US Basketball Team Defeats British Basketball Team By 40 Points

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**WarOne**

Nearly every year the America squad dominates this sport. Doesn't seem like it'll change this year.

(AP) MANCHESTER, England - Deron Williams was in, Carmelo Anthony out, and both were better for it.

Of course, it wouldn't have mattered what lineup the U.S. men's Olympic basketball team used against an inexperienced and overmatched opponent.

Williams and Anthony responded to a lineup change with 19 points apiece, and the Americans beat Britain 118-78 on Thursday in an exhibition game.

LeBron James added 16 points and Russell Westbrook had 15 for the Americans, who built a 40-point lead early in the fourth quarter and every basket from there seemed to be a dunk.

Chicago Bulls All-Star Luol Deng scored 25 points for Britain against his former college coach at Duke.

"He said they just had never faced that speed and quickness, so you can't practice that," Mike Krzyzewski said. "You can't simulate that, so I thought it was a great experience for them. And us."

Krzyzewski inserted Kevin Durant for Anthony, and Williams for Chris Paul, and both Anthony and Williams flourished in their new roles.

Williams, who couldn't scrimmage with the Americans when they opened camp because he hadn't signed his $98 million extension with the Nets yet, made 7-of-8 shots, going 5 of 6 from 3-point range and adding five assists.

"I feel I adjusted pretty well," Williams said. "I was a little worried about how my conditioning was going to be, just because I hadn't played 5-on-5, but I just trained really hard coming in so I'd just be in the best shape possible, and I feel like I'm there."

Anthony came in for Durant in the first quarter — apparently unnoticed to the PA announcer, who credited Durant with the Knicks forward's first basket — and shook off the change well after being a starter in three previous years with the national team and both exhibitions this year. He rebounded from a poor game in Washington by shooting 8 of 10 from the field.

"It was fine with me, definitely fine with me," Anthony said of the change. "(Krzyzewski) came to us this morning, me and Chris, asked if we were OK with it. I'm like, why wouldn't we be? It is what it is. He wanted to put a different lineup out there against this team, see some different things. He's still trying to figure it out as a coach as well with this new group."

Britain's home game was similar to the Americans' opener against China in the Beijing Olympics, where plays for both teams were loudly cheered. The boos were brief, when a light "USA!" chant broke out in the fourth quarter.

Basketball has little place in British sports, but with the national team returning to the Olympics this year as the games' host, the sport got some attention with a visit from the powerful U.S. squad.

In an unusual pregame scene, the crowd didn't seem interested in the home team's strange set of pregame warm-up exercises, choosing instead to watch the Americans' practice dunks, oohing and aahing along the way.

The rules of the game were then written shown on the overhead video scoreboard and explained by the public address announcer before play began.

The British, also including the Portland Trail Blazers' Joel Freeland and coached by Houston Rockets assistant Chris Finch, hung with the Americans for 10-plus minutes before the visitors' athleticism ran them off the floor.

"We knew what kind of level we had to get to to compete in the Olympics," British forward Kieron Achara said. "This was a level higher than we were used to."

Coming off a tough test against Brazil in an 80-69 victory Monday in Washington in which they trailed by 10 after one quarter, the Americans led by only three inside 1 1/2 minutes left in the opening period. They closed with 10 straight points, with Anthony nailing consecutive 3-pointers that made it 33-20.

Krzyzewski went with an explosive lineup of Durant, Kobe Bryant, James and Anthony — four of the NBA's top six scorers — and Paul late in the second quarter, and James scored twice on feeds from Anthony and set up Durant for another basket in an 8-0 spurt that extended a 10-point lead to 18, and the game was never close again.

"It doesn't get more explosive than that and that's the dynamic of our team," James said. "We have an opportunity to do multiple things with our lineups and it's a luxury we have."

Durant scored 13 points and No. 1 pick Anthony Davis had 11 for the Americans, who shot 60 percent from the field and led by as much as 47.

