this was the poast and comment that spurred this discussion. seems pretty clear to me we were discussing drob vs rookie shack defense and it would make sense considering those were the years applicable to this thread.

Adding Shaq to DT isn't nearly as beneficial as adding D12 to 2012...AINEC

He may not even get any PT over Robinson and Ewing at that point...his career doesn't matter when we are talking about Pre-rookie shaq in '92 for DT vs vet centers already on the team

afaik, only thing DT would win in is an eyebrow count

How is the butthurt going in this thread? Is it still pretty bad? Safe to come back in yet?

Oh nm I see I should wait a couple more days for things to simmer down. For all the funny(/wrong) things you have posted in this thread vhawk, thinking I was being serious in those two posts may be the bestest yet.

PS - I didn't really make that graph to analyze 3PT shooting either.

I must admit Mr. vhawk01, it is very very interesting how we must take variance into account when considering that the 2012 team only beat Lithuania and Spain by 5 and 7 respectively, but for some conspicuous reason this consideration is absent when comparing 3 PT shooting between '92 and '12.

For the lols, can you quote/bold exactly where I said this shows the Dream Team is basically equivalent to the 2012 team in the 3 point shooting department? Just for the lols, of course.

I just noticed we are looping back around to arguing over adding Howard and Bynum to the team.

If we're healing injuries are we allowed to heal Larry Bird's back? He still had a PER of 21.0 in '91-'92 with a jacked up spine. 3PT% of .406. Peak PER of 27.8... in the last season before his back trouble started. We can also consider adding some combination of Joe Dumars, Gary Payton, Dennis Rodman, Dominique Wilkins, Tim Hardaway, Reggie Miller, and Glen Rice. Not sure who I would pick - so many choices!

Challenging vhawk seems like a good idea

Yes, it would be like the 1992 Dream Team challenging the 2012 Olympic team. I will let you guess which side I am. (Hint: it's the side that's not wrong.)

Thanks for the hint

No, it means they underperformed, or they ran bad. But for the sake of this discussion those basically amount to the same thing. The fact that 2012 beat Spain by 7 and underperformed IS AN ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF 2012.

If anything, the performance of the 1988 USA Olympic team should probably be something you are embarrassed to bring up if you are a pro-DT poster ITT, dont you think? Or did you not really think that through?

EDIT: I mean seriously, you guys understand this was just 4 short years before the DT, and a team full of college kids went 5-0 in pool play, winning by an average of like 35 points per game, and won the Bronze medal game by 29. With the exception of a single game against USSR, they dominate probably MORE than the DT did. For crying out loud, they beat Egypt 102-35.

But yeah, sorry, I forgot that Lithuania had 2 NBA players in 1992.

Before we get ahead of ourselves guys and proclaim the 1988 "Daydream Team" to be definitively better than 2012, I think we need to ask ourselves: How many HoFers did they have?

You forgot to account for how much sleep the 88 team got.

So few people think 12 beats DT in a series that this thread is a bunch of people who think DT is much better arguing against a bunch of people who think DT is only slightly better

Jordan's game is pretty bad for the international rules, 50-55% 2pt shots are quite bad when there are 45% 3pt shots readily available, and he was pretty bad from 3

he's still Jordan so it's not like he's awful but Lebron is definitely better suited for the international game than Jordan, and Durant is probably better than both

Out of curiosity, why can't it mean that Spain overperformed? It could also mean the bookies don't always set the line properly. But yeah, underperforming in big games certainly helps their cause.

well done

bookies sometimes fail but they're much better at it than any of us, so if we're making appeals to some authority: bookies >>>>>>>>> Skip Bayless and BADUU

Do you have any sort of evidence that the 2012 Lithuania team was better than the 1992 team or do you just want to continue misrepresenting that argument? Which by the way was made as a counterpoint to a poster saying the team the DT played was full of no pro hacks. But hey, it's easier to be disingenuous I guess.

I agree. It seems though most posters in this thread are pretty united that the '92 team would be the faves over the '12 team. So it's not just Skip Bayless and BADUU. It's unfortunate that BADUU is just too easy to troll.

That would depend on how much they underperformed by now wouldn't it. But you stated earlier that since they were favored by 20+ then what happened in the game doesn't matter anyway IIRC which is pretty LOL IMO. I wonder, had Spain actually won the gold, would you still be saying that? Hey, who cares who won, USA was favored by 20, that's all that matters, the USA just ran bad is all.

What if they were to play again today? Do you think the line would still be 20+, or perhaps somewhat less this time around? Or is the betting public mostly in the USA and maybe that bias is partly responsible for the line being an inaccurate representation of the two teams relative strength? Is that even possible in your mind or do you take the line set by the bookies as gospel?

people always make arguments like this when arguing against lines, and they're lolwrong every time

Except when it comes to the Dallas Cowboys.

In seriousness though, you picked out the weakest part of his argument. Would the US still be 20+ point faves against Spain if they were to play Game 2 tomorrow?

what if they won by 40 like they did in '08? who cares

I doubt the line would be less that -15

Lol. Ok.