Kay is in there for sure unless someone else steps up and knocks him out. Whoever that is has got about 9 months to prove it. If Bolden fancies himself as that someone then he has handed Kay a huge head start.

Baynes/Bogut
Simmons/Kay/Landale
Ingles/Broekhoff/Creek
Mills/Goulding
Dellavedova/Exum

No idea. I can't wait to get Broekhoff back in there. He would have made a big difference this year. Simmons obviously. I'm not against the idea of Cotton being in the mix if he is eligible. Exum I am not sold on yet, but we could really use a someone we can throw in as a backcourt stopper and he might be that guy.
Plenty of spots in the air for me given there are 3 easy outs and another 3 fringe guys who proved they are not certainties but are capable of contributing.

Kay over Bolden for now anyway.
Will we see Motum again?

I'm not overly impressed with Maker either but I would take him over Bolden. I only see him playing spot minutes though.

Unless Cotton plays some point I'm not so sure he is in.
Can't imagine they would want two undersized shooting guards.

I agree it would need to be at PG, but as we saw in the finals he is quite capable of that.

20 player squad

Baynes Maker Bogut Kay
Simmons Bolden Landale Motum
Ingles Cooks Adel Creek
Mills Broekhoff Goulding Green
Delladova Exum Cotton McDowell-White

Kay was really solid this world cup.
Only the 1 bad game vs France(Batum)

He can go with any traditional PF but doesn't have the agility to match up with the SF playing PF.

But doubt he makes the world cup but definitely possible. I think he did himself a lot of favors this world cup.
Depends what position they play Simmons and who's missing (injuries / don't care). And how players develop and age over the next year.

Given that this tournament has been very much about mental toughness as well as skills, which is where the Boomers have excelled, why would the Olympics be any different? In other words, you need guys who will knuckle down and do whatever is needed to get the team over the line. This means that we will still need guys LIKE Kay and Creek even if not Kay or Creek.

I think one of the reasons we've done so well this WC is that we haven’t been as distracted by refereeing as in the past, when we’d lose focus too easily.

This is one of my reservations about youngsters like Simmons, Bolden, Adel, etc. Are they mentally tough enough to knuckle down and get the job done at both ends, or will they spend most of their time complaining about the refs and be distracted by every tiggy touch so that their offense goes to shit, and end up being unplayable at the end of the bench?

My 12 for Olympics would be:

Delly,Exum,
Mills,Broekoff,
Ingles,Cooks,Adel,
Simmonds,Bolden,Maker,
Baynes,Bogut.

Simmonds and Ingles could be point forwards.
I think this lineup gives us size,athleticism and shooting and there is no-one is not able to compete.

Up to coach to make it work but core is still there from this years success.

Nostraballmus asks not who the players will be in 2020, but suggests we should look at the coaching team.

In Lemanis, Longley, Weaver, Caporn and Patrick we have:

Aussie with NBL experience and international experience, no medals (yet)
Aussie with NBA playing experience, limited coaching
Americans with college and sub-elite pro experience
Aussies with college and junior coaching experience
Nothing non Aussie or American in sight


They've done good but none have won anything internationally

Nostraballmus suggests we may consider some diversity in the team ? A proven international medal winner as an assistant perhaps maybe ? An expert on European and South American styles and players ? An older mentor ? maybe not even as an assistant or coach but as a technical advisor ?

Ettore Messina ? (although hasn't won internationally, granted)
Jonas Kauzlauskas ?
Aleksander Petrovic ?
Ruben Magnano ?
Djordjevic may need a job now

Nostraballmus is just thinkin but again, u know he's right

The biggest question of the coaches is why haven't they cleaned up the turnovers? It ultimately killed us, even if some dubious calls didn’t help along the way. Some of those passes should have never being thrown.

