We need to focus a little bit more on skill (especially shooters)and IQ at the junior levels. If you are not a great athlete you are almost discarded. There does not seem to be a lot of basketball brain in the current lineup. If you have super athletes like the US you can get away with it, but many of the other top teams have great fundamentals and play with a great understanding of the game. We really do lack any knock down shooters and In dont see any in the up and comers who have this skill either.

That's a good point. You also have to remember that this generation is still a few years off their prime. Basketballers tend to peak at 28-32ish, we only have three or four guys in the current top 20 who are in that age group.

2014 and 2016 will be the best years for this Bogut, Newley, Mills, Martin, Maric, Ogilvy, Khazzouh, Knight, Ingles, Barlow, Jawai, Gibson, Worthington, Markovic etc etc group.

Some good younger players to come in in those years too.

I think Australian juniors are almost too fundamental.

IMO, junior players are extremely efficient at running offences and hitting catch and shot jump shots.

But sometimes they are over-instructed (pass to A, cut here, screen there). Many overseas coaches have labelled the Australian Juniors as "robots" -- meaning they rarely make mistakes or turn the ball over, but they find it really difficult to adjust to changes in the game and often they are too structured and unselfishness to adjust.

I think great emphasis needs to be placed on the ability to create shots and play with a little less structure and more freestyle and selfishness. The junior programs need to focus on acheiving a balance between structure and freestyle. Too much of either can be bad, but at the moment it is apparent that both the junior teams and the senior teams are too structured.
And hence, when the offence breaks down no one has the skill/ familiarity/selfishness to create their own shots and get the offence out of the rut.

Its why US College teams and US Players in particular are so good..They run structures but at the end of the day they just play Basketball and if they see an opportunity to shoot they will take it.

Agree with you Paul..2014 and 2016 will be the years.
Throw in the likes of Greenwood, Drmic, Hadziomerovic and Creek (Latest group of Emus) and the Boomers could assemble a team that has size, skill and athleticism.

With the boomers, many international teams seem to build around the same group of guys for 5-10 years and have them play together as a group, and they get used to playing together, develop chemistry, etc, which seems to work better than throwing an 'all star' team together.

It wouldnt be our best 12 players, but would it be an idea, assuming everyone is available/healthy, to basically give Boguts Jnr gold medal team a go as boomers, well the members of that team who are atleast half decent NBL/Euro players and then mix in a couple of our top guys, as they have the success and possibly would have more chemistry than some other teams and id even be happy to give Bevo a go at coaching them.

It would make the team something like, with 9 guys from the Bogut Emus, not all stars by any means, Carter and Robbins dont even start regularly (Bruce looks to be the Kings starting PG) at NBL level but could be a good thing as they would be happy to ride the bench, which could help with chemistry)

Emus of atleast sold NBL standard

Bogut
Maric
M.Knight
Newley
Bruce
R.Carter
D.Martin
Robbins
Markovic

Mix in the top Aussies like
Jawai
Nielsen
Andersen
Ingles
Barlow
Mills
Worthington
Ogilvy


I would go with a 12 of

C Bogut/Maric/Ogilvy

PF M.Knight/Jawai (Nielsen unlucky, just went with younger guys to build a 5 year squad)

SF Ingles/Barlow

SG Newley/D.Martin

PG Mills/Markovic/Carter or Robbins or Bruce as 12th man

giving 7 of the emus team, 7 of that team went to the last world champs, and Bogut would have been there if not injured, so most of those guys appear to be in the mix anyway

i think we could do worse than to get that group together for the next 5 years and see how they go (just use the 17 names above unless too many are ruled out), as most will be reaching the 28-32 age group in that time and hopefully can peak together, and have some chemistry.

Some young guys like Dellavedova may be a bit stiff, but he could be in the young group/next inline and he and the other young guys ala Drmic, Greenwood get their stint at the end of the 5 years and fill in and get experience when too many unavailable from my squad above, as if peak form is at around 28-32 we should aim to have the bulk of our squad in that age group.

The whole 'peak age is 28-32' idea is very contentious.
Obviously, ones physical peak may be at this age, but I often think mentally players peak a lot earlier.

