The NBA landscape is witnessing an undeniable transformation as international players increasingly occupy leading roles. Over the past seven seasons, the league’s Most Valuable Players have primarily been international stars like Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, Nikola Jokić, Giannis Antetokounmpo, and Joel Embiid. This shift signals a major change in basketball’s global power balance, raising questions about the state of American basketball development. Philadelphia 76ers forward Paul George has openly expressed serious concerns about why American youth basketball seems to be falling behind, highlighting a growing development gap between U.S. players and their international counterparts.
Through an in-depth discussion on his podcast, Paul George revealed his perspective after experiencing international basketball firsthand. His observations focus on contrasting the structured and rigorous training overseas with what he described as chaotic and inconsistent youth basketball in the United States. George’s evaluation goes beyond statistics—he points to systemic issues that may threaten the future competitiveness of American players in the NBA.
Contrasting international basketball development with American youth systems
Paul George identified a fundamental difference in how young players develop internationally versus in the U.S.
“Internationally… we’re not playing six games a week. Like we’re playing two games and then we’re practicing. Like we’re learning how to play basketball,”
George explained. While many American youth programs, particularly those tied to the AAU system, emphasize frequent games—sometimes six or more per week—international programs prioritize fewer games and more focused practice sessions.
George also highlighted the level of accountability presented in international setups, noting,
“No one’s kissing your ass over there… if you mess up, you’re going to get cussed out.”
This no-nonsense approach, according to him, builds resilience and discipline from an early age. Additionally, international prospects often compete against mature players much earlier, which George believes accelerates their development:
“We’re playing against men super early… It helped me mature a lot earlier.”
These elements foster players with solid fundamentals, showing readiness for professional basketball, a stark contrast to the American emphasis on game exposure rather than skill development.
Statistical evidence supporting the international advantage
The figures reinforce George’s concerns. Last season’s opening night rosters included a record 125 international players from 43 countries, demonstrating the global talent influx into the NBA. League commissioner Adam Silver noted that nearly
“close to 30% of the league”
is foreign-born, attributing this to differences in youth development models. Silver specifically pointed out the international focus on
“more of a focus on practice less of a focus on games… the opposite of many… youth programs in the United States.”
The European training model typically involves four practice sessions for every two games played, whereas the American AAU model often reverses this ratio, with approximately six games for every one practice. Kobe Bryant once criticized AAU basketball as “horrible, terrible… stupid” due to its neglect of fundamentals. Paul George agrees that the current U.S. system prioritizes exposure and competitive wins over genuine skill development, prompting him to advocate for substantial changes.
Paul George’s call for adopting the international club system
George urges a systematic reformation of American youth basketball, favoring the European club model where young athletes compete for academy teams affiliated with professional clubs. Progression depends solely on merit, allowing talented players to rise regardless of age.
“I do [think America should adopt that model],”
George affirmed.
Unlike the U.S. system, which often involves fleeting team commitments driven by tournament exposure and rankings, the club system builds continuity and loyalty. Its emphasis on disciplined practice and meritocracy can better develop the skills and maturity required for professional success. George warns that without significant changes, the U.S. risks continuing to lag behind growing global basketball powers.
Fundamental advantages of international player development over AAU
The core issue centers on development versus illusion. International youth basketball is deeply structured, focusing on skill mastery within hierarchical club teams. Players like Franz Wagner recount leaving home in their early teens to join elite academies staffed by expert coaches, progressing through age-specific leagues into senior teams.
George stressed that advancement depends on talent rather than age:
“it doesn’t matter how old you are. If you’re good enough, you can always move up.”
This creates an environment where young players constantly face tougher competition, similar to Luka Dončić’s rise through the EuroLeague and G-League, promoting rapid growth in basketball IQ and physicality.
Additionally, international training enforces accountability and teamwork, often requiring players to focus on
“collective play… moving the ball well,”
while U.S. youth basketball can rely excessively on individual athleticism. Training sessions abroad frequently involve small-sided games designed to enhance decision-making and reaction skills, rather than isolation plays common in American youth competitions.
This approach stands in stark contrast to the AAU’s “exposure trap” where players frequently switch teams chasing visibility and tournament victories at the expense of consistent skill work. The lack of system continuity undermines long-term development and resilience among American prospects.
The implications for American basketball’s future
International players not only dominate MVP awards but have consistently won defensive accolades and placed multiple athletes on recent All-NBA teams, reflecting stronger foundational skills. Paul George perceives the European model as a blueprint for rejuvenating American basketball.
He believes that adopting fewer games, increasing practice intensity, fostering humility over ego, and encouraging club-based team cohesion will help the U.S. catch up. Unless these reforms occur, American players risk remaining in the shadows of their international rivals who currently shape the NBA’s present and future.