Kay is just a smart basketballer. Defensively and on the glass he is elite, possibly ahead of all other suggested pf’s. Offensively, he doesn’t need to be elite as a scorer and as a post up threat, look who is around him! What he does do better than possibly most pf’s is make the right read to get a cheap and easy basket. If you re watch most games, the commentators were busy raving about the great pass, but never highlighting the fact he has managed to make the right read at the right time to end up wide open! Under the basket.

Simmons would be your pg right? I would almost think he steps in for one of our extra nbl guards. Goulding has also done himself a heap of favours, i was surprised he did not get destroyed defensively and offensively I thought he played really rather well for the most part.

Weren't turnovers fairly high in Rio as well? Assist numbers are absurdly high as well, it just seems to be the way the system works to an extent.

I couldn't see Simmons stepping in as PG straight away, would be too much to expect him to run this system straight off the bat. I reckon he will be used like Bogut in this system where his passing comes to the fore and he isn't too far from the basket to make quick moves.

Re turnovers, up until yesterday there were a lot of aggressive turnovers, but we had a 1.75 assist-to-turnover ratio coming into the game which is very good.

Against Spain there were a lot of flustered and tired turnovers where we lacked poise, so there wasn't the risk and reward as per previous games, Rio etc. To beat France, we simply need to look after the ball well, and I think part of that is getting it into Bogut's hands more. That was the biggest mistake late in the SF.

Can anon above talking rubbish please choose a name? It reads like Dave/Makur. You are destroying the reputation of all anons.

Simmons
Mills
Baynes
Landale
Ingles

Delly
Exum
Bogut
Kay
Cooks

Goulding
Maker

Anyone picking Bolden over Kay must have been in a coma for the last month.

There's every chance Bolden doesn't even get picked in the squad IMO.

Kay's contribution isn't about stats, it's about doing the things that allow the stars to do their thing, and if you listen to Luc Longley (a guy who would know a thing or two about that), Kay is excellent at it.

Bolden, on the other hand, is a work in progress on that front, particularly in the Boomers' system. The veteran players are also very peeved at him, they sacrifice big time to represent their country and have for a long time, so Bolden's selfishness does not sit well and will make it harder for him to get back in next year.

Beyond that, assuming he matures, he should become a massive contributor for the national team with his all-around ability.

If Simmons starts making demands like that, he can (and will) stay home.

We need a new coach. New style, Lemanis has had his chance and can't get the job done. Too predictable, too dependent on too few. Bevo currently doesn't have a coaching gig, make him the Full Time Boomers coach and give him a consultancy position at CoE

"We need a new coach. New style, Lemanis has had his chance and can't get the job done. Too predictable, too dependent on too few. "

It's seems to be anons and Dave/Makur repeating this. Vocal minority? Or all the same person?

Lemanis led Australia to their best Olympic record and then led them to their best WC result ever. The system has been responsible for a large part of this success. It also offers such continuity that players like Kay can seamlessly come in and be real contributors.

We still have players like Broekhoff and Exum to add who know the system well. Concerns might be with Maker, who has only one window under his belt, and Simmons and Cooks, who have been to just one training camp.

Rjd, the much vaunted 'system' doesn’t work. It produces 4th place finishes. That’s reality.
We need to change if we want medals.

The system has got us our best results ever at consecutive major tournaments...

So close, yet so far. Obviously we are within grasp of our first medal but there is a change somewhere that is necessary to realize the goal.

I think the Europeans have an edge because they're more used to playing big, meaningful games. Their warm up games are among eachother, and ours are with Asian nobodies.

But fact of the matter is, we're getting dangerously late with this core group. It's sure to make big changes after the coming Olympics. The time is NOW for Australian basketball. We may be on a pretty big rebuild in just a year's time.

Do we replace Lemanis? Well, is it better the devil you know? We know Lemanis will get us 'around the mark' but we don't know that he will get us the medal. We also know that we should have better talent stocks coming into Tokyo. We don't know what a Bevo or Gleeson will do with the team, and imposing new systems on these players in a short time frame may be recipe for disaster.

