19-0 when scoring 72 or more, 0-9 when scoring 64 or less

[Sean Miller Fan]

Plus a win scoring 66 @ Syr.

We know the D isnt good but there have been games this year where it was good enough but we just couldnt score. I dont think the staff is concerned enough about offense. You still have to score points. If the shots arent falling, is there anything else we can do. Clark drew 6 fouls yesterday. Cant Mike Young do that?

This game was lost in the 1st Half. They weren't scoring and neither were we. We were up 19-10 and it should have been 25 or 26-10, game, set, match. We didnt extend the lead and that was that.

 

[KiwiJeff]

Plus a win scoring 66 @ Syr.

We know the D isnt good but there have been games this year where it was good enough but we just couldnt score. I dont think the staff is concerned enough about offense. You still have to score points. If the shots arent falling, is there anything else we can do. Clark drew 6 fouls yesterday. Cant Mike Young do that?

This game was lost in the 1st Half. They weren't scoring and neither were we. We were up 19-10 and it should have been 25 or 26-10, game, set, match. We didnt extend the lead and that was that.

Lol....yeah, not concerned about offense.

 

[UPitt '89]

Plus a win scoring 66 @ Syr.

We know the D isnt good but there have been games this year where it was good enough but we just couldnt score. I dont think the staff is concerned enough about offense. You still have to score points. If the shots arent falling, is there anything else we can do. Clark drew 6 fouls yesterday. Cant Mike Young do that?

This game was lost in the 1st Half. They weren't scoring and neither were we. We were up 19-10 and it should have been 25 or 26-10, game, set, match. We didnt extend the lead and that was that.

Why not just say 20-0 when scoring 65+?

65 is the line of demarcation.

 

[NCanton Panther]

Why not just say 20-0 when scoring 65+?

65 is the line of demarcation.

Yeah I thought the same thing at first UPitt89. But then I figured out SMF was trying to emphasize the point that if our offense shows (i.e., scoring >72 pts in 19 of our 20 wins), we can very often still win even with less than stellar defense.

 

[NCanton Panther]

Lol....yeah, not concerned about offense.

C'mon Kiwi, that's a little extreme. You have to admit that any close to casual observer of the program and Dixon's public statements that defense gets way more attention and scrutiny than the offense.

 

[SoufOaklin4Life]

Do you ever watch Dixon's press conferences, troll? I watch ALL of them on Pitt Live Wire and he talks defense 95% of the time. Yes, defense is a problem but there have been plenty of games we would have won if our offense didnt totally suck. Last night was 1.

Conceding 63% from the field didn't help in the second half.
Or sending them to the line 30+ times

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Yeah I thought the same thing at first UPitt89. But then I figured out SMF was trying to emphasize the point that if our offense shows (i.e., scoring >72 pts in 19 of our 20 wins), we can very often still win even with less than stellar defense.

Yes. If our offense is "good," we win. If its not good we lose. Syr was the only game won with defense. 19 others were won with offense. This is why I said I wouldn't want Dixon coaching a group of players who cant defend. He's to married to defense to try to figure out ways to maximize offensive talent. I said it would be like Paul Johnson trying to coach a team that was terrible at running the football. He cannot adapt and start slinging the ball around the field.

72 points wins games. Jamie has to figure out a way to score 72 vs GT. If we dont, we will lose.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Conceding 63% from the field didn't help in the second half.
Or sending them to the line 30+ times

Sure. There were 20 reasons we lost that game. Terrible offense was one and that has been a consistent theme in all our losses.

 

[UPitt '89]

Conceding 63% from the field didn't help in the second half.
Or sending them to the line 30+ times

Our best defense turned out to be sending them to the line. When we sent them to the line, they scored only 1 point on average. When we let them shoot from the field, as you said, they shot 63%.

Sending a bad FT shooting team to the line repeatedly limits their offensive output.

The downside was that it got our PG in foul trouble.

 

[pittbb80]

I think the main point with this team is that for them to win they have to be hitting their shots. This is not an old style JD team that can lock down the other team and steel their will. They are quite the opposite. Their entire game feeds off the energy they get when they are efficient offensively and hitting shots. More specifically this team is more of a jump shooting team than any of JDS prior teams. If they are not hitting the jumper they cant get into the lane and become very one dimensional. Then they lose focus on the defensive end, where they are not that great to begin with, and you have stretches like we saw in the second half.

 

[KiwiJeff]

Sure. There were 20 reasons we lost that game. Terrible offense was one and that has been a consistent theme in all our losses.

Terrible defense has been a common theme in the wins and losses, less a few games.

 

[NCanton Panther]

Oh, name calling now. Great. Yeah, they don't care about offense, they why we were missing all of our good and open shots yesterday. Had the coaches cared, the shots would have gone in. Great.

Sorry Kiwi but your reply really was antagonistic and was just inviting a harsh reply. Guy is just making a post with his observations and maybe generating some discussion, you know, what the purpose of this board is.

You could have replied back with a rational comment taking exception to his claim, but instead you took a more smart ass approach.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Oh, name calling now. Great. Yeah, they don't care about offense, they why we were missing all of our good and open shots yesterday. Had the coaches cared, the shots would have gone in. Great.

Point is, there is nothing creative done offensively, no adjustements. Game was being called so tight, why not iso Young on the block and draw some fouls? That's just one example. Dixon talks defense, defense, defense. Well, our defense only let up 65 points. This one is on your offense Jamie. You cany expect to win games 58-55.

 

[KiwiJeff]

Sorry Kiwi but your reply really was antagonistic and was just inviting a harsh reply. Guy is just making a post with his observations and maybe generating some discussion, you know, what the purpose of this board is.

You could have replied back with a rational comment taking exception to his claim, but instead you took a more smart ass approach.

Damn straight.

 

[KiwiJeff]

Point is, there is nothing creative done offensively, no adjustements. Game was being called so tight, why not iso Young on the block and draw some fouls? That's just one example. Dixon talks defense, defense, defense. Well, our defense only let up 65 points. This one is on your offense Jamie. You cany expect to win games 58-55.

ok, good insight. my only point is this. there will always be game by game variations in offense and defense. Regardless of what coaches or players say in interviews, and regardless of what they "focus" on. Our offense, by and large, has been acceptable most often. The defense, not so much. That's all I was saying, in my smart ass way.

 

[PittPoker]

The way this crap officiating crew was calling the game against us played a part as well. We sucked last night but the refs were awful.