Bogut might be too old and injured the way he's going

Agreed, although I'll gladly eat my hat and anyone else's if I'm proven wrong, and wash it all down with a serving of humble pie!

http://www.hoops.com.au/forum/31913-game-4-china-australia/#p423379

forgot ben simmons...

Not a bad list Jason but I will have a go
Dellavedova/Exum
Mills/Drmic
Ingles/Broekhoff
Baynes/Motum
Jawai/Nevill
11.Simmons
12. Gliddon/Goulding/Newley (hard to pick)

Delly,exum and mills can all play 1/2.
Drmic and ingles can play 3/2
Baynes and Jawai can play 4/5
By 2016 I wouldn't expect Newley to be a lock he has alot of competition with drmic, goulding and gliddon all in contention. Haven't added Bogut (still a fan) just injury/insurance issues make it hard to add him in.
If Bogut plays take nevill out. Ogilvy,greenwood and Bairstow will be in the mix.

Decided to pick Newley for that final spot at 31 he will be the "old man" but his athleticism and experience will be valuable.
Ins for 2016:
Exum,drmic,broekhoff,motum,Jawai,Simmons,Nevill.
Outs from 2012:
Gibson,Barlow,Worthington,Andersen,Nielsen,maric,Crawford.

Still need experience to pass on the boomers values and culture to the young guys. If Australia don't medal at the next olympics the funding will be cut (by more than half) so there is enormous pressure to perform. With that in mind, i think that coaches will go for more experience rather than blooding new players into the Boomers. Basically Australia's medal chances rest on Bogut being healthy.

Tiger I dont agree that it all rests on Bogut. We had a less talented team last year then we will at rio.. and without bogut we beat Russia (who medalled) came close to brazil and did fairly ok, if we won a different game we would have been in against argentina and anything could have happened. What I do agree with is they will capitalise on experience they are going to see the past 6 years of boomers foundations wasted... however should exum/simmons/maker/broekhoff/drmic/motum Etc.. prove to be worthy they will be forced to go some new guys. Either way we will have a very good team I have no doubt.

Sadly every other country will improve. I think given our resources 6-10 is a brilliant result at any international tournament.

Well not sure if I agree Wayne.. yes they will improve but how much and will they necessarily have stand outplayers? Spain and Argentina are getting old.. france is getting old.. a lot of the best teams in the world are at the end of there cycles.. prime time for the Boomers I say!

Russia is the only medalling team of late where I can say most of there players are under 30... correct me if I am wrong.

@YouknowME as well as beating Bronze medallists Russia, we also defeated Lithuania in Beijing in a pool match, who went on to lose the bronze medal match and finish fourth.

As much as I enjoyed those victories, they are both virtually meaningless as a gauge for where the Boomers stand in international basketball for the same reasons: both were the final pool matches against previously undefeated teams, whose position at the top of the pool was assured regardless of the outcome of the game. The coaches and players had their eyes firmly on the quarter finals to come. Losing to the Boomers was immaterial.

A more telling gauge is what happened in the early pool matches. When faced with the winnable match that they had to take to avoid fourth spot and the dreaded crossover match with team USA, the Boomers failed. In 2012, it was versus Brazil, and in 2008, it was against Croatia.

Never so full of youthful potential? Agreed.

Never been so athletic across the whole squad? Agreed.

Never been so talented? Waaayy too early to claim that.

Age matters for how much longer a team will be at its best. Australia indeed has more youthful potential and athleticism ever... I do agree talent is yet to be shown. I actually think Australias 2008 team was one of our best in hindsight (behind ofcourse the 2000 squad which was basically a whos who of aussie basketball). Do i think the 2016 team will be better? I actually do. I think the fight for positions is going to be that feirce that you could make 2 X 12 man Australian Boomer's teams and they would STILL be competitive. Could you have said that ever before? No I doubt it... Certainly couldnt have said it anytime in the past decade where we had Kendall, Hinder, Daniel Egan, Jacob Holmes or Mcgreggor involved. LOL. those were some lowly days for aussie ball! But... since the goorjian days great foundations have been laid and we are starting to see the fruit of it.

I am thinking 2016.

as for the young talent, thats great I just hope it keeps coming

To see how talented youth doesn't necessary translate into success in the senior team, we just need to see the victorious 1997 U22s Worlds team and the 2003 Junior Worlds. How many of those players made the transition to an impact on the senior team? In 1997, Trahair was a supremely talented shooter, Dwight was an incredible defensive (blocking) presence with 3-point range (IMO a near ideal role-playing PF at international level), yet neither made any impact on the senior team (only Dwight made the senior team, taking an 11/12th 'potential' spot in one WC team). Mackinnon really only reached his star player potential late in his career, Nielsen became a reliable starter on the senior team from 2003 onwards (6 years after the Crocs team) with a good Euro career, and Anstey was the only other who went on to a successful career in any top-tier league. In 2003, it was the fast-paced guard-centric play of Bruce, Markovic, Damian Martin that combined with the super-dominant Bogut. Only Bogut has become something special at international level. Although Newley and Maric played more minor roles on that team and soon developed well, they have had a patchy existence in the senior team. You then had players like Frank "the next Andrew Gaze" Drmic, Ben "can't talk about him on Hoops" Mel-meth (who was an All-NBL 1st team player at age 23), and NBA draft pick Ben Pepper, with none of them playing any significant role on the senior team (only Drmic came close).