But having said that, all the sets and structures meant absolutely NOTHING when the game was on the line. And all too often it was brilliance from Patty Mills that bailed us out. At the end of the tournament we absolutely capitulated. Tired legs are one thing, but it was our execution and brains that lost us the game.

For me, watching the basketball is fantastic. I truly care about the future success of this team. It guts me to see them suffer. It sucks that for some of these guys, this will be the last opportunity they ever have to win a medal for their country. The pride, dedication and love they have for representing this country is unquestionable. So when we're being critical of the team, we should keep in mind those guys who put their very souls out there on the court to represent us to the world. For that every single person on this team has been absolutely incredible. They care deeply about this team and basketball in this country. We may not have the luxury of players with this character after these guys pass on the baton. A thanks is deserved for that.

For the core group - Delly, Patty, Ingles, Baynes, Bogut - Tokyo will be the last roll of the dice. After this we have to have a changing of the guard. A new identity. There is a lot of uncertainty moving forward. We could only dream that our next generation buys in the way these guys do.

But looking ahead, questions need to be asked about team selection, coaching, and all of that. After Tokyo we're a rebuilding team again. And I do fear that fourth will once again be our ceiling

Dave / Makur is a pathetic troll. Before the tournament he trashed everything about the team. Now claims to be disappointed that we're 4th in the world.
The knob is not worth responding too. There's no reasoning with a troll.

I think the Europeans have an edge because they're more used to playing big, meaningful games. Their warm up games are among eachother, and ours are with Asian nobodies.

Actually Luuuc the Euroleague itself plays during international windows as the entity running it broke away from FIBA.

Thanks PW I stand corrected on that one

This was clearly the best result ever for Australia in a major tournament.

I don't mean to downplay 4th place in the Olympics, but 4th in the Olympics is far easier than the World Cup. Those 4th places have given us a false idea of Australia's place in world basketball.

Think about it: the Olympics is just 12 teams.

- This includes affirmative action places for Africa and Asia, which we clearly should be superior to. So top 10 is almost guaranteed.

- Then there is a home team addition, which in the case of Tokyo, should be another low ranked team. Now top 9 is easy for all teams except Africa/Asia.

- So to make the final 8, when the real tournament begins, requires just one European/American/Oceania team to be eliminated in the group phase. Compare that to this world cup that was a serious challenge to proceed past the first round, then required good previous results and games against quality opposition to proceed past the 2nd round into the elimination games.

To go final 4 in the Olympics requires one win in an elimination game after, as expected, Australia gets through the group phase. That's one win, possibly an upset, to go final 4.

The pool of quality teams in the World Cup is far larger than the Olympics. Basketball has also grown around the world, so there are now more quality teams to contend with. To get into that top 8 is a far greater challenge in the World Cup. Once there, as we've seen in this World Cup, those quality teams can beat anyone on any given night. Starting 6-0 in this WC was an incredible performance.

It is. especially considering all the drama they had to go through just to get here. All the players that pulled out, the double group of death, the Simmons drama, the Cooks injury and then the Bolden walkout. Shows just how much character they have, just a shame they don't have anything to show for it.

Tokyo:

Baynes/Bogut
Simmons/Kay/Landale
Ingles/Broekhoff/Creek
Mills/Goulding
Delly/Exum

In
Simmons
Broekhoff
Exum

Out
Gliddon
Sobey
Barlow


Bolden, Maker and Motum could challenge Kay or Landale, but I was super impressed with Kay's world cup efforts as a role playing glue guy. If Cotton naturalises then he could challenge Goulding.

Adel and Cooks in the mix. Josh Green? Isaac Humphries? A year is a long time.

I like that team LV, it gives continuity while bringing in guys who can address our weaknesses.

LV has picked a good team.
Bolden needs to have an amazing NBA season along with Maker and Exum to be considered.
They shouldn't be picked on potential, they should be picked on talent.

The Lemanis system breaks down under any kind of pressure. We needed massive individual games all tournament long to progress. Every time the system started to falter (usually in the third quarter once the opposition coach made adjustments) we only got back into the game through one of our guys going off (Delly Vs Canada, Ingles Vs Senegal, Baynes Vs France, Patty every other time).

