Cam Cohren?

[Sean Miller Fan]

Wuddya think?

Visiting next week. I always thought he looked great at times and then disappeared at times. Seemed like he should be a lot more productive than what he was. If he came to Pitt, I think he'd have to play the 4. Not sure he rebounds well enough to play the 5. 3.9 RPG is pretty low. And he never struck me as a tood defender.

 

[Bethlehemjohn]

Wuddya think?

Visiting next week. I always thought he looked great at times and then disappeared at times. Seemed like he should be a lot more productive than what he was. If he came to Pitt, I think he'd have to play the 4. Not sure he rebounds well enough to play the 5. 3.9 RPG is pretty low. And he never struck me as a tood defender.

He’s strong, but not as athletic as he looks. He kind of reminds me of JR Reid for UNC in late 80’s. Looks better than he plays. However, he is only a Soph and hopefully he continues improving.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

No way he could be the 4 with GDG/Kante at the 5. I think he would be the 5 here. I would consider it a slight upgrade from Fede. Maybe like going from a C- to a C+, at best.

 

[LGP1989]

No way he could be the 4 with GDG/Kante at the 5. I think he would be the 5 here. I would consider it a slight upgrade from Fede. Maybe like going from a C- to a C+, at best.

I'd say more of a C- to B situation. Corhen has a pedigree (top 75 recruit). Offensively he is an A+ compared to Fede's D (and I only give him this because he could occasionally set a screen). Defensively he is a C compared to Fede's B.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

I'd say more of a C- to B situation. Corhen has a pedigree (top 75 recruit). Offensively he is an A+ compared to Fede's D (and I only give him this because he could occasionally set a screen). Defensively he is a C compared to Fede's B.

He's not an A+ on offense overall, though, so he's not averaging out to a B.

 

[TheSpecialSauce]

I'd say more of a C- to B situation. Corhen has a pedigree (top 75 recruit). Offensively he is an A+ compared to Fede's D (and I only give him this because he could occasionally set a screen). Defensively he is a C compared to Fede's B.

He dominated Fede inside when we played them at The Pete a month ago.

 

[WillyDavis33]

I would take him! He is only 19 so he should get stronger and has 3 years left.

 

[Pitt666]

Austin masked a lot of bad play by Fede on D. Having someone stronger and bulkier would make the team better, especially if they can finish down low. He also only took 2 three pointers last year. We need more offense at 4. I would think he would be a 5 here. Also decent FT shooter for a 5. Prpg Torvik would have been 4th highest on team this year, behind Hinson, Bub, and ish.

 

[buckage]

IMO, we land him. Just a hunch...

 

[pittchagg]

I would take him! He is only 19 so he should get stronger and has 3 years left.

Two years left, I’m pretty sure.

 

[WillyDavis33]

Two years left, I’m pretty sure.

Ok good catch

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

Looks like he'd be able to catch a lob and dunk it, as opposed to our guards making a nice pass into the abyss that was Fede. Also looks like he could catch it off the drive and go up strong, as well as clean some things up around the rim.

Is he going to offer any type of posting up game? Doesn't look like it.

Rebounding? Not too impressive on the stats sheet anyway.

Defense against opposing fives? No idea, but it seems like he mostly - or maybe completely - played the 4, so you'd have to think that's a ? at best.

Seems like an upgrade from what we had last season, but maybe not a massive one. I'm fine with bringing him in, but we need to land at least two bigger fish at other positions then.

 

[pittchagg]

View embedded media

Looks like he'd be able to catch a lob and dunk it, as opposed to our guards making a nice pass into the abyss that was Fede. Also looks like he could catch it off the drive and go up strong, as well as clean some things up around the rim.

Is he going to offer any type of posting up game? Doesn't look like it.

Rebounding? Not too impressive on the stats sheet anyway.

Defense against opposing fives? No idea, but it seems like he mostly - or maybe completely - played the 4, so you'd have to think that's a ? at best.