This was possibly the Americans' last easy game before London, with exhibitions remaining in Barcelona against 2008 bronze medalist Argentina and Spain, the team they beat in the gold-medal game four years ago.

Former NBA player Pops Mensah-Bonsu scored 12 points and Andrew Sullivan had 11 for Britain.

**Amaya**

I think it's more along the lines of Britain has never had a decent basketball team.

**sarpedons-right-hand**

No real surprises here is there? At least I can be safe in the knowledge that we can whup the Americans at football (Soccar), Cricket and Rugby. Oh and F1!

**kronk**

F1? Formula 1 racing? Maybe. Real men race stock-cars not go-carts, anyhow.

Cricket/Rugby? Yep. You got us.

Soccer? We tied you during the last World cup though, and advanced to the second round, lest you forget!

While this is an impressive win, they won't be winners in my book unless they seal the deal (Gold or nothing). The UK's basketball team is only in there because they are the host country. Their soccer team, however, is formidable.

**Frazzled**

kronk wrote:F1? Formula 1 racing? Maybe. Real men race stock cars not go carts, anyhow.

Cricket/Rugby? Yep. You got us.

Soccer? We tied you during the last World cup though, and advanced to the second round, lest you forget!

While this is an impressive win, they won't be winners in my book unless they seal the deal (Gold or nothing). The UK's basketball team is only in there because they are the host country. Their soccer team, however, is formidable.

We'd kick ass at soccer if they let us play it properly, with steroids, motorcycles, and spikes!

**LordofHats**

And tasers.

**Testify**

Is 40 points a lot? I have no idea.
Never see basketball in England outside of the local news, that probably says a lot

**BolingbrokeIV**

This is the equivalent of making a thread about England beating the US at Cricket. I swear I could go a whole year without hearing the word basketball spoken where I live. It's no surprise to me our country can't field a basketball team which can rival the United States.

**Scrabb**

Testify wrote:Is 40 points a lot? I have no idea.
Never see basketball in England outside of the local news, that probably says a lot

It's a drubbing. I've been on the wrong end of that more times than i like to remember.

It's more than ten possessions difference with perfect play.

**Hulksmash**

It's not a surprise. I'm hoping they have a coach that can control the ego's on the US team this year. The team hasn't been the same since a lot of the great players started waving it off. Hell, we didn't even win the gold last time. Damn Argentinians took.

**kronk**

Exactly Hulk. Gold or nothing.

**Zyllos**

Testify, I think the average NBA (National Basketball Association) team score was 97.2. I think you can make the comparsion from there.

**Amaya**

Zyllos wrote:Testify, I think the average NBA (National Basketball Association) team score was 97.2. I think you can make the comparsion from there.

How? Score is completely irrelevant. Changes in rule and tempo cause scores to fluctuate wildly throughout various leagues. You can arbitrarily compare one to the other.

**WarOne**

Testify wrote:Is 40 points a lot? I have no idea.
Never see basketball in England outside of the local news, that probably says a lot

Basketball contests are often decided by double digit point scores.

Typically, NBA level games often exceed 80 points for both sides, and sometimes 100 points. The lower the amount of points allowed means either a poor offensive effort by the other team or a good defensive effort on your part. Higher points scores on your part mean the opposing team defends poorly or your team performed well offensively.

As a rule of thumb, single digit victories means a close contest, though losing by 8 or 9 points is far less impressive than 1 or 2 point losses.

Losing by 10-20 points indicates one team dominated the other in a clearly defined way and is not the end of the world.

Losing by 20+ is a blowout and means the level of competitiveness between the two teams is obviously not on the same level.

Being held to a very low point score while allowing 100+ points indicates that Britain did poorly. Keep in mind however while several NBA players do play on the UK sqaud, they are not on the same parity as the entire American team is (It is like having two Ian Rushes on you team, but the opposing team is composed of nothing but Johan Cruyffs, Diego Maradonas, and Pelès).