In the last two major tournaments we've played 4 games that could have clinched a medal and are 0-4. Importantly, two of those games were against sides that we'd already beaten earlier in the tournament. This shows Lemanis simply cannot make adjustments to match the world's best coaches.

Yes the results overall have been good, but we've also had the most talent ever, aside from maybe 2000 and achieved the same result there.

Lemanis took 3 guys to the tournament who were clearly never trusted to play in any circumstance when those spots could have been used for X factors to throw in when things went against the plan - Adel, Motum.

You can be a good coach and still not be the right guy to take the team to the next level. Think of GSW sacking Mark Jackson when they were a good team and then becoming a GREAT team.

"This shows Lemanis simply cannot make adjustments to match the world's best coaches."

Bogut said one of the things he really likes about this team is the way they are able to make adjustments. The reality is with back-to-back final four efforts Lemanis is one of the world's best international coaches at the moment.

The final four had Scariolo, Hernandez, Collet and Lemanis. In Rio it was Krzyzewski, Djordevic, Scariolo and Lemanis. That's elite company.

Really, in two final four games against Spain, it was a toss of the coin whether we beat them. Since 2006, Spain are 16-6 in medal round games at Olympics, WCs and Eurobasket. Take the USA out of that equation and they are 16-3.

It's funny how the toss of the coin always goes against us though hey?

I would say only twice, against Spain. One was a bad call in Rio, the other a missed FT by Mills.

And what about the complete out coaching against Serbia in Rio and France last night? Those teams clearly made adjustments that Lemanis had no idea how to counter. He has no plan B.

If you look at the past decade in international basketball, apart from the USA, the heavyweights are Spain, France and Serbia. These are the teams that regularly medal in Eurobasket, Olympics and World Cups.

We've lost two coin tosses against Spain, both costing us a medal. We’re 2-1 recently against France- a big win in Rio, then two super tight games in this world cup, one going each way. In the first, the scores were tied 17 times and in the second it went down to the last minute.

We beat Serbia comfortably in Rio, and then lost the semi final- which was the single terrible game the Boomers have played across the entire 2016 Olympics and 2019 World Cup.

Lithuania is another basketball heavyweight- Boomers smashed them in Rio and beat them in a close match at the World Cup.

Boomers are unlucky to have missed some silverware. They’ve consistently matched it with the greatest basketball nations, and only missed medals after losing the tightest of matches that could’ve gone either way.

Sacking Lemanis would be a dumb move. He has runs on the board with this group. Re-assess after Rio, and choose someone new to take the new generation forward.

"And what about the complete out coaching against Serbia in Rio and France last night?"

Re Serbia, when you get smashed by 26 points it's on the players, not the coach. Our guys just didn't show that night unfortunately.

Last night's is an interesting one re coaching. The Boomers got 15 in front, was that because of good adjustments from the last game or just the players executing well defensively? I would say the coaching error was nothing to do with tactics in this game, but not giving Ingles, Mills and Delly more rest earlier in the tournament.

Apart from the results though, from a pure analysis point of view I'm impressed with Lemanis.

This group of players has some weaknesses:

- Lacks elite one on one scorers.

- Lacks playmaking and offensive creativity.

- Lacks athleticism.

Given those weaknesses, Lemanis has gone a great job of using their strengths to create a system where we’re consistently putting points on the board. He uses the bigs from the high post, utilising their high bball IQ in the team with a constant stream of back cuts, gets Mills coming off screens very effectively.

France and Australia had similar rosters I reckon. Baynes and Bogut got the better of Gobert generally. Batum and Ingles are both versatile forwards. (Although Batum was playing 4 too). Both teams have an elite scorer in the backcourt. The only difference was the experienced De Colo coming off the bench- the Boomers didn’t have anyone comparable.

Essentially given our roster, I can’t complain with a 4th place finish.

