USA Basketball

**manker** · 09-01-2006, 02:28 PM

Originally Posted by Busyman™

Originally Posted by manker

So you didn't read/understand what I wrote.

Ah, well.

Maybe I didn't dumb down enough. Who knows/cares.

Well I did dumb it down for you and you still didn't get it.

Typically a longer 3-point line makes for harder shots and longer games take a bigger toll on the body. It's in part why NBA basketball is a harder game than college basketball.

If a player is used to a harder game then an easier one should be...well, easier.

Is that dumbed down enough for you this time.

Good lord.

Maybe your last post is your way of saying that I'm right in a non-humble way. Apparently you knew/cared enough to be smart-ass but not back it up.

It really is that simple, eh.

I know what you're trying to say - I disagree with it. The closer three point line and the shorter matches won't help better teams.

Are the games longer and three point line further away from the basket in other countries' domestic games? If not, then the US definitely have a disadvantage for obvious reasons. If so, the better teams (of which, the US is one) have a disadvantage to what it would have been if the game was the same because none of the teams are used to this version - they've trained for the more difficult game, which requires more skill (3 point shots) and fitness (stamina).

The teams with players who aren't so fit and aren't so skilled are suddenly in a game where you don't have to be so accurate with 3 point shots and don't have to be so fit.

The playing field has been levelled, somewhat. The teams with the best three point shooters and the fittest players don't have so much of an advantage anymore.

It's not quite so simple as you're making it. There are other factors which I don't believe you considered.

**Busyman™** · 09-01-2006, 02:45 PM

Originally Posted by manker

Originally Posted by Busyman™

Well I did dumb it down for you and you still didn't get it.

Typically a longer 3-point line makes for harder shots and longer games take a bigger toll on the body. It's in part why NBA basketball is a harder game than college basketball.

If a player is used to a harder game then an easier one should be...well, easier.

Is that dumbed down enough for you this time.

Good lord.

Maybe your last post is your way of saying that I'm right in a non-humble way. Apparently you knew/cared enough to be smart-ass but not back it up.

It really is that simple, eh.

I know what you're trying to say - I disagree with it. The closer three point line and the shorter matches won't help better teams.

Are the games longer and three point line further away from the basket in other countries' domestic games? If not, then the US definitely have a disadvantage for obvious reasons. If so, the better teams (of which, the US is one) have a disadvantage to what it would have been if the game was the same because none of the teams are used to this version - they've trained for the more difficult game, which requires more skill (3 point shots) and fitness (stamina).

The teams with players who aren't so fit and aren't so skilled are suddenly in a game where you don't have to be so accurate with 3 point shots and don't have to be so fit.

The playing field has been levelled, somewhat. The teams with the best three point shooters and the fittest players don't have so much of an advantage anymore.

It's not quite so simple as you're making it. There are other factors which I don't believe you considered.

Of course there are other factors. I wasn't talking about other factors.

For instance, foreign teams practice 3-point shots more. Foreign born big men in the NBA are better 3-point shooters than US born ones typically.

Not my point.

The point was that I was not making an excuse but just the opposite. You tried to turn into an excuse to be smart-assed and it didn't work which made you look like idiot. You are now arguing it's a disadvantage (3-point and game length) and I don't think it was.

Typically a player that can shoot from a farther line can shoot better even closer. It requires less arm/leg strength. That's not hard to understand is it?

Our big men that don't normally shoot 3s would have an easier time since the line is closer.

Imagine NBA players playing on a high-school basketball court. Tim Duncan (a center/power forward) could have a great 3-point shooting game and a normal 3-point shooter would have a field day.

**manker** · 09-01-2006, 02:53 PM

Originally Posted by Busy

The point was that I was not making an excuse but just the opposite. You tried to turn into an excuse to be smart-assed and it didn't work which made you look like idiot.

That's fair enough, you wrote it and only you know what was in your head at the time. I can only surmise.

I make smart-arsed comments all of the time ... most of them are twisting people's words to mean something else. Which is what I did to you. What you actually meant is not really important to my smart-arsery

It looked like an excuse to me. It is an excuse if you take my points on the matter.

If you disagree with my points, then you also disagree with what you wrote being an excuse.

I'm fine with that.

**Busyman™** · 09-01-2006, 03:00 PM

Originally Posted by manker

Originally Posted by Busy

The point was that I was not making an excuse but just the opposite. You tried to turn into an excuse to be smart-assed and it didn't work which made you look like idiot.

That's fair enough, you wrote it and only you know what was in your head at the time. I can only surmise.

I make smart-arsed comments all of the time ... most of them are twisting people's words to mean something else. Which is what I did to you. What you actually meant is not really important to my smart-arsery

It looked like an excuse to me. It is an excuse if you take my points on the matter.

If you disagree with my points, then you also disagree with what you wrote being an excuse.

I'm fine with that.

Originally Posted by manker

The playing field has been levelled, somewhat. The teams with the best three point shooters and the fittest players don't have so much of an advantage anymore.

What you said in bold works the opposite way. If it were NBA rules, foreign players would have to shoot farther and play longer. Disadvantage to the foreign player.

It actually doesn't work both ways. The NBA player doesn't have to worry about conserving energy as much and should be able to shoot from more of the floor. Advantage - American NBA player.

I saw your logic and I think it's just that you don't know the game and that's understandable being in a 2-sport town.

**manker** · 09-01-2006, 03:01 PM

Busy edit

**Barbarossa** · 09-01-2006, 03:02 PM

bouncing a ball around a gymnasium and lobbing it at a hoop occasionally is hardly energetic

**Busyman™** · 09-01-2006, 03:02 PM

Originally Posted by manker

Busy edit

Actually no. I saw you posted so I moved it down as a separate post.

**manker** · 09-01-2006, 03:05 PM

Originally Posted by Busyman™

Originally Posted by manker

That's fair enough, you wrote it and only you know what was in your head at the time. I can only surmise.

I make smart-arsed comments all of the time ... most of them are twisting people's words to mean something else. Which is what I did to you. What you actually meant is not really important to my smart-arsery

It looked like an excuse to me. It is an excuse if you take my points on the matter.

If you disagree with my points, then you also disagree with what you wrote being an excuse.

I'm fine with that.

Originally Posted by manker

The playing field has been levelled, somewhat. The teams with the best three point shooters and the fittest players don't have so much of an advantage anymore.

What you said in bold works the opposite way. If it were NBA rules, foreign players would have to shoot farther and play longer. Disadvantage to the foreign player.

It actually doesn't work both ways. The NBA player doesn't have to worry about conserving energy as much and should be able to shoot from more of the floor. Advantage - American NBA player.

I saw your logic and I think it's just that you don't know the game and that's understandable being in a 2-sport town.

Yeah, I don't follow basketball, but do I have a good understanding of sport science and the psychology behind it. That's pretty much the same across the board.

Like I said, if you agree with my points, that's cool. I was right by default. If not then I don't really mind because I was being a disingenuous smart-arse anyway.