Men’s Olympic basketball team faces test of ambition as Murray and Wiggins eye Paris

Open this photo in gallery:

After the draw on Tuesday, we now have some idea of the height of the first hurdle faced by the Canadian men’s basketball team at Paris 2024.

It dodged the United States, but will have to overcome Australia, Spain (maybe) and another European powerhouse. We can’t say for certain because qualifying isn’t completed yet. Not good necessarily, but a long way from terrible.

For the women’s team, the hard part is its draw – a group featuring host France and Australia again, who are even better on the women’s side.

For the men, there’s a hard part before the hard part.

Canada has two senior men’s basketball teams – the one that got it this far, and the one that is most likely to get it to a medal. Now it will have to decide which one it is taking to the Olympics.

A couple of years back, after getting fobbed off or flaked on too many times, the Canadian setup asked players to make a multiyear commitment to the national team. Fourteen guys did.

The key among them was Shai Gilgeous-Alexander. At the time, he was an up-and-comer. Now he is a rock-solid, top-five-in-the-NBA superstar.

Gilgeous-Alexander was the first member of this generation of Canadian stars who didn’t treat his summers like a religious retreat. His involvement encouraged second-tier standouts like Dillon Brooks to make the same promise. Those two, along with Toronto Raptor R.J. Barrett, form the core of the Canadian team.

Denver Nugget Jamal Murray is Canada’s other game-altering star. He did not take the pledge, but is full of excuses. He’s a little banged up or he’s in a contract year or the dog ate his plane ticket. Murray’s never shut Canada down exactly, but he misses a lot of phone calls.

Murray begged off the 2023 FIBA championships where Canada finished a surprise third and qualified for Paris 2024. But he made sure to be there for the first photo-op.

“I still showed up for training camp. I was still around the guys,” Murray told reporters a few months ago. “I felt the vibe there, and they did a great job. They’re on the come up, and we’ve got enough guys to go out there and compete for gold next year.”

Did you catch the slippery pronoun switch in there? ‘They’ qualified, but ‘we’ will be at the Olympics.

Should someone who did more than “feel the vibe” lose their place because Murray skipped rehearsals, but is raring to go for opening night?

A second and more difficult proposition is Andrew Wiggins. He’s shown the same in-and-out pattern as Murray. It’s a harder choice because he’s not the same level of player, but still better than your average bear.

Back when it was up in the air, Wiggins wanted it both ways. He “would love to play if they made the Olympics,” but wasn’t prepared to be part of the effort to get there.

“I got a life outside basketball,” Wiggins told reporters.

Which means what for the guys who did show up? They’re all basketball monks?

In the six months since Canada qualified, there has been a buzzy debate about who should play. It has two aspects – ‘Imagine how good we could be if we featured this starting five?’; and ‘Imagine how wrong it would be if we brought along the objectors and lost anyway?’

No one says anything about some theoretical Canadian team that beats America and goes all the way. That squad could be filled by tax cheats, flakes and out-and-out villains and no one in Canada will care. All they’ll see is gold.

Now that there is a clear lane into the knockout rounds, the debate will become an argument. None of our other national teams in Paris will be as scrutinized. With apologies to everyone else, this is real, NBA-sized glamour. This is the true world stage.

If Canada gets this right, it will be a national moment on par with a hockey gold. If it gets it badly wrong, it could sour the whole Olympic experience.

There are several ways to go, but cutting the baby in half might work best.

Should Murray be on the team? Yes. He’s too good not to be.

Is it strictly fair that he didn’t do the hard work and gets to enjoy the glory? No, it isn’t. But if you want perfect fairness in sport, stick to T-ball.

On a macro scale, the Olympics is a gallant endeavour. On an individual level, it’s a fight in a closet over a piece of broken glass. The starkness of the difference is what makes us care.

Perversely, the idea that a Murray will steal the spot of someone who never quite made the big time adds more flavour to the broth. That sort of brutality makes this story real, rather than comforting. It ratchets up the stakes.

Murray’s inclusion substantially improves Canada’s chances at a podium. Alongside Gilgeous-Alexander, Canada would have the best backcourt in the tournament. That assumes Murray is healthy, which you can never assume. The man has ankles that twist in a brisk wind.

If Murray wants to go, that’s fine, but he has to suffer for it. He should need to ask. If Canada blows up in Paris, he deserves more than everyone else’s share of the blame. He was the front-runner who messed up the chemistry.

If Canada wins, it was meant to happen this way, because winners are always right.

Wiggins improves Canada’s chances, but not by a ton. He’s having a downbeat year at Golden State. He’s no longer good enough to deserve special treatment.

Switching out one guy who’s a defending NBA champion is a minor tweak that everyone on the team will get used to. Switching out two, including a second guy who may take the starting job of one of your best and most loyal players (Barrett), is a major change.

If we were talking about the Wiggins from three years ago, sure.

From last year, maybe.

From this year, no.

Zero sum works both ways. In this case, the boat is big enough for one stowaway. Two makes it more likely to tip over.

Besides, you’ll be doing Wiggins a favour by telling him to stay home. He has a life outside of basketball. Part of it can be watching a team he could have been a part of doing something amazing from the serene comfort of his couch.