And as I’ve written elsewhere on this board in the choke thread, I think the losses to Spain and France are more to do with A. Fatigue and B. Roster deficiencies than anything we can pin on Lemanis.

And when I say "playmaking and creativity" above I mean both together, not either/or. Ingles and Delly are both guys can are elite passers and can run an offense capably, but they aren't creative guys who will generate something out of nothing in clutch situations.

Do we want to look at glass half empty or glass half full?

Glass half empty:

We keep losing close matches that matter. We keep losing to teams we beat in the group stages. Lemanis has to go.

Glass half full:

We finished higher than teams with more talent like USA and Serbia, we notched wins against quality opponents Lithuania, France, Czech Republic, Canada and were within a Patty Mills free throw of a guaranteed silver medal (and likely gold, in my opinion).

Sure, lets keep doing the same thing and hope we get better results. Sounds like a good plan

I would say it's a case of doing most of it the same, because it works, and tweaking a few things to try and get that extra step we need.

I predict 4th place again if that's the case.

We had a chance at Gold. We won't have that next year, or for the foreseeable future. This was our one chance, and because of a coach with no Plan B, we blew it.

Some would say with the help of an excellent coach we got closer to it than we ever have before.

I get that. I don't buy it.

When it came to the big games, team's knew how to counter our system and the individual heroics that got us over the line early in the tournament didn't eventuate. He was out coached.

Nostraballmus says Thank you Cram
'You can be a good coach and still not be the right guy to take the team to the next level. Think of GSW sacking Mark Jackson when they were a good team and then becoming a GREAT team'.
This system DOESN'T work ! It doesn't win medals (with a team that can or even should). 3 major campaigns now and no medals. Replicate the system, coaching staff and player group in Tokyo as is and we'll replicate the result (or worse. Significant change is absolutely needed
Minimum: 1)retain Lemanis for Tokyo and add a proven European medal winning assistant coach to the coaching team, to 2)add to/modify the offensive and defensive systems to provide greater flexibility and specifically to counter Euroball strengths that keep beating us in the crunch and 3) proven leadership and counsel EOG, under pressure on and off court 4) engage our best talent to play for the cause in Tokyo. Stop f'ing around with the players. Go to the 14 players you want (12 + 2 reserves) and just tell them we want you, you want in, you are in. I mean Mills, Delly, Bogut, Baynes, Ingles, Simmons, Broekhoff, Exum, Maker, Bolden, Cooks + Motum, Goulding. No camps, no squads. This is an allstar team at the end of the day. Start treating them like one.
The coach candidates have been discussed ad infinitum on this forum
You know Nostraballmus is right. he just hopes BA have enpugh Ballmus to make the tough decisions that will give this proud group the ebst chnace if medalling in Tokyo before their and our window firmly shuts.

How come no one ever puts any of the blame on the players?
Ingles switched out of his absurdly passive mode for a few games, but played only ok throughout.

Goulding/ Delly/ Ingles handled the ball a lot, and when they played lock down on Mills (who we needed to find in the 4th quarters), they simply weren't aggressive enough finding him when he worked himself open.

Aside from disappointing finishes, and the fact that makes it sting a little more, a pretty amazing tournament by the Boomers. Obviously we should've been playing for gold, but a few people commented on what would be considered a good finish before hand, and I think nobody really expected better/ more than 4th at the time.

Have to consider it pragmatically and instead of saying TWO CLOSE LOSSES AGAINST ELITE PLAYERS SACK LEMONASS

"When it came to the big games, team's knew how to counter our system and the individual heroics that got us over the line early in the tournament didn't eventuate. He was out coached."

Good teams know how to counter every teams' system by the end of the tournament. That's why it comes down to making plays late in close games. Had Mills made that free throw this conversation probably isn't happening, that's how small the margins are.

Talking about individual heroics is just absurd when you're talking about a team with a ridiculously high assist percentage. No team generates more out of their system than the Boomers.