Seems like an upgrade from what we had last season, but maybe not a massive one. I'm fine with bringing him in, but we need to land at least two bigger fish at other positions then.

Corhen was their starting 5. But they had a freakish seven foot athlete in Baba Miller that they had at the 4, so they were definitely more of a two big lineup. Which, it’s a Hamilton team, so that makes sense.

 

[WillyDavis33]

View embedded media

Looks like he'd be able to catch a lob and dunk it, as opposed to our guards making a nice pass into the abyss that was Fede. Also looks like he could catch it off the drive and go up strong, as well as clean some things up around the rim.

Is he going to offer any type of posting up game? Doesn't look like it.

Rebounding? Not too impressive on the stats sheet anyway.

Defense against opposing fives? No idea, but it seems like he mostly - or maybe completely - played the 4, so you'd have to think that's a ? at best.

Seems like an upgrade from what we had last season, but maybe not a massive one. I'm fine with bringing him in, but we need to land at least two bigger fish at other positions then.

Seems like it has been forever since we have a center who can "Go Up Strong"

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

Corhen was their starting 5. But they had a freakish seven foot athlete in Baba Miller that they had at the 4, so they were definitely more of a two big lineup. Which, it’s a Hamilton team, so that makes sense.

Oh, he's listed as a forward on ESPN. I suppose that's a good thing, then. He definitely can't be a 4 here, as some have suggested, with the way we like to space. But I'd be okay with the additional overall, I guess. Hopefully he grows into a stronger role on the glass.

 

[pittchagg]

Oh, he's listed as a forward on ESPN. I suppose that's a good thing, then. He definitely can't be a 4 here, as some have suggested, with the way we like to space.

Yeah, I think we’re recruiting him as the replacement for Fede’s minutes. He’s a different player than Fede - better in some areas, worse in others - but it seems like he fits what we want to do out of the 5 spot pretty well, and gives a little bit of a different look than Guillermo or Kante give them at that spot (Kante health issues notwithstanding).

I think it would be a pretty nice group to have at that spot, while also probably not paying as much as you would have paid to keep Fede. Bare minimum, it might the same total cost but a cost that you can spread out to Corhen’s second year here.

 

[TIGER-PAUL]

upgrade, imo, IF Jeff can land him. Not gonna get excited about any 4,5's until it actually happens....

 

[Vader_Storm]

Wuddya think?

Visiting next week. I always thought he looked great at times and then disappeared at times. Seemed like he should be a lot more productive than what he was. If he came to Pitt, I think he'd have to play the 4. Not sure he rebounds well enough to play the 5. 3.9 RPG is pretty low. And he never struck me as a tood defender.

He averaged 9.8 points per game in ACC conference play for Florida State on 68% shooting at 23 minutes per game. He was 3rd on the team in scoring for Florida State in ACC Conference play. He was 2nd on team in total wins shares for the season. He also made 33 midrange jumpers at 46% shooting, ORTG offensive power rating of 123 for the season and 128 in ACC Conference play which is excellent. That's all good as a sophomore and it looks really good when he he only played 21 minutes per game for the full season as he should improve on the scoring totals. He can pull the defense away from the basket which is good and helps unclog the interior. He also can finish very well in the interior and has some ability to finish 1 on 1. Also consider, Florida State did not have good point guard play at all last year and their 3 point shooting was horrendous as a team so offensive spacing was poor to help get him better spacing. He had strong games against some of the better teams on the schedule like Pitt, Duke, Florida, etc.. Potential is there to increase his scoring numbers. Lastly, he had a toe injury which caused him to miss some games and limit some playing time.

His rebounding leaves a lot to be desired, especially on the defensive side of the basketball. This has been a huge problem for this Pitt team the last 2 years trying to get to the next level and off the bubble. If he was a 4, it wouldn't look anywhere near as bad as being a full 5. He could get run at both positions, but I would like to see what he could do next to Kante in the interior or with another portal player. I would consider his defense average right now.