Australia has often produced young guns with potential who just never develop enough to make a big impact on the senior team. Hopefully guys like Exum and Simmons continue to improve.

There's plenty of talent coming through but like has been mentioned in the other thread, and by rjd above, plenty of young guys with huge upside simply shrink when the competition shifts to the pro game. The majority of guys just don't take that next step when it comes to competing with grown-ass men who are bigger, stronger and smarter than them. It's got nothing to do with Australia...how many "sure thing" lottery picks do we see coming into the NBA every season that just never make an impact at that level?

It's too early to tell for lots of these guys, and while it's fun to speculate, I have a hard time believing anyone is going to be unseating someone like Brad Newley, a proven veteran in his prime who has been playing in the grit and grind of Europe for years now.

The massive influx of Aussies onto the NCAA and NBA radar is as much an indication of the globalisation of the NBA as it is the depth of talent in Australia right now, we can't lose sight of that.

Spot on, it is great fun looking into the future but we dont know who will be playing well in two-three years and who wont.

The other big question is where these guys will be playing. Will the European economy collapse? Will there be an NBL as we know it? KK's prediction about 2016 showed a lack of foresight about both basketball and economics!

Well said rjd, and also comments by Mick and paul. As exciting as it is to have success on the junior international stage, such as the U17's recent silver medal, it certainly does not guarantee the same success on the senior level. The current group is certainly deep and athletic, but to claim their the most talented is short sighted. Sometimes I feel that people forget that the Boomers finished fourth at the Olympics three times between 1988 and 2000. Talk about talent, and have a look at the players that represented the Boomers during that timeframe - Gaze, Longley, Heal, Bradtke, Anstey, Mackinnon, Vlahov, Ronaldson, Maher, Borner, Keogh, Smyth, Sengstock - the list just goes on and on. People forget how good these guys were. In today's globalised basketball environment, the first six or seven would have enjoyed long and successful NBA careers, or at least, distinguished careers at the top European level of competition.

In fairness though, for most of the period you talk about we had very little depth and were regularly thrashed by the top teams.

We had an absolute superstar in Gaze, a good 'Robin' in Heal, and disciplined tough role players like Vlahov, Bradtke, Ronaldson, Fisher, Smyth etc.

Only in 2000 did we have real depth but again we werent competitive with the very best teams.

We have never had anywhere remotely close to the overall depth we have now, but you can only have five on the court and seven on the bench so it still comes down to how a team functions on the court.

Exum is very exciting though, he reminds me of a young D-Wade, something remarkable would have to happen for him not to kick on.

I understand we didn't have the depth we do now, I mentioned that, I was talking about the overall talent level of our better players. A guy like Bradtke could barely crack the NBA, he'd be a 10 year player in the NBA today.

I dont know about that, as a 6'10 centre without great athleticism he was hamstrung a bit, and he didnt do that well with big clubs in Europe in his time.

He definitely could have found import gigs in some of the domestic leagues over there these days though, that's for sure.

C'mon paul, I normally agree with most things you post here, but not on this. You only have to take a look at some of the Euro stiffs running around the NBA today to realise Bradtke could have had a successful stint over there.

I just dont see what he would bring. He was overmatched by true big men in his day internationally even though he battled very hard.

Maybe he could have slotted into 11-12th/injury list spots and made a living as a good training guy like Sean Marks, but I dont see him as a rotation guy due to his lack of genuine size and athleticism.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

OK. I agree to the extent he would have got more of a look in than in those days, and that he could have cracked a roster and stuck there, but not to the point where he would have been a regular minutes guy.

If he had the developed the skills he showed in his 2002 MVP year at a younger age then yes I would agree with you. It was such a shame we didnt see more of that Bradtke.

Bogut in the middle surrounded by shooters. Hopefully the likes of Drmic, Broekhoff and Motum are established by then. Not to mention out highly touted kids Exum and Simmons are starting to come through.
Delly Mills Ingles Baynes will be at their peak. Lets get that medal.

I think being in Oceania, despite the perks of automatic selection for the Worlds, is really hurting our chances in major tournaments. Our full-strength or near full-dtrength national team gets so little experience against quality teams. So little experience just playing together. Not just against quality teams, but also against reasonable-strength teams that are not familiar to us in roster and playing style. Meanwhile, European and American teams must go through tough qualification tournaments, or at least experience against a variety of opponents. Meanwhile, we are stuck facing the ever-familiar New Zealand team, playing a similar "Oceania" style of play, in which half the time the outcome is practically inconsequential.