**Kilkrazy**

Well, a 40 point difference is more meaningful if the average score in a game is 10 points than if it's 95 points. It's like a 6-0 goal differential compared to a 1-0 at football.

But as said, almost no-one in the UK plays basketball at school or professionally, and the game has very little traction.

There is a similar game called netball played in girls' schools.

**BolingbrokeIV**

I don't know why such an unbalanced sport like basketball is played at the olympics when sports like rugby league, union and cricket aren't. Sure the commonwealth teams would dominate it but why is that any different than Basketball being dominated by the US.

It would be different if it was a half "amateur" event like the football competition. But these are teams full of experienced professionals.

**mattyrm**

Why is this even a thread like its news?! That is the most obvious occurrence ever!

feth me.. Basketball?! I could even understand it if US beat England at soccer seeing as the States would be the slight underdogs (despite being almost as good anyway) but Basketball?

We don't play basketball!

That's like an Englishman making a thread called "England defeat Americans in renowned pasty faced cricket, rain and appalling teeth competition"

Actually, I should have posted along these lines last week, a 350lbs trucker from Alabama beat a 105lb amphetamine addled Englishman with a laudanum addiction in a fried chicken eating competition.

I was fething amazed!

**WarOne**

Looking at the rosters and the players, it seems almost no one on the English team even played for a British basketball team beforehand save for Andrew Sullivan and Nate Reinking.

The number disparities also reflect several places where England was outmatched:

Steals (taking a possession away from the other team)
16-1
Assists (credited with a pass to another player that results in a basket scored):
39-16
Blocks (times when a basket is shot, but blocked by an opposing player):
8-2

They actually rebounded as well as the Americans, but turned the ball over 27 times total, 16 of which were steals.

As a shooting percentage, the Americans made 60.3% of their shots to the 40.7% that the British shot. Typically, a good offensive effort is around the 45-50% range.

So in short, the British need to control their ball handling and need to shoot and defend better.

Their coach is an NBA level assistant head coach, so I think he has a great opportunity to adjust his team for future performances.

But I think the lack of a cohesive team (due to all the players playing in different countries for different nations) is what will hurt them the most.

**BolingbrokeIV**

It's kind of similar to a bunch of Irishmen going to a south pacific island telling them to put a gaelic football team together. Drubbing them. Then going back to Ireland and proclaiming themselves as world beaters.

**Hulksmash**

@glorioski

You do know it used to be a "half" amatuer event 20 years ago right? I say half amatuer because the teams that followed the rules (like america) didn't have professionals on their team as it wasn't allowed. While other nations (russia for instance) had players supported by the state with state job titles that were professionals in all but name. The olympics say to hell with it, let professionals play and so was born the Dream Team's I and II.

Either way it's an exhibition game. And 40pts is pretty funny but understandable since it's not a big sport out that way.

**WarOne**

Glorioski wrote:It's kind of similar to a bunch of Irishmen going to a south pacific island telling them to put a gaelic football team together. Drubbing them. Then going back to Ireland and proclaiming themselves as world beaters.

Not yet. Americans have a reputation for being just like that though, but in recent years, more cohesive national teams have outplayed the all star team the Americans shove on the floor.

**BolingbrokeIV**

Hulksmash wrote:@glorioski

You do know it used to be a "half" amatuer event 20 years ago right? I say half amatuer because the teams that followed the rules (like america) didn't have professionals on their team as it wasn't allowed. While other nations (russia for instance) had players supported by the state with state job titles that were professionals in all but name. The olympics say to hell with it, let professionals play and so was born the Dream Team's I and II.

Either way it's an exhibition game. And 40pts is pretty funny but understandable since it's not a big sport out that way.

So why did that change? Did the Olympics think nobody is going to be interested in this sport until you let the Americans bring Michael Jordan with them?