Its a take, but we need to get the right pieces to go with him. Whoever he plays with in the frontcourt needs to be strong on the glass. That's either Kante or someone else in the portal.

 

[Pitt666]

So in similar amount of minutes, less rebounds for the year than Fede, less blocks, more steals, and about 15 less fouls committed. He is a decent FT shooter. Don’t forget that Fede was a turnover on front end 1 and 1s. Also head to head game, corhen had 4 offensive and 4 defensive rebounds against Pitt. Fede and GDg had 8 combined rebounds in that game. To say he can’t rebound, may be selling him a little short. Particularly if he can buy into being more aggressive, team player. I also think he and Austin would feed off each other. Austin likes to throw lobs. Fede can’t finish.

 

[Vader_Storm]

So in similar amount of minutes, less rebounds for the year than Fede, less blocks, more steals, and about 15 less fouls committed. He is a decent FT shooter. Don’t forget that Fede was a turnover on front end 1 and 1s. Also head to head game, corhen had 4 offensive and 4 defensive rebounds against Pitt. Fede and GDg had 8 combined rebounds in that game. To say he can’t rebound, may be selling him a little short. Particularly if he can buy into being more aggressive, team player. I also think he and Austin would feed off each other. Austin likes to throw lobs. Fede can’t finish.

He's significantly better than Fede with far more upside if that is what you are comparing. His defensive rebounding is a pretty big problem for a 5, if not a major problem. He did not rebound any better as a freshmen. I can see a jump in his offensive scoring, there are a lot of good signs he can score quite a bit more than 10 points per game the next 2 seasons. But thinking the rebounding is going to get fixed is pretty wishful thinking unless he gets way stronger, gets coached up substantially on defensive positioning, or somehow finds another gear to attack the glass and get after it more. If he could do that on the offensive end only with putbacks the next few years it would be a big plus for both himself and the team.

A DR rebound rate of 12 for a center is bad anyway you slice it. If you want to be a bubble team, you can potentially get away with it. If you want the program to get to the next level, it needs improved or you need a strong rebounding player to pair with him. If Kante cleans up the glass on day 1, then all is fine.

 

[pittchagg]

He's significantly better than Fede with far more upside if that is what you are comparing. His defensive rebounding is a pretty big problem for a 5, if not a major problem. He did not rebound any better as a freshmen. I can see a jump in his offensive scoring, there are a lot of good signs he can score quite a bit more than 10 points per game the next 2 seasons. But thinking the rebounding is going to get fixed is pretty wishful thinking unless he gets way stronger, gets coached up substantially on defensive positioning, or somehow finds another gear to attack the glass and get after it more. If he could do that on the offensive end only with putbacks the next few years it would be a big plus for both himself and the team.

A DR rebound rate of 12 for a center is bad anyway you slice it. If you want to be a bubble team, you can potentially get away with it. If you want the program to get to the next level, it needs improved or you need a strong rebounding player to pair with him. If Kante cleans up the glass on day 1, then all is fine.

Alternatively, maybe the staff doesn’t think defensive rebounding is as necessary for success at the 5 as you think it is. They’ve proven that for two years now, and it certainly seems like they’re content to roll with that approach for 2024-25.

 

[Vader_Storm]

He's significantly better than Fede with far more upside if that is what you are comparing. His defensive rebounding is a pretty big problem for a 5, if not a major problem. He did not rebound any better as a freshmen. I can see a jump in his offensive scoring, there are a lot of good signs he can score quite a bit more than 10 points per game the next 2 seasons. But thinking the rebounding is going to get fixed is pretty wishful thinking unless he gets way stronger, gets coached up substantially on defensive positioning, or somehow finds another gear to attack the glass and get after it more. If he could do that on the offensive end only with putbacks the next few years it would be a big plus for both himself and the team.

