2024 FIBA Asia U18 Championship

[TheRodster21]

DDO relies on athleticism, shooting and individual one on one ability. It’s harder when your shooters can’t shoot and other than the guard, there isn’t any advantage in scoring in the other positions

[ZIMATAR]

Having Kai, Geo, and AJ in our Batang Gilas program is a once-in-a-generation opportunity. While we do have young players in the 6'8" to 6'10" range, they are still very raw and might even be slower than Greg. Even Pablo and Gagate appeared slower compared to the bigs of Japan and Korea.

[live_evil]

I guess Japan and Korea are also dumb as they loss to us several times already in U16 using small ball and DDO.

We can dream of a tall lineup all we want but unless we see hoards of them in our doors, which we won't, we will be small and need to play thru that to make us winnable in competition. It's easier in the men's category as most of the Filipino body develops and can carry more weight as we get to 23 and up.

they are not dumb because they always include players who are tall if they are available and can be developed. Boy nepotismo is the one who is dumb because he gets players who can't shoot and are short while players who are available and are taller are not included because of "chemistry." Boy nepotismo has no concept of development while Japan and Korea have it. So even if they lose to us using small ball and ddo in u16, they are actually building for the future.

[IPC]

they are not dumb because they always include players who are tall if they are available and can be developed. Boy nepotismo is the one who is dumb because he gets players who can't shoot and are short while players who are available and are taller are not included because of "chemistry." Boy nepotismo has no concept of development while Japan and Korea have it. So even if they lose to us using small ball and ddo in u16, they are actually building for the future.

We could develop players that have potential in FIBA and could be developed in their FIBA positions.

It will raise their own level of play, even if they end up not being good enough for our seniors. It will help raise the level of their positions in the collegiate leagues and the PBA.

[thatweirdguy]

We could develop players that have potential in FIBA and could be developed in their FIBA positions.

It will raise their own level of play, even if they end up not being good enough for our seniors. It will help raise the level of their positions in the collegiate leagues and the PBA.

How many of this kids realistically had a shot of making it to the senior team? How many has PBA potential? Starters on a collegiate team?

[Alif]

BG u18 Thread

andy gemao is still eligible in this tournament

• "Yes, let's include Ludovice, Alas, and Daja in the tournament. We'll keep an eye on CJ Amos and add them if their performance improves."

[JAMSKIE]

How many of this kids realistically had a shot of making it to the senior team? How many has PBA potential? Starters on a collegiate team?

Throughout the history of RP youth teams, only a handful of players from every iteration of U-16/17 & U-18/19 teams could transition to the national senior level team. Even the U-16/17 & U-18/19 batch of Kai Sotto, sya lang, AJ Edu & Carl Tamayo have become serviceable for Gilas senior team. Malakas na nga yung batch ni Kai Sotto na yun.

May I ask, saan na ngayon yung mga players natin in the 2014 FIBA World U-17 Championship? Where is Jolo Mendoza now? At least yung Nieto brothers were able to play for Tab Baldwin's Gilas cadet team in 2021.

[zairex]

they are not dumb because they always include players who are tall if they are available and can be developed. Boy nepotismo is the one who is dumb because he gets players who can't shoot and are short while players who are available and are taller are not included because of "chemistry." Boy nepotismo has no concept of development while Japan and Korea have it. So even if they lose to us using small ball and ddo in u16, they are actually building for the future.

Tell me how many 6'5 players of Japan and Korea in U16 2023. Why they did not win against us considering they have been consistent in our region

[thatweirdguy]

Throughout the history of RP youth teams, only a handful of players from every iteration of U-16/17 & U-18/19 teams could transition to the national senior level team. Even the U-16/17 & U-18/19 batch of Kai Sotto, sya lang, AJ Edu & Carl Tamayo have become serviceable for Gilas senior team. Malakas na nga yung batch ni Kai Sotto na yun.

May I ask, saan na ngayon yung mga players natin in the 2014 FIBA World U-17 Championship? Where is Jolo Mendoza now? At least yung Nieto brothers were able to play for Tab Baldwin's Gilas cadet team in 2021.

That was the batch that came into my mind as well. Heck Kobe wasn't even included in the team that made the worlds for some reason (unavailability?). We suck at identifying players with good potential. Kai's batch and the Mason/ Konov batch were the ones that really got me excited

[hmbopbaduwap]

China U18 vs. Utah Prep

[IPC]

Tell me how many 6'5 players of Japan and Korea in U16 2023. Why they did not win against us considering they have been consistent in our region

We were the same size as them at the time. We were just more physical.

