USSR vs Yugoslavia in Eurobasket 2011.

[pimpekaustas]

Against what competition?

http://archive.fiba.com/pages/eng/fa...Men/index.html

you are bb analphabet, put any of todays NBA best player in europe and i wonder would they dominate all others like toni did in his time i doubt it

[Southpaw]

http://archive.fiba.com/pages/eng/fa...Men/index.html

you are bb analphabet, put any of todays NBA best player in europe and i wonder would they dominate all others like toni did in his time i doubt it

Nothing special on dominating Europe. McAdoo and Dominique did it way past their prime.

Even lesser role player like Anthony Parker did it.

If Kukoc dominated NBA that would be something special.

What Dirk did, that's special. He played against the best, he won
an MVP and an NBA championship as the main man.

[Southpaw]

in 88. majority of them were kids

89. and leatter didn't wining by 40, but with 15

of corse, dream team would be better, but leats assume they started sleepey like in 92. finals. could then much deeper yugo team surprise

Yugo lost a game against Puerto Rico in 1990.

Dream Team beat everyone by 40 points without calling a timeout.

someone said it's an even matchup.

And someone actually said the 92 Yugo NT could have been the greatest team.

hypothetical stuff with bias opinion can't make you the greatest team.

FACT: Dream Team was undefeated with margin of 40 plus without calling a time out.

OPINION : Yugo NT could have benn unbeatable. They lost to Puerto Rico.

[pohani komarac]

Yugo lost a game against Puerto Rico in 1990.

Dream Team beat everyone by 40 points without calling a timeout.someone said it's an even matchup.

And someone actually said the 92 Yugo NT could have been the greatest team.

hypothetical stuff with bias opinion can't make you the greatest team.

FACT: Dream Team was undefeated with margin of 40 plus without calling a time out.
OPINION : Yugo NT could have benn unbeatable. They lost to Puerto Rico.

they called time out during finals when they were to relax at beginig and croatia took the lead

FACT: they needed to get more serius to beat croatia in finals



and that is what i'm saying. dream team was better then evryone by huge margin, but for sure they could lose from yugoslavia if they don't come out serius

yes, one lose from 89 to 91 is for rolling eyes, and that's before team eterd peek what should be period from 92-96

[Dule_Vujosevic]

Lol to one who said that USSR would easily beat Yugoslavia
Look again at rosters, there are 3-4 teams that could easily concur for gold...

[Genjuro]

These Yugos comparison to Dream Team is a joke. They will play Dream Team 10 times and they will lose 10 times by average of 30 points. On their best day they will lose 15 points and at their worst they will get beaten up like 50 points. If Jordan was motivated enough, there's no one on that Yugo squad can stop him.

You are not taking the factor "team" into account. Yugoslavia had been playing together for many years (the 67-68 born core, with Divac, Radja, Kukoc or Djordjevic, has been playing together since 1986 at least and they joined the senior NT in 1987). Despite the unbelievable amount of individual talent displayed by Yugoslavia (for European standarts), they stood out for their amazing team play.

This is like Argentina beating the USA in 2004, or every time a USA team built of NBA players has lost a game: were the opponents better players? No way. They played better as a team.

You're also forgetting the different level of preparation of each team. Yugoslavia used to focus a lot on these championships. The US Team went to Montecarlo to practice...

Furthermore, the Dream Team wasn't really ready for a serious game. Their Olympic Games was more of a series of exhibition games, and only struggled against Croatia in the first half of the final. Their solution? To defend harder on the ball and run the fastbreak, the same old recipe for every US team. With a Croatia struggling at the PG position that was easy. Not so sure against Yugoslavia.

My point is, they could have stood a chance. USA had so much more talent and would've been favourites, of course, but again, this is a team game.

Indeed, the 1996 Dream Team was supertalented as well, and they struggled mightly against Serbia and Montenegro (still called Yugoslavia). Not until Divac was fouled out that game was decided (the Yugo frontcourt was very decimated, as back up big Savic couldn't play due injury, I believe).

Perhaps 1992 was to early. But I do believe that in 1994, with a World Championship bound to be played in Belgrade, Yugoslavia would've prevailed.