The football tournament is still restricted to a majority of under 21 players.

**mattyrm**

Oh I get it now... 40 points is a big deal then?

So ignorant am I of basketball, I didn't know if that was a big deal or not.

I thought maybe normal games ended like... 66-123 or something.

**WarOne**

Glorioski wrote:

So why did that change? Did the Olympics think nobody is going to be interested in this sport until you let the Americans bring Michael Jordan with them?

Actually, Michael Jordan's drawing power was so great...yeah...they probably did that to allow him to compete on an int'l stage and bring the sport of basketball to the world.

**Hulksmash**

Did you miss the part about some nations basically cheating? I'm sure part of it was to make it more interesting by allowing professionals to play, especially jordan and magic johnson, but part of it was they couldn't enforce their rules and decided to level the playing field.

By the way this also allowed for teams that didn't stand a chance to put together solid teams. Making the sport much better (naturally after the Dream Teams stopped showing up).

**mattyrm**

Glorioski wrote:
Hulksmash wrote:@glorioski

You do know it used to be a "half" amatuer event 20 years ago right? I say half amatuer because the teams that followed the rules (like america) didn't have professionals on their team as it wasn't allowed. While other nations (russia for instance) had players supported by the state with state job titles that were professionals in all but name. The olympics say to hell with it, let professionals play and so was born the Dream Team's I and II.

Either way it's an exhibition game. And 40pts is pretty funny but understandable since it's not a big sport out that way.

So why did that change? Did the Olympics think nobody is going to be interested in this sport until you let the Americans bring Michael Jordan with them?

The football tournament is still restricted to a majority of under 21 players.

Yeah its still different though isnt it? You can take three!

And considering big clubs usually only have 2 or 3 star players, 3 is all that matters!

For example, Spain could turn up with Casillas, Fabregas and Torres.

**BolingbrokeIV**

mattyrm wrote:
Glorioski wrote:
Hulksmash wrote:@glorioski

You do know it used to be a "half" amatuer event 20 years ago right? I say half amatuer because the teams that followed the rules (like america) didn't have professionals on their team as it wasn't allowed. While other nations (russia for instance) had players supported by the state with state job titles that were professionals in all but name. The olympics say to hell with it, let professionals play and so was born the Dream Team's I and II.

Either way it's an exhibition game. And 40pts is pretty funny but understandable since it's not a big sport out that way.

So why did that change? Did the Olympics think nobody is going to be interested in this sport until you let the Americans bring Michael Jordan with them?

The football tournament is still restricted to a majority of under 21 players.

Yeah its still different though isnt it? You can take three!

And considering big clubs usually only have 2 or 3 star players, 3 is all that matters!

For example, Spain could turn up with Casillas, Fabregas and Torres.

But they wont. Because nobody cares. Spain are fielding Adrián López, Javi Martínez and Juan Mata as their 3 over 21s.

**WarOne**

Also the influence of Borislav Stanković cannot be underrated in the decision to allow NBA players to join the Olypmics. He was a devoted player and coach to a Yugoslavia team that became very competitive on the international level throufh the '80s and '90s. It was his decision as FIBA president that allowed NBA players in.

His love of basketball transcended national competition.

**Jihadin**

Do believe americans were real tired of losing in basketball at the Olympics 20 yrs ago so hence Dream Team came into play.

**WarOne**

Jihadin wrote:Do believe americans were real tired of losing in basketball at the Olympics 20 yrs ago so hence Dream Team came into play.

David Stern, Commissioner of NBA wrote:We said to FIBA [the international basketball federation] that we weren't gung ho to play in the Olympics, but we would try to be good soldiers to support basketball. So they had a vote. The U.S. was against it, and the Russians were against it, too. But the overwhelming vote was in favor.

http://www.gq.com/sports/profiles/201207/dream-team-20th-anniversary-1992-olympics-usa-basketball?printable=true