For Australia, players like Kickert and Bruce have really struggled to carry on what were brillant College careers.

IMO, the Senior year for College players is as close to their physical and probably mental peak as possible..
They get access to the ultimate Strength and Conditioning facilities, nutrition programs, advice and consultation. Furthermore, their physical peak arises from training 2-3 times daily.
They are also developed mentally from the myriad of trainings and the fact that they have to balance education and basketball.

Players don't receive the same physical training at the professional level in terms of facilities, consultation and access to recovery equipment (Colleges have spas, ice baths, hydrotherapy sessions, open massage tabes etc).
And mentally they aren't as challenged at what they were at College..

I would say the mental peak is possibly later myself, with the physical maybe a little earlier. Basketball is such a thinking man's sport, experience is worth its weight in gold.

But if you look at recent times, Anstey, Mackinnon, Bruton, Saville, Penney, Redhage etc, they have played their best basketball in the late 20s and early 30s. I personally think that is common around the world. Sav may be an exception to the rule, he is still playing great.

A simple "go to guy" players is the Australian Basketball has to focus on. We cannot live with this netball type of offense.

Must agree there needs to be 1 or 2, bg scoring threats, that end up causing double teams and then giving the role players something to work off... I tend to think that Brown has no idea on offense and needs to choose a pecking order for shots

I applause those mention the lack of emphasis on ball skill, creativity, freedom, IQ..even selfishness. Also, at the highest level, basketball is show business where masses will go to games to see fun to watch players not motion offence robots who "can play defence". Is our junior system producing them ?? Do basketball's governing bodies have wisdom/policies to appreciate smart players, pick them and develop further ???

they need a tough scoring guy with a chip on his sholder and something to prove night in, night out.

Jonno, that's an interesting idea... but its what got Smyth fired as coach of the Boomers back in 2001 or so when his team of 'role players' got beaten by NZ! When we lost, BA was quick to pull the trigger on Smyth and install Goorjian, so Smyth's experiment never really had a chance to succeed.

Having said that, I would still tend to go predominantly for 'best player available' for the national team. I'd only make perhaps up to two or three exceptions to that, if I thought a particular player had specific skills that would really enhance the effectiveness of my key players.

For example, Perkins was not a particularly great centre for the Celtics, but he was a very good complement to the other stars in their starting lineup. His size, strength and mean attitude on the court allowed him to attract and soak up a lot of the physical punishment that otherwise would have worn down KG and on offence he used to set great screens with his wide body to get Rondo, Allen and Pierce free. He also was probably more willing to accept a role like that than a more talented player would have.

With regard to this generation, I think whoever said that they still have a couple of years to reach their peak is right. However, I have to admit I am starting to wonder if Ingles or Newley will ever succeed for the Boomers as I had hoped they would when they first appeared on the team.

I think more than anything this is just a reality check as to where the Boomers rightly sit in the international new world order of basketball. We have one guy who is a key player in an NBA franchise who never plays, another who is a deep NBA benchie/experiment who will be lucky to keep his spot, and a half dozen players putting in passable performances to keep them hooked up with jobs in Europe, none of whom are superstars.

Spain had a main rotation of solid if not spectacular NBA players augmented with the stars of Europe's best basketball league, all of whom have grown up playing the same style in the same system.

Our 'Go to Guys' are Mills, Bogut and Andersen. The best go to guys are generally play SG or SF, however exceptions occur with PGs PFs and Cs playing this role. I love these 3 guys and although they are great players in there own right and by comparison to other Boomers, they are simply not good enough to get us out of jail consistly. The Bucks are going to Bogut more often now than ever before, so perhaps he will turn into an NBA All Star in the coming years. As for Mills, he always looks better with talent around him.

So we have identified a real problem with the Boomers. Where does the future lie? Where will our future 'Go to Guy' come from??

My thoughts, although a little VIC focused as usual, are:

Anthony Drmic - you tube this kid, you will watch all day.
Dante Exum - he always gets his numbers.
Ben Simmons - recently dominated the U16 Nationals like no other before him.