A DR rebound rate of 12 for a center is bad anyway you slice it. If you want to be a bubble team, you can potentially get away with it. If you want the program to get to the next level, it needs improved or you need a strong rebounding player to pair with him. If Kante cleans up the glass on day 1, then all is fine.

Let's remember too. Bub Carrington cleaned up a lot of our rebound problems this past season, he was one of the best rebounding guards in the country. Brandin Cummings is an instant impact player scoring the ball, but he's not even close to being able to rebound in the same territory as Bub next year. So this rebounding weakness on our team in general will be magnified next season if we don't get better rebounding players, especially in the frontcourt.

 

[Pitt666]

He's significantly better than Fede with far more upside if that is what you are comparing. His defensive rebounding is a pretty big problem for a 5, if not a major problem. He did not rebound any better as a freshmen. I can see a jump in his offensive scoring, there are a lot of good signs he can score quite a bit more than 10 points per game the next 2 seasons. But thinking the rebounding is going to get fixed is pretty wishful thinking unless he gets way stronger, gets coached up substantially on defensive positioning, or somehow finds another gear to attack the glass and get after it more. If he could do that on the offensive end only with putbacks the next few years it would be a big plus for both himself and the team.

A DR rebound rate of 12 for a center is bad anyway you slice it. If you want to be a bubble team, you can potentially get away with it. If you want the program to get to the next level, it needs improved or you need a strong rebounding player to pair with him. If Kante cleans up the glass on day 1, then all is fine.

Yeah I think my point was the offensive athleticism and size is a better trade than what Fede brought if looking from a net gain/loss. You take offensive and FT versus a few more rebounds and poor offensive. Pitt rebounded by committee. Ish and Austin and Lowe can do that again. Yes it limits transition O, but if they can actually run sets with a 5 who can convert, that would also help.

 

[Vader_Storm]

Alternatively, maybe the staff doesn’t think defensive rebounding is as necessary for success at the 5 as you think it is. They’ve proven that for two years now, and it certainly seems like they’re content to roll with that approach for 2024-25.

What have they proven exactly?

We've struck out on just about every major center recruit that we have targeted in the Capel era. If we had landed Efton Reid for example like we thought we were going to get, Fede would have rode the bench and Reid would have started.

We've been on the bubble the last 2 years. As I said above, you can still get away with it and be on the bubble. But if you want more than being a bubble team, you need better rebounding in the frontcourt.

 

[Vader_Storm]

Mikeal Brown Jones is down to 3 including Pitt per on3. This is a guy that gives just under 8 boards per game with a quality rebound rate at the 4. This was one of our top targets from the early going when he opened it up.

Get this guy with Cohren, and we are starting to look pretty decent.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

If you want to be a bubble team, you can potentially get away with it.

This part is significant to me. Not just with defensive rebounding, but with portal additions in general.

We were a bubble team, and we lost our two best players: A likely 1st round pick and a guy who was on the short list for ACC POY. It feels like something significant needs to happen in the portal if we actually want to better ourselves as a program, which should be the obvious goal.

There are some obvious caveats to this:

1) Bub might be a 1st round pick, but it doesn't necessarily mean he played like that all season, as some of that is based on potential. Okay, fine.

2) You could say we were something close to a round of 32 team if you discard November/December. Okay, fine again. But we still lost our two best players (and if we're weighting the latter part of the season differently, then Bub was playing like something close to a 1st round pick).


I hope for Lowe to get better. Are Leggett and Austin going to improve that much? GDG has some room for growth, I guess. But, all in all, we need some big hits in the portal if we even want to dream of something like a Final Four (which should be the goal). This would not be one of them. Take him or don't take him; I have no idea which is best. I'm just saying we need to land at least two fish who are a lot bigger than this one.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

No way he could be the 4 with GDG/Kante at the 5. I think he would be the 5 here. I would consider it a slight upgrade from Fede. Maybe like going from a C- to a C+, at best.