[damelo]

Jagodnik?

He might be older though...

[robbe]

Jagodnik?

He might be older though...

No. Anthony Parker.

[wardjdim]

Slightly off-topic?

That was the definition of off-topic

[robbe]

Slightly off-topic?

That was the definition of off-topic

I'm referring to this:

Nothing special on dominating Europe. McAdoo and Dominique did it way past their prime.

Even lesser role player like Anthony Parker did it.

Just to show how big the gap between "dominator" and "lesser role player" is. It's an ocean!

On a more serious note: If this player's name wasn't Anthony Parker and if he hadn't changed leagues before 06/07, nobody would raise an eyebrow. Statistical decline from 28/29 onwards is the rule.

[wardjdim]

I hadn't noticed that on Southpaw's post, although I am not surprised that he finds U.S. born players better than the rest simply because of their nationality. I was just hoping that he would have a couple of serious reasons for believing it, or at least something to back it with

By the way, in a yearbook before his senior year, Parker was presented as the best NCAA SF and a lock as a lottery pick. A poor senior year cost him a higher draft selection, a likely longer NBA career as something more than a good all-around role player or a spot shooter at some plays. So, the change of a player's judgement based on one season reveals weaknesses on the U.S. system as well. There are many NBA-level players not playing in the NBA and some non NBA-level players playing there. This is enough for a conclusion, I believe

[Southpaw]

I hadn't noticed that on Southpaw's post, although I am not surprised that he finds U.S. born players better than the rest simply because of their nationality. I was just hoping that he would have a couple of serious reasons for believing it, or at least something to back it with

By the way, in a yearbook before his senior year, Parker was presented as the best NCAA SF and a lock as a lottery pick. A poor senior year cost him a higher draft selection, a likely longer NBA career as something more than a good all-around role player or a spot shooter at some plays. So, the change of a player's judgement based on one season reveals weaknesses on the U.S. system as well. There are many NBA-level players not playing in the NBA and some non NBA-level players playing there. This is enough for a conclusion, I believe

what reason? SMH.

FACTS;

USA record on Olympic basketball 128-5. 13 golds, 1 silver and bronze. Even a strong team like Greece cant even medal.

1992 - Dream Team has a margin victory of 43.8


1960 = 39

1996- 32.3

2000- 21.6

2008 - 27.9.

No tell me a country that has margin of victory like that.

FACTS - USA in Europe

Since 2000, 33 players have been name in all Euroleage team, more than any country.

regular season MVP = 4 times. more than any country.

final 4 league MVP = 7 times, more than any country.

5 named to 35 greatest players - 2nd to Serbia. ( it should be 8 if you include Galis, Luyk and Brabender because they are americans)

Look Finley have the same scenario with Parker. He was drafted late because of poor senior season. The reality if minutes are earned in practice. You are not entitle to that no matter where are you drafted. Case in point Adam Morrison.

[NorCal]

Ok, so just because we have in this forum people who haven't even watched the Yugoslavian team ever play, we will have to forget what common sense means

The Yugoslavian NT before 1992 is either the best team of all-time, or top-3 at worse. The other two are USA 2008 and USA 1992, in no specific order. Focusing on individual talent and what the Yugoslavian players (who would beat the best Spain possible 8 out of 10 times) did in the NBA is something that has nothing to do with the discussion

Southpaw, you just proved that if someone is from Philipinnes, they probably don't know much about basketball besides the NBA. Do you really understand the international rules? Have you watched this team playing?

NorCal, if someone is from the US could be far from understanding international basketball and especially during the period that this Yugoslavian generation was in charge. Yugoslavia in 1988 got half of this roster at ages 20-21. I think that when they were 24-25, they were better. Anyway the 3-year period 1989-91 was 3 golds, no losses, pure dominance and seriously, below their true prime. Take all the talent in the world, even with a better coach than Chuck Daly and I am not sure you can beat a continuously developing generation and a team dominant for so long, with the "no-one can beat us" mentality altogether