And people criticise the Boomers for always seeming to choke against quality opposition in important tournament games. Because we don't encounter anything like that situation except in the major biannual tournaments, whereas our opponents not only get into those situations for qualifications, they regularly play against a variety of opponents in friendly matches.

I know it seems irrational in that it is risking automatic qualification, but we ought to insist upon FIBA merging Asia and Oceania. Or at least somehow raise the money to tour Europe more regularly when the Euro teams prepare for qualification tournaments. How far can we go when we only practice against New Zealand and China?

Remember when Brown's selection as coach was greeted with expectations, fuelled by Brown himself, that the Boomers would get experience playing NBADL teams and such? In some ways that is a ridiculous idea, but at least it would provide some experience against more unfamiliar opponents.

The Stankovic Cup represents the most experience we get against varied opponents outside of major tournaments and a handful of preparation games prior to the major tournaments, which tend to be literally days prior to the tournament. Yet how often do the Boomers have their A team is that tournament?

Oceania is merging with Asia rjd for World Cup qualification, it will happen after the 2016 Olympics I think.

Our 'full strength' team usually has a tour of Europe each year to help them gel, it's not like they only play against NZ, but I agree more cutthroat matches after the merger will definitely be of benefit.

Oceania merging with New Zealand only means we get China as well as New Zealand (plus myabe taiwan and japan woopty doo). With anything less then scrubs we SHOULD still qualify. Personally I wouldnt want to be in the position of most the European teams.... I am not sure about the future boomers team but undoubtedly there were teams much better then aour 2001-2007 efforts that didnt even qualify.

We do need to face better teams more often for the growth of the game. No one considers China or New Zealand world class. The China series only serves to rub dirt on the name ofd AUssie hoops when we send out D grade squads that manage to lose to them and the average guy on the street doesnt know were missing up to 20 of our best players

I think you are underestimating how tough one off games in places like Iran, China and the Philippines could be. Just ask the Socceroos.

We should still get through, of course, but we will learn more about playing do-or-die games than we currently do, and that has to be a good thing.

Would be more exciting to see do or die matches also.

@Paul: yeah if we are sending our D team but a full strength Boomers team should romp through any competition from Asia, hostile crowd and refs or none.

I would like to think that Mick... However historically Australia has done a good job of losing matches that they should have absolutely owned. Angola, New Zealand, almost lost to Jordan recently. China... As hit on we def need to get use to the big matches to make it.

How quickly you forget the opening game of the 2010 WCs against Jordan, Mick.

Either way, playing against NZ and Asia in meaningful qualification games will serve the Boomers much better than just playing against NZ for seeding only.

paul, do you have any idea of the structure of competition for this new Asia-Pacific World Cup qualification tournament?

It will be like soccer, with six 'qualification windows' across two years leading up to the world cup and games played in home and away format.

This sums up most of the changes:

http://www.fiba.com/pages/eng/fc/news/presRele/p/newsid/54422/presReleArti.html

Thanks mate. Sounds exciting. Looking at the timing of some of the qualification windows, having depth in the Boomers program will be key, so series such as the Sino-Aus just completed will be quite valuable.

Haha yeah I know that's why i said SHOULD.

Yes indeed!

I'd love to see a Possibles vs Probables game as part of preparation for any major qualification series. It would give the fringe players a chance to show their credentials, and provide a real challenge to those already in the squad.

I know we've had this thread before, but ... wouldn't it be great to see guys like Nevill, Goulding, Gliddon, Andersen, Maric, Majok, Lisch up against Baynes, Mills, Dellavedova, Ingles, etc.

I'd certainly pay to see it!!

Speaking of international teams with the potential to put out a good lineup...Check out Canada's potential lineup for 2016 Olympics:

PG Myck Kabongo / Kevin Pangos
SG Olivier Hanlan / Brady Heslip
SF Andrew Wiggins /Anthony Bennett
PF Tristan Thompson/Andrew Nicholson
C Kelly Olynyk/ Rob Sacre

Crazy team.
Hanlan should find himself on an NBA roster in a few years.
Pangos and Heslip will find themselves in Europe.
Nicholson and Thompson already making their way in the NBA.
Kabongo 2nd round pick in this years draft.
Olynyk high first round.
Wiggins will be a stud -- lock for no.1 in next year's draft.
Sacre with Lakers.
Bennent - lottery pick of this year's draft

I think there will be a change in the basketball landscape. Looks to me like Canada will be another team making noise... and Australia. Argentina might be done for. Maybe spain too?

Nik Stauskas will make that Canadian team too. Already one of the best shooters in the world.

Stauskas may be the BEST shooter in the world - three point shooter anyway, he is unbelievable. Really glad to see our Commonwealth cousins getting their hoops act together.

MACDUB, you can also add Cory Joseph to that team. He'd probably be the starting point guard at this stage.

Canada beating the US would be pretty cool. That's an impressive squad they're putting together.

I would take Jawai if availible