A bunch of random thoughts on a Sunday morning, in no particular order:
- Maybe it means something, maybe it means nothing, but in the five highest-scoring games of Cam Corhen’s career, his team is 2-3. He had his career high with 25 in a loss to Pitt last year. He had 18 in a loss to Florida last year. And he had 17 in Saturday’s loss at North Carolina. His high-scoring wins came when he scored 19 against Cal this year and 18 against Notre Dame last year.
Corhen has attempted at least nine field goals in 16 career games. His teams are 7-9 in those 16 games.
Maybe it means something, maybe it means nothing.
- Cam Corhen has played 83 career games. He has recorded double-digit rebounds four times. He has played 30+ minutes 21 times; he recorded double-digit rebounds once in those 21 games.
- On Saturday at UNC, Corhen had a game-high 17 points on 7-of-9 shooting and collected two rebounds in 33 minutes.
- I’m just starting with Corhen, but I don’t think he was the biggest issue on Saturday. Nor do I think he has been the biggest issue this season. He hasn’t been what they expected him to be or needed him to be, but he hasn’t been the biggest issue.
- Lowe has recorded fewer than five assists nine times this season; Pitt is 3-6 in those games. And he has committed two or fewer turnovers in just seven games this season. The Panthers are 6-1 when Lowe has two or fewer turnovers (the loss was Saturday at UNC).
- Lowe has shot below 40% in 13 of 23 games this season. Pitt is 6-7 in those situations and 3-5 against ACC opponents. He has also been sub-40% on two-point attempts in nine of Pitt’s 23 games this season, including five games against ACC opponents.
- Lowe has made five or fewer field goals in 11 of 23 games this season and seven of 12 ACC games. At the same time, Lowe has attempted double-digit shots in 20 of Pitt’s 23 games; he has made five or fewer field goals in eight of those 20 games.
- To me, Lowe’s inefficiency is probably the single biggest issue for this team. It’s not the only issue, and there are certainly other big issues - defense and rebounding come to mind - but if there is one thing that has left this team short of its expectations, it’s Lowe’s play. Pitt needed more from him this year, and while he is leading the team in scoring at 16.9 points per game, he hasn’t been able to fully meet the expectations and needs of the team.
- I think Ishmael Leggett has been a bit closer to what the team needed from him. He has shot 40% or better in 16 of Pitt’s 23 games and he has been at 40% or better from two in 17 of the 23 games. He has also committed two or fewer turnovers in 15 games.
- That said, I am struggling with the “plan” for Pitt’s game-winning attempt on Saturday. Here’s what Jeff Capel said about the final play:
“We wanted to get the ball in Ish’s hands and get him going downhill and just try to drive and try to create something for himself or someone else.”
What did UNC do to blow it up?
“They didn't blow it up. We got a good shot. We got a good shot. We missed a good shot. We got a shot in the paint. We just missed a good shot.”
That was the plan: give the ball to Leggett and see what happens. No involvement from the other four players on the court. No outright attempt to even get a certain shot for him. Just give him the ball and vaya con dios.
I just don’t get it. And I actually think that was the plan twice, since the first inbounds play was probably going to Leggett before UNC tackled him.
That tackle seemed to blow up the whole thing, which asks another question:
How is there not a secondary option on the inbounds? Given how close Pitt got to a five-second violation on that play, I would say there was no plan beyond what Capel said:
Give the ball and Leggett and let him make a play.
Which doesn’t seem like much of a plan to me.
- And so another opportunity was missed. That last play certainly wasn’t the only opportunity Pitt had to win the game late; really, it seemed like both teams were trying as hard as they could to give each other opportunities to win. Combined, Pitt and UNC shot 1-of-5 in the final two minutes, with the Tar Heels missing two one-and-one front ends and Pitt giving away a turnover (plus what was effectively a turnover when Ven-Allen Lubin came off the free throw line to steal a rebound away from Guillermo Diaz Graham; that went down as a rebound for UNC, but given how Guillermo had more or less grabbed it, it acted as a turnover).
- In a way, it was kind of fitting that Pitt took a lead with 2:03 left on a Lowe layup and then failed to win on a trio of missed one-man plays from Lowe and Leggett.
- It just doesn’t make sense. This team should be better than it is. It should have won more games than it has. There shouldn’t be any question about this team’s NCAA Tournament hopes, let alone facing a massive uphill climb to get to the bubble.
This team should not have multiple losing streaks of three games or more. This team should not be sitting on nine losses with eight games left to play. The talent isn’t perfect but it is better than that.
- Now they’ll be down a man (again) for what seems to be an extended period of time after Damian Dunn suffered a fractured elbow in Chapel Hill.
“We've got to get him checked out,” Capel said. “We’ve got to get him to see doctors and things like that, but it's probably going to be a while. I doubt if we'll see him the rest of the season.”
So Pitt’s two transfer acquisitions this offseason have amounted to a center whose offensive production has little correlation with success and a guard who has suffered two injuries that will likely cost him nearly half the season.
- If there’s any upside to Dunn’s injury, it may be that it forces the coaches to dig into the bench a little more. They can’t really go with Lowe, Leggett, Guillermo, Corhen and Zack Austin for 40 minutes per game, can they?
- Actually, don’t answer that.
sports.yahoo.com
