You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
D
Darrell Armstrong2
Guest
I don't see how you can properly rank the teams that came out of the OQTs. They never faced each other, nor the same teams, and haven't had any exhibition games since those tournaments ended. I get that everyone wants to lick Doncic's pole, but it's getting a tad ridiculous. Yes, they beat Lithuania, but you can argue that Italy had a tougher road to Tokyo, and the azurri have improved the team adding Gallinari. Objectively, there's no reason to give Slovenia the edge.
And, of course, France should be ranked higher. Yes, they lost both games against Spain, but they fought hard, didn't even have all their stars available for the first game, and were still in the first stages of training camp. I think they have good chances of beating Team USA in group A.
And, of course, France should be ranked higher. Yes, they lost both games against Spain, but they fought hard, didn't even have all their stars available for the first game, and were still in the first stages of training camp. I think they have good chances of beating Team USA in group A.
D
Darrell Armstrong2
Guest
I take back my words about France. Absolutely disgraceful loss against Japan in their last exhibition game. The last two minutes were an exercise in futility. Pigheaded attempts to get a three instead of running plays or trying to get the ball inside where they had a clear advantage with Gobert.
They better get their shit together soon.
They better get their shit together soon.
S
Shawshank2
Guest
for me Usa,Spain,Australia are medal favourites.
2 group France,Argentina,Slovenia
Dark horses Italy and Chech
Nigeria,Germany,Iran,Japan i dont think its realistic those teams can make semifinal.
2 group France,Argentina,Slovenia
Dark horses Italy and Chech
Nigeria,Germany,Iran,Japan i dont think its realistic those teams can make semifinal.
K
Katastroika2
Guest
I think Nigeria has a shot to be very troublesome in this tournament.
Slovenia for me in direct contender position. For others I agree.
Slovenia for me in direct contender position. For others I agree.
C
ChuckDiesel22
Guest
If Japan can be respectable it would really impact the knockout seeding. Hope they steal a game.
T
Terrorizer2
Guest
I haven't followed the preparation games and missed most of OQT, but judging purely by rosters strength for me it's something like:
1. Spain.
2. France.
3. USA.
4. Slovenia (Doncic factor mostly though I'm not sure that it will work in Tokyo).
5. Argentina.
6. Nigeria.
7. Italy.
8. Australia (a team which always competes and hence gets much higher than it should be, but really its roster is a mix of washed up, low basketball IQ NBA role players, failed prospects and some local NBL "stars").
9. Germany.
10. Czech Republic.
11. Japan.
12. Iran.
One of the most unpredictable yet weak Olympic games tournaments I remember. 2012 was most probably the best one.
1. Spain.
2. France.
3. USA.
4. Slovenia (Doncic factor mostly though I'm not sure that it will work in Tokyo).
5. Argentina.
6. Nigeria.
7. Italy.
8. Australia (a team which always competes and hence gets much higher than it should be, but really its roster is a mix of washed up, low basketball IQ NBA role players, failed prospects and some local NBL "stars").
9. Germany.
10. Czech Republic.
11. Japan.
12. Iran.
One of the most unpredictable yet weak Olympic games tournaments I remember. 2012 was most probably the best one.
T
Terrorizer2
Guest
Well, judging purely by roster's strength, USA should be higher but their preparation period was so hectic and with all the late comings, replacements and other stuff right now I'm not seeing them on the top.
Yet, truth to be said, I like how the core of their roster is composed: Durant, Lillard and versatile Tatum as main offensive weapons (I don't like Lillard but at least he can score), Holiday and Adebayo for defensive intensity (on the perimeter and in the paint respectively) and Draymond Green as a jack-of-all-trades (master of none) glue guy. The main problem is that this team is too thin and also it lacks a proper floor general a la Chris Paul and a proper high class center. If they could make a couple of adjustments (let's say Trae Young instead of Johnson, Anthony Davis instead of laughable McGee and also - let it be three adjustments - powerful Zion instead of lanky Grant) and they'll be really good.
Yet, truth to be said, I like how the core of their roster is composed: Durant, Lillard and versatile Tatum as main offensive weapons (I don't like Lillard but at least he can score), Holiday and Adebayo for defensive intensity (on the perimeter and in the paint respectively) and Draymond Green as a jack-of-all-trades (master of none) glue guy. The main problem is that this team is too thin and also it lacks a proper floor general a la Chris Paul and a proper high class center. If they could make a couple of adjustments (let's say Trae Young instead of Johnson, Anthony Davis instead of laughable McGee and also - let it be three adjustments - powerful Zion instead of lanky Grant) and they'll be really good.
J
judasmartel2
Guest
Well, judging purely by roster's strength, USA should be higher but their preparation period was so hectic and with all the late comings, replacements and other stuff right now I'm not seeing them on the top.
Yet, truth to be said, I like how the core of their roster is composed: Durant, Lillard and versatile Tatum as main offensive weapons (I don't like Lillard but at least he can score), Holiday and Adebayo for defensive intensity (on the perimeter and in the paint respectively) and Draymond Green as a jack-of-all-trades (master of none) glue guy. The main problem is that this team is too thin and also it lacks a proper floor general a la Chris Paul and a proper high class center. If they could make a couple of adjustments (let's say Trae Young instead of Johnson, Anthony Davis instead of laughable McGee and also - let it be three adjustments - powerful Zion instead of lanky Grant) and they'll be really good.
Well, the problem is... he was injured during the Lakers-Suns series.
D
DarkoMVP2
Guest
What are you talking about? All the teams are ranked properly, by trying to assess how good they are, of which there is currently no objective measure. The whole point is ranking them before the Olympics - if we wait until afterwards, sure, it may be more accurate, but it won't be too interesting.I don't see how you can properly rank the teams that came out of the OQTs. They never faced each other, nor the same teams, and haven't had any exhibition games since those tournaments ended. I get that everyone wants to lick Doncic's pole, but it's getting a tad ridiculous. Yes, they beat Lithuania, but you can argue that Italy had a tougher road to Tokyo, and the azurri have improved the team adding Gallinari. Objectively, there's no reason to give Slovenia the edge.
And, of course, France should be ranked higher. Yes, they lost both games against Spain, but they fought hard, didn't even have all their stars available for the first game, and were still in the first stages of training camp. I think they have good chances of beating Team USA in group A.
D
Darrell Armstrong2
Guest
What are you talking about? All the teams are ranked properly, by trying to assess how good they are, of which there is currently no objective measure. The whole point is ranking them before the Olympics - if we wait until afterwards, sure, it may be more accurate, but it won't be too interesting.
Well, FIBA publishes these Power Rankings before and throughout every competition. Usually the early Power Rankings are based on results of exhibition matches, so there is some basis for comparison. But this year a lot of teams have not played among themselves, and any attempt of ranking them is going to be biased. Take Slovenia as the perfect example: they haven't played a high level tournament since 2017. They won their Qualifying Tournament, but the only high ranked teams they faced were Lithuania and Poland, which haven't faced stiff competition since 2019 (and lost most of those matches).
As Slovenia, Italy, Czech Republic, and Germany haven't faced off in years; and have not played against the same teams this summer, you cannot really "rank" them. You can attempt to make some predictions based on roster strength or historical results. But that's not what the Power Rankings are about, and even the author makes a point to explain it in his article.
For me, all the OQT winners are together at the bottom of the rankings until they win a match against any of the other teams. That's not a prediction of future standings. It's just they have done nothing yet to be placed higher than the teams that qualified earlier for the Games and have been facing each other.