BC -4
- Thread starter pittjas
- Start date
I think refs have adjusted their whistle to John, he won’t foul out their top 2 player and they’ll play zone. Take BC - 4
Boston College is god awful, but there’s a reason Vegas has a bunch of fancy buildings out there. This is one of those games I tell my gambling buddies to just avoid
Having the snowstorm
postpone the game would
be best, as it would allow
Horton more practice time.
Game has been moved to Sunday at 4 PM
Pitt Vs. Boston College Postponed Due to East Coast Snow Storm
On Friday, Pitt announced that its game against Boston College, scheduled for Saturday, Jan. 29, has been re-scheduled back to Sunday, Jan. 30 at 4 p.m. due to an impending snowstorm in the Boston area. Pitt (8-12, 3-6 ACC) is coming off an 11-point win over Syracuse, in which Jamarius Burton...
pittsburghsportsnow.com
I have no idea why teams
don't go zone against us.
It would be easy to clog
the lane and make it
tough for Hugley to
operate inside. Aside
from that, it would force
us to win by scoring from
the outside.
Well, so much for my ideaGame has been moved to Sunday at 4 PM
Pitt Vs. Boston College Postponed Due to East Coast Snow Storm
On Friday, Pitt announced that its game against Boston College, scheduled for Saturday, Jan. 29, has been re-scheduled back to Sunday, Jan. 30 at 4 p.m. due to an impending snowstorm in the Boston area. Pitt (8-12, 3-6 ACC) is coming off an 11-point win over Syracuse, in which Jamarius Burton...
of extra practice time for
Horton. LOL
Because if that's not what you do and not what you work on in practice all the time you are pretty likely to do it really, really poorly.
This line doesn't really make any sense. We were 3-1/2 point favorites over BC at home, and now we are 4 point underdogs on the road. Given what home court is generally worth, it's almost as if the people who put their money where their mouths are don't think that Pitt having Ithiel Horton back is actually worth all that much. You'd think that with Horton back it would at least change the spread by a few points to maybe where the game was a pick 'em or something, but no, it's basically the same as the last time with the different home court taken into account.
They wouldn't have to
do it really well. Clog the
middle and give us the
outside jumper. We have
difficulty hitting open
outside shots.
You are just an absolute ray of sunshine, aren't you. It almost sounds like you are rooting for losses.
Of course they would. For instance one of the things that is harder to do in a zone is to rebound. What if they hold Pitt to an average shooting night from the perimeter but Pitt absolutely hammers them on the boards and gets a bunch of put backs and draws lots of fouls?
If it was so easy to play defenses that teams rarely play and rarely practice then every team that plays a poor outside shooting team would just play a packed in zone. And yet they don't. And basically they never even try. Surely you must agree that there is probably a reason for that other than coaches don't care if they win or lose games.
College teams basically play
a man D. They do practice a
zone D, in fact more than one
type of zone. Sorry, but there
are times when a coach switches
into a zone for any number of
reasons. Are you watching Pitt?
they usually do it at some time
each game. Once teams have basic
man to man basics down, it's
easy to switch to a zone. How
effective? Depends on how much
they practice it and how well
they've been taught.
Are you watching Pitt? Because we have played a kind of standard 2-3, a more mutated version of a 2-3 (that seems to be more like the way that Syracuse plays it) and a version of a 1-3-1 at times this year, and almost every time they are a disaster. We are not any good at either one, and in fact most of the times that we switch to them unless they are doing it because of foul trouble we pretty quickly switch back to the man to man.
So we are actually a good example. When we try to play zone against teams that don't shoot the ball well it generally does not work out well for us.
Hilarious. Read what I
posted. I used Pitt only
to point out to you that
teams DO switch into
a zone D during the course
of a game. Now, are they
good at it? Of course not.
Pitt's poor zone D isn't a
reflection of why teams
switch to it or don't.
God coaches have their teams ready to play any defense, particularly if it is just a change of pace to create initial confusion and steal a possession or two.
Who said anything about mastering?
You switch defenses occasionally to get careless teams to make careless mistakes.
It does take time, you're right.
But Gary's point about change
of pace, and confusion is also a
good point.
BTW, when teams are full
court or 3/4 court pressing,
they tend to fall back into a
zone D. It's tough to come out
of a full court zone press and
then get back into a man D,
so zones are seen in that instance.
Yeah, teams do switch sometimes during games. And sometimes when teams do it they do it really poorly. Which is why teams don't do it all the time.
I mean seriously, if it was as easy as "play a bad shooting team, switch to a zone, win the game", don't you think that literally every team would do that? And yet basically none of them do. Doesn't that tell you anything?
It's as if you think that coaches are ignoring easy decisions that will lead to them winning games for some reason. Coaches would pretty much have to universally be idiots for this to be as simple as you make it out to be.
But a change of pace with the idea of stealing a possession or two is completely different than taking a team that plays man to man 95% of the time and suddenly playing zone all game because your opponent doesn't shoot the ball particularly well.
Sagarin's computer predictions usually closely mirror the Vegas line. Today Sagarin's four ratings (with BC having home court advantage) predict this way--
Overall (season to date) = BC - 5.24
Predictor (season to date) = BC - 5.29
Golden Mean (season to date) = BC - 5.41
Recent Games = BC - 2.22
Based on the above BC - 4 appears that the oddsmakers may be predicting right between Pitt's recent games performance and its overall performance for the season. Horton's return does not appear to have been a factor. If so, that can be explained in either of two ways--
(1) Most Pessimistic Case-- Oddsmakers don't believe Horton will make any difference for PITT in all remaining games for this season.
(2) Less Pessimistic Case-- Odsmakers don't believe Horton will make a difference in this particular (BC) game because he has only just returned to practice and needs more time to adjust to his role and to get in game condition physically.
Here's my take on this, Pitt
hasn't won a road game
this year (St. John's was on
a neutral floor). Our last
game with BC was a close
2 pt. win. BC actually beat
the spread in that game.
BC - 4 doesn't surprise me
one bit. These are both
two pretty poor teams, so
I guess anything could happen.
I wouldn't bet on this one.
Also, It appears that Horton's
return isn't a factor with the
oddsmakers.
He didn't make any real difference in the point spread the last time he came back either. It's almost as if these guys don't think he's worth nearly as many points in an average game as some Pitt fans think he's worth.
A guy like Horton isn't going to influence the spread much, if at all.
That will remain true until, or unless, Horton demonstrates that he should have influenced the spread over the outcome of a number of games —assuming he actually does makes such a difference. In the meantime, it is simply Pitt fans’ WAG that he should actually influence the spread.
Personally, I believe Horton has the potential to make Pitt about 5 points better offensively on average. But, will he hurt on defense and offset that potential gain?
Only times will provide the answer.
Last edited:
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
OT: Poker player loses $100,000 in less than 1 minute!
- Latest: Zeldas Open Roof
-