Comparing to Fede:

Offense: going from D+ to B-
Rebounding: C- to D+
Defense: C to C-

So do you take the upgrade on offense ans actually downgrade rebounding/defense, which is hard to do?

For me, Baba Miller was the 5 and Cohren was the 4. Its a different system but they played 2 bigs. So call them what you want but it was a 2 post-player lineup. If Cohren came to Pitt, I think he'd have to split time at the 4 and 5 because I dont think he rebounds or defends well enough to play the 5 with a smaller lineup. That said, he passes the eye test. Seems like he should be a lot better so maybe he is the type of player that makes a massive jump.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

This part is significant to me. Not just with defensive rebounding, but with portal additions in general.

We were a bubble team, and we lost our two best players: A likely 1st round pick and a guy who was on the short list for ACC POY. It feels like something significant needs to happen in the portal if we actually want to better ourselves as a program, which should be the obvious goal.

There are some obvious caveats to this:

1) Bub might be a 1st round pick, but it doesn't necessarily mean he played like that all season, as some of that is based on potential. Okay, fine.

2) You could say we were something close to a round of 32 team if you discard November/December. Okay, fine again. But we still lost our two best players (and if we're weighting the latter part of the season differently, then Bub was playing like something close to a 1st round pick).


I hope for Lowe to get better. Are Leggett and Austin going to improve that much? GDG has some room for growth, I guess. But, all in all, we need some big hits in the portal if we even want to dream of something like a Final Four (which should be the goal). This would not be one of them. Take him or don't take him; I have no idea which is best. I'm just saying we need to land at least two fish who are a lot bigger than this one.

Here's the deal. In this new age, Pitt is always going to be a bubble team. There's no difference betwee Pitt and 40-50 other teams from the 2 seeds all the way to NIT teams. It just comes down to how the team gels and the luck along the way. Did you beat a couple really good teams? Did you lose a couple really bad games? All the teams are the same now. So I fully expect Pitt to be on the bubble again. And this is a reason the tournament needs expanded. There's no bad teams anymore.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

Here's the deal. In this new age, Pitt is always going to be a bubble team. There's no difference betwee Pitt and 40-50 other teams from the 2 seeds all the way to NIT teams. It just comes down to how the team gels and the luck along the way. Did you beat a couple really good teams? Did you lose a couple really bad games? All the teams are the same now. So I fully expect Pitt to be on the bubble again. And this is a reason the tournament needs expanded. There's no bad teams anymore.

To an extent. Anybody can beat anybody in a given game, as has always been the case, but I think it's slightly more tiered than just saying you can flip a coin for teams 5 - 55. Duke (4 seed), at full strength, beats us 90 times out of 100. Clemson (6 seed) beats us 82 times out of 100. And so forth. Yes, some of it is matchups, but there is also more to it than just that.

And I think you're overlooking the element of potential. Ours was pretty capped last year, because our situation at the 5 was like running a marathon with peroneal tendonitis.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

To an extent. Anybody can beat anybody in a given game, as has always been the case, but I think it's slightly more tiered than just saying you can flip a coin for teams 5 - 55. Duke (4 seed), at full strength, beats us 90 times out of 100. Clemson (6 seed) beats us 82 times out of 100. And so forth. Yes, some of it is matchups, but there is also more to it than just that.

And I think you're overlooking the element of potential. Ours was pretty capped last year, because our situation at the 5 was like running a marathon with peroneal tendonitis.

Its matchups. Flip walks off the bus with 30 against us. Then the next game he'll score 8. They arent more talented. Same with Clemson. Schiefflien looks like Shaq playing against Fede. Player for player Pitt is about the same as a Duke or Clemson. Now, obviously some teams are better. I'm not saying everyone is exactly the same. But the difference between a 2 seed Arizona and an NIT leve team like a Wake or Syracuse isn't much. There's more parity than there's every been thanks to the portal. Its almost like a rec youth sports league. Every year you do a draft and while some teams are better than others, the talent is spread across many teams so anyone can beat anyone.