Anyway, it can be 50%, it can be longer, it can be less. But the discussion can only be on this level. Good note is that Serbia (World Champions 1998 and 2002, Euro Champs 1995, 1997, 2001) would stand no chance against them and same goes for Spain (World Champs 2006, Euro Champs 2009, 2001), despite both teams' great chemistry

pohani komarac, Bodiroga is of course the 2nd best SF of the past 20 years in Europe, but back then, as a teen, you can't compare his value to Perasovic who was a scoring machine and also a great passer, approaching his peak. Still Bodiroga would make a 2nd Yugoslavia team for sure. Look at his stats during the 1991-92 season http://bit.ly/qSvr4a I think he would at least contend as a 12th player in this roster



Regarding Toni Kukoc. In any other team, he would be a superstar. The fact that the Bulls didn't need him to be one to win so many titles proves their true value as a team. I pity the people who haven't seen him playing in Jugoplastika

Radja was a 20-10 machine, regardless the defensive liability. All-star level player

No need to get into further discussion about Savic or Zdovc and all the other players that the NBA fans don't know (not even by name). Just, when someone doesn't know a topic, hasn't watch a team playing or hasn't heard the names of the players, it's better not to post about it. A friendly tip

I actually think the 1996 USA team was better than the 2008 team.

And Kukoc was great but I wouldn't call him a superstar in the NBA. Well, I guess it depends on what you mean by superstar. But when Jordan wasn't playing Kukoc's numbers were good but not great. Check the stats-during Jordan's first retirement he averaged 15.7/5.4/4.6 on 50% FG and the year after Jordan and Pippen left Kukoc averaged 18.8/7.0/5/3 on 42%FG. The guy was a very good and underrated player but he never even made one all star team.

[pohani komarac]

kukoc before he left to nba was better then petrovic. that was REAL toni kukoc. toni him self says he made mistake overweight him self to fast in start of his nba carer wich slowed him down

before mj comback i soaw some video of alex english discusing can toni become franchise player and evryone agreed he can but needs his own team. at tjhat time phill jackson was telling he will make toni bulls main playmaker. toni at that point had something like 16-5-4. and for sure his creativity sufferd a lot from gething weight, playing more at pf and in triangle.....but we will never know how would he end in difrent situation

anway the fact toni didn't play in all star doesn't mean he was less all-star zhand maglorie, okur and some others. or that dino radja didn't deserve to play all-star game infront of juwan howard. or petrovic in his last 2 seasons

but that was much difrent era

anway toni fo sure wasn't superstar player during his nba carer, bus sure was one-two steps away. similar like gasol was posting 20-10 in bad team, similar situation toni had in bulls and hawks where he was 19-7-5

[NorCal]

Ok, so just because we have in this forum people who haven't even watched the Yugoslavian team ever play, we will have to forget what common sense means

NorCal, if someone is from the US could be far from understanding international basketball and especially during the period that this Yugoslavian generation was in charge. Yugoslavia in 1988 got half of this roster at ages 20-21. I think that when they were 24-25, they were better. Anyway the 3-year period 1989-91 was 3 golds, no losses, pure dominance and seriously, below their true prime. Take all the talent in the world, even with a better coach than Chuck Daly and I am not sure you can beat a continuously developing generation and a team dominant for so long, with the "no-one can beat us" mentality altogether

Anyway, it can be 50%, it can be longer, it can be less. But the discussion can only be on this level. Good note is that Serbia (World Champions 1998 and 2002, Euro Champs 1995, 1997, 2001) would stand no chance against them and same goes for Spain (World Champs 2006, Euro Champs 2009, 2001), despite both teams' great chemistry

Sure Yugoslavia dominated like crazy in the late 80s-early 90s in Europe but by many posters admission it was during a period in Europe when very few teams were any good at all so I don't put a lot of 'weight' into those results.

I mean you have to take into account that the U.S. teams were winning every Olympics with college players. By that I mean you are telling me that the Yugoslavia team that in 1988 didn't win gold got so much better in 4 years that they would have been able to beat the best team the NBA has ever created when the Yugoslavia team had never been able to beat our college players before? Did they consistenly beat the other European teams by as much as the U.S. did in 1992? In looking at the results from the '89 and '91 Eurobasket Yugoslavia's margins of victory weren't anywhere as dominant as the Dream Team's. I just don't think you have that great of a case is all.