[Metta]

That was the batch that came into my mind as well. Heck Kobe wasn't even included in the team that made the worlds for some reason (unavailability?). We suck at identifying players with good potential. Kai's batch and the Mason/ Konov batch were the ones that really got me excited

Our basketball environment is modeled closest to the US. All over the country, many players play growing up. You can call it democratized/decentralized, where development is mostly left to the schools. It's different from places like Europe or other Asian countries like (China, Middle East, SoKor, etc) where there are varying degrees of a centralized entity overseeing development from an early age.

Identifying "eventual" top talent is very difficult, and it gets much more difficult when there are so many paths to development (in democratized/decentralized environments). Even the US has a poor performance when it comes to identifying "eventual" top talent at the 17U and below. The centralized approach tends to end up with a consistent group of prospects because they are the ones getting the top training the whole way.

In a decentralized environment, the players who get to receive excellent training/coaching/competition (in other words, those in the top local school programs and Filfors) have a huge advantage early on. Prospects who do not receive that type of development early on (pre-high school) eventually get identified in college (when growth spurts are done) and are able to catch up to those with earlier advantages when they finally receive ample training in college.

[Metta]

We were the same size as them at the time. We were just more physical.

Another thing to consider...some teams really don't prioritize winning (over development) in the youth stages.

This is by no means exactly why those teams lost and is purely for explanation of how some youth teams prioritize development over wins.

For example, a youth team that plays straight up man to man has a disadvantage against a team that plays zone. But when they grow up, the ones who play M2M become better defenders. Same thing with physicality/strength. In youth ranks, you can opt to emphasize on strength/physicality instead of skills/shooting/speed. The stronger kids can dominate (especially the inside game/rebounding) which leads to higher chances of winning. But when kids eventually grow up, the skilled kids surpass the strong kids when everyone eventually get stronger.

Then there are also teams that use the youth stages to play up. The key players are year/s younger and are given advanced experience against older kids. They will not win a lot of games, but in the long run becomes better players.

[IPC]

Another thing to consider...some teams really don't prioritize winning (over development) in the youth stages.

This is by no means exactly why those teams lost and is purely for explanation of how some youth teams prioritize development over wins.

For example, a youth team that plays straight up man to man has a disadvantage against a team that plays zone. But when they grow up, the ones who play M2M become better defenders. Same thing with physicality/strength. In youth ranks, you can opt to emphasize on strength/physicality instead of skills/shooting/speed. The stronger kids can dominate (especially the inside game/rebounding) which leads to higher chances of winning. But when kids eventually grow up, the skilled kids surpass the strong kids when everyone eventually get stronger.

Then there are also teams that use the youth stages to play up. The key players are year/s younger and are given advanced experience against older kids. They will not win a lot of games, but in the long run becomes better players.

And I think we should be using youth tournaments to identify players who have potential for seniors, not just those who are good players at this level. Can't go wrong with that.

[IPC]

Our basketball environment is modeled closest to the US. All over the country, many players play growing up. You can call it democratized/decentralized, where development is mostly left to the schools. It's different from places like Europe or other Asian countries like (China, Middle East, SoKor, etc) where there are varying degrees of a centralized entity overseeing development from an early age.

Identifying "eventual" top talent is very difficult, and it gets much more difficult when there are so many paths to development (in democratized/decentralized environments). Even the US has a poor performance when it comes to identifying "eventual" top talent at the 17U and below. The centralized approach tends to end up with a consistent group of prospects because they are the ones getting the top training the whole way.

In a decentralized environment, the players who get to receive excellent training/coaching/competition (in other words, those in the top local school programs and Filfors) have a huge advantage early on. Prospects who do not receive that type of development early on (pre-high school) eventually get identified in college (when growth spurts are done) and are able to catch up to those with earlier advantages when they finally receive ample training in college.

That's why I don't really blame Josh too much when he played 6'5" Marc Burgos and 6'4" Charles Esteban exclusively at 4/5 last SEABA. They're mobile, have length and a good motor, and might be able to shoot a bit, but they don't really have handles yet to play the 3. It's on the schools to develop them to play the wing, and sometimes they develop players who are undersized for their FIBA position.