 

[TD_6082]

Here's the deal. In this new age, Pitt is always going to be a bubble team. There's no difference betwee Pitt and 40-50 other teams from the 2 seeds all the way to NIT teams. It just comes down to how the team gels and the luck along the way. Did you beat a couple really good teams? Did you lose a couple really bad games? All the teams are the same now. So I fully expect Pitt to be on the bubble again. And this is a reason the tournament needs expanded. There's no bad teams anymore.

There's more parity than ever, but teams are certainly not all the same. Bubble teams aren't winning the tournament. There are zero bubble teams playing this weekend. I don't recall seeing any in the Elite 8 either, (which is only halfway through the bracket)

 

[Protes]

There's more parity than ever, but teams are certainly not all the same. Bubble teams aren't winning the tournament. There are zero bubble teams playing this weekend. I don't recall seeing any in the Elite 8 either, (which is only halfway through the bracket)

Huh? NC State wouldn't have even been in the tourney without winning the ACCT.

 

[TD_6082]

Huh? NC State wouldn't have even been in the tourney without winning the ACCT.

By definition, you can't be both a bubble team and an automatic qualifier.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

By definition, you can't be both a bubble team and an automatic qualifier.

Are you on crack, dude? NC State was 3 or 4 seed in the NIT. Only reason they are in the NCAA Tournament is because of the AQ rule. They are WORSE than the bubble teams, by definition. And they are basically the poster child for what I am saying. Also, dont tell me that a Pitt, Wake, SHU, etc couldn't have made a run to the Final Four with the right matchups. The parity is incredible. The difference between the top NIT teams and the 2 or 3 seeds is minimal.

There's no rebuilding anymore. I fully expect Lou and WVU to contend for the NCAAT next year. Every year, everyone had a new team

 

[Protes]

By definition, you can't be both a bubble team and an automatic qualifier.

I understand that. But NC State was worse than a bubble team. Yet, they've made it to a Final Four and have a chance to win it all still. It runs counter to your statement.

 

[TD_6082]

I understand that. But NC State was worse than a bubble team. Yet, they've made it to a Final Four and have a chance to win it all still. It runs counter to your statement.

I'd be absolutely shocked if they won it all. There's a HUGE difference in making a Final Four and winning the whole thing.

 

[Scasten17]

Pitt wasn't a bubble team and should have been in the tournament. Ask Jay Bilas and look at the numbers. No they were left out because 5 teams stole bids on championship Saturday and Pitt was the fourth first four team. And after that they deferred to non conference schedule

Let me rephrase yes they were a bubble/on the bubble however you want to say it but were a tournament team and should have been in there, especially if UVA was

 

[TD_6082]

The 4 from UNC Greensboro has Pitt in his top 3. Originally from Philly.

 

[PITTstorm]

By definition, you can't be both a bubble team and an automatic qualifier.

This makes no sense. You could be the worst team in the country and still be an automatic qualifier, but not a bubble team.

 

[Jeffburgh]

Comparing to Fede:

Offense: going from D+ to B-
Rebounding: C- to D+
Defense: C to C-

So do you take the upgrade on offense ans actually downgrade rebounding/defense, which is hard to do?

For me, Baba Miller was the 5 and Cohren was the 4. Its a different system but they played 2 bigs. So call them what you want but it was a 2 post-player lineup. If Cohren came to Pitt, I think he'd have to split time at the 4 and 5 because I dont think he rebounds or defends well enough to play the 5 with a smaller lineup. That said, he passes the eye test. Seems like he should be a lot better so maybe he is the type of player that makes a massive jump.

There would be no one else appreciably better than him in those areas at Pitt, if he played w G, G would be the 4. He might be better chasing guys defensively, but isn't as stout against other big men.

Who knows w Kante.

To your point, yes, he's at that point where he could make that upperclassmen step up. He may have two more years of eligibility, but could still only be in Oakland one year.