Lemanis' system suits our players perfectly.

The system has helped deliver the Boomers their best ever result at a World Cup, following their equal best ever result at an Olympics.

But, Patty missed a free throw and we missed a medal, so we're blaming the system

The free throw falls in and Lemanis is the GOAT Boomer coach and we're all celebrating

Damn, sport can be a tough business hey?

I can barely imagine them doing much better than they have played under Lemanis, to be perfectly honest. I've been pleasantly surprised with our performances at Rio and China, despite the close misses. Just my opinion I guess

And no team gave up more turnovers.

Like clockwork when the going got tough, the system faltered. The heroics were either guys going one on one (Patty or Jingles) or guys being left open on purpose (Delly, Baynes). Sure it worked in the preliminary games, but Spain and France banked on the fact that couldn't be replicated and were proven right.

Most of the shots came out of the system, there were little one-on-one heroics. Of course, down the stretch of close games you rely on players to make plays, that's the same the world over.

What we need to tweak is who can make those plays and how. In Rio, we came from 12 down against Spain and won the last quarter 24-22, while we executed very well late in wins over Lithuania and France in China, so I don't think there is a systematic issue late in games.

In my opinion it comes down to having better guard depth so our playmakers are fresher later in the tournament. You don't need to throw out a system that works, and is admired by national teams around the world, to achieve that. In fact, if you tried an overhaul you are effectively writing off our medal chances for 2020.

You know who played well in that come back against Spain in Rio? Brock Motum. He'd have been a handy addition when we had nothing else going last night.

Our system provided a lot of assists, sure, but it also provided FAR more turnovers than any other team. Assist percentage may be a nice stat, but constantly throwing the ball by forcing passes that aren't there kept even minnows like Senegal in games against us. Yes it produced a lot of good looks, but it faltered more than any other offense there too.

Going into the medal rounds the assist-to-turnover ratio was 1.76:1, which is very good. The turnovers in those games were mostly aggressive turnovers. Once we got late into the Spain game and the France game they were sloppy turnovers, which to me again comes down to having better guard depth to keep our playmakers fresh. The offence is fine as long as the people running it make good decisions.

Yeah it would have been nice to not struggle against Canada and Senegal so that our guards could have had some rest hey? Unlikely I know as they're both noted FIBA heavyweights

It would have been nice. That doesn't detract from 5-0 though.

Replicate the system, coaching staff and player group in Tokyo as is and we'll replicate the result (or worse.)

We've proved this three times (2014,16,19) now while Spain, France, Serbia, Arg etc have proved their way actually wins medals

5-0 was great. So was 6-0. The goal is to go 8-0 (or at worst 7-1) though.

Indeed. A lot of teams wanted 8-0, only one achieved it, the team that beat us in double OT. That tells the story, it's about tweaking some things because the team is so close to achieving a medal, rather than overhauling things and writing off our chances next year.

Indeed it does tell the story

Indeed!

Indeed

What are we tweaking exactly ?

Are they the same things we tweaked after Rio?

What did we tweak after Rio and why did it not make the difference ? Did we not tweak them enough ? Or do we need to tweak different things now ?

We had less guard depth this year than in Rio, that's the biggest thing I'd address.

As for minor tweaks, I think they could be a little better at using some simpler sets that go to our strengths at the death. Now, there are coaches who know this stuff farbetter than I, hit up Liam Flynn on twitter and get his thoughts, he's analysed this stuff really well.

Nostraballmus would prefer we get advice from those who've proven they know how to win medals at Worlds/Olympics

We need to be looking at HOW we break the curse and be putting these things in place. If it's as simple as 'add Simmons and we win' (its not by the way IMO)then we need to see what do we do to make sure Ben plays in Tokyo.

Anyone have insight into what rigor is applied to assessment of performance by BA after major championships ?

Nostraballmus

What happened to the third person, allegorical nature of your posts?

Too direct by half.

Nostraballmus can see he choked.
So he's gonna make changes.
Unlike others.