OPINION

2004 Men's National Team vs. 2006 Men's National Team

Written by David Barbour
Published August 17, 2006

By now, it is pretty obvious that the 2006 version of USA Men's Basketball is much better than the team fielded in 2004, but just how much better is worth looking at. Each team played five exhibition games leading up to their respective tournaments so those are the games I compared. It remains to be seen how USA will do in the World Championships, but the outlook looks bright for the sort of success that has eluded the national teams for the last few years.

In 2004, the national team played two great games, one horrific game, and two not-quite-good games. They destroyed Puerto Rico and Serbia-Montenegro, outscoring those two teams by 15.9 points per 100 possessions and 14.9 points per 100 possessions, respectively. Italy outscored the US 33.3 points per 100 possessions, a dominating performance in every sense of the word. To be outdone in offensive efficiency by such a margin as this is reason enough to forfeit your spot in any world tournament, but the US kept playing. Overall, the US put up an offensive efficiency of 106.3 points per 100 possessions in their five exhibition games. They allowed their opponents 104.7 points per 100 possessions. That slight advantage for the US speaks of a slightly above .500 team, which is the sort of team they ended up being in the Olympics, going 5-3 (note: I have the advantage of writing this in hindsight, but the numbers did give an indication of what their future performance would be if they stayed the course they were on).

By contrast, the 2006 version has run roughshod over all five teams who were foolish enough to step on the same court. Even in their worst game, when they only beat Brazil by four points, they still had an offensive advantage of 11.9 points per 100 possessions. For the five games, the team has put up 128.0 points per 100 possessions while giving up only 89.3 points per 100 possessions. It doesn't get any better than that.

However, the difference between the two teams does not stop at how efficiently they play on both ends. The 2006 team is also better at taking care of the basketball; they have averaged .168 turnovers per possession while the 2004 squad turned the ball over .222 times per possession. Also, USA men's basketball version 2006 has a higher offensive rebounding percentage (.351 to .260) and they have a much higher effective field goal percentage (.613 to .568), on the strength of making more than twice as many 3's as the 2004 bricklayers.

page 1 | 2
David Barbour wastes his time by following sports and wastes your time by writing about them. He hopes evidence is uncovered that Babe Ruth took steroids so the love affair with him will cease and desist.
Keep reading for information and comments on this article, and add some feedback of your own!
2004 Men's National Team vs. 2006 Men's National Team
Published: August 17, 2006
Type: Opinion
Section: Sports
Filed Under: Sports: Basketball
Writer: David Barbour
David Barbour's BC Writer page
David Barbour's personal site
Spread the Word
Like this article?
Email this
Submit to del.icio.us Save to del.icio.us
RSS Feeds
All RSS Feeds (240+)
Comments on this article
BC articles by David Barbour
Sports: Basketball
All Sports Articles
All Opinion articles
All BC articles
All BC Comments

Comments

#1 — August 17, 2006 @ 01:25AM — Tan The Man [URL]

A more superficial analysis would be to say that the players are more team-oriented under Coach K. Take a look at the points that LeBron and Carmelo have -- under 20. They spread the play around.

#2 — August 17, 2006 @ 22:43PM — Matthew T. Sussman [URL]

Tough to pencil them in for a championship this year. They're definitely on the upswing, however, and should be ready to contend by '08.

Want comments emailed to you? No spam, promise! Address:

Add your comment, speak your mind

(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/51670)

Personal attacks are not allowed. Please read our comment policy.





Remember Name/URL?

Please preview your comment!

Fresh
Articles
Fresh
Comments