delete
- Thread starter Chescat
- Start date
Good observations. I went to the game. My biggest takeaway was the potential of Battle to be a pretty good player. She’s very athletic - made a really impressive tough layup early on. I thought she should have driven to the hoop more.
Pitt had some nice ball movement with getting the ball to King just inside the foul line - which gave them nice options.
Nice to see Hutcherson used a bit more. They used her height advantage down low, but she can shoot.
In warmups, Malcolm had to have made her first eight threes. Nice high arc, which her teammates could learn from…
Coach was pretty intense on the sideline - he’d cringe when we made a poor pass. I’m thinking he’s going to have a tough time getting through the ACC games…
Go Pitt.
I don't know why we are deleting this, but I'll bite.
As to the comment that Pitt seemed far superior to St. Francis, I'd point out that everyone is far superior to St. Francis. They are 0-7 and their closest game all season was an 11 point home court loss to Robert Morris. They are a really, really bad team. The Coppin State team that we lost a close one to on school kid day beat SF 70-34.
I guess one good thing you could say is that the 87 points we scored were the most scored against SF all season. But then the bad thing would be that the 62 points that we gave up to SF was their highest scoring game of the season (tied) as well. After just a few minutes my thought was wow, a good team beats SF by 50. If they spent half the game coasting.
One thing that seems odd about this team, at times they bring the ball up the court at a breakneck pace. Like as if they want to be the runningest team in the country. And then the get the ball across the half court line and pass the ball to someone who has a wide open shot. And they pass it up. And then they pass up another one. And sometimes another one. And frequently settle for a shot worse than the one that they could have had 10 seconds into the shot clock.
It's like they can't decide if they want to be a full steam ahead, play as fast as we can team, or we want to be a team that plays half court basketball, passing the ball around and taking time off the clock in the half court.
As to the comment that Pitt seemed far superior to St. Francis, I'd point out that everyone is far superior to St. Francis. They are 0-7 and their closest game all season was an 11 point home court loss to Robert Morris. They are a really, really bad team. The Coppin State team that we lost a close one to on school kid day beat SF 70-34.
I guess one good thing you could say is that the 87 points we scored were the most scored against SF all season. But then the bad thing would be that the 62 points that we gave up to SF was their highest scoring game of the season (tied) as well. After just a few minutes my thought was wow, a good team beats SF by 50. If they spent half the game coasting.
One thing that seems odd about this team, at times they bring the ball up the court at a breakneck pace. Like as if they want to be the runningest team in the country. And then the get the ball across the half court line and pass the ball to someone who has a wide open shot. And they pass it up. And then they pass up another one. And sometimes another one. And frequently settle for a shot worse than the one that they could have had 10 seconds into the shot clock.
It's like they can't decide if they want to be a full steam ahead, play as fast as we can team, or we want to be a team that plays half court basketball, passing the ball around and taking time off the clock in the half court.
The "delete" thing was my error. I wote a post and edited it,
but couldn't get rid of the edited one, so I j.ust wrote delete.
My one post is up there that you responded to, thanks. My
stupidity.
I wondered about the attempted fast break as I watched on tv. They'd
get the rebound, outlet it (all good btw), get down the court and then
what?? I had no idea what they were doing because there were some
options there that they didn take...just as you described.
ST F..... Maybe the worst team I've ever watched on here. Very little
talent, but they took advantage of some defensive breaakdowns on our
part, and hit some threes. How bad N. Kentucky must have been that we
beat worse than what we did last night? St F? I'd decribe them as playgound
scrappy with very limited talent.
Battle looked good both running the offense and shooting. She's probably
going to take minutes from Marley who just can't buy a hoop. My girl Hutcherson
hit a few and got a few rebounds, butagain look at what she was playing
against. As I said above at least theyre trying to do the right things bball wise.
They're being coached, and at least it looks like bball. As Majors and I both
posted, and I know you agree....ACC, uh oh!
They were so young too. Started three freshmen and two sophomores. I looked at their roster, they had 14 players listed and six of them were freshmen and five of them were sophomores (plus two juniors and only one senior). And they were small too. Two 6-2s and no one else taller than 6-0.
They were really, really bad.
Bad enough (and young enough) that I wondered if they had recently made a coaching change, but no, she is apparently in her 6th season there.
Battle looked much better than she did at the last game I was at. But man, she passed up so many open shots right at the three point line. And I don't get that, because when she actually took them during the game she did make 3 out of 4. Even if you normally aren't that good, on a night when you are hitting them, keep shooting them.
Interestingly, your gal Hutcherson was mostly playing on the inside on offense. She did step out and take a three late, but for the most part she was a post player last night. And before the game during warmups she was with the bigs group in their drills, whereas before she was in the smalls group. I wonder if that means a position change going forward, or just trying something against an overmatched opponent?
Also, I found it interesting that they played Battle, Washenitz and Perkins together a lot, and especially later in the game when they did it was Perkins playing the point. Again, maybe just trying something against an overmatched team, but maybe not.
Battle was a decent recruit going to UMass, instead followed Verdi to Pitt. She played
like a natural pg (at least last night). She was hot from 3 land, and I thought she was
efficient and composed (again considering the competition). We'll see what she does
against ACC competition, but I think she's a building block for the program.
As for Hutcherson, I also noticed her playing inside. Could be for a number of reasons.
At 6'2" she was at a decided height advantage and maybe Verdi wanted to see how she
did in there. She got a few rebounds, but when it got a little rough, she ended up flat
on her back. She's frail, and the inside is not her cup of tea. She can shoot, and she hit
a nice jumper out of the high post. She and King could maybe rotate in and out of there.
I think Verdi might be trying to get her to fit some place. To me, she's a natural wing. I like
her game because she seems to have a clue out on the floor away from down low.
But she didn't really play much point guard last night. When she was in the game with Washenitz it was always Washenitz at the point. For most of the 4th quarter it was actually Perkins. Battle played much more on the wing as a 2/3. Which is why I don't understand her not shooting open threes when she got them. If that's where you're playing you've got to take (and hopefully make) those shots. And she actually did when she took them. If last night was a correct indicator of her abilities, shoot the ball!
This is stating the obvious, but right now we have one ACC-level player, and that’s Liatu King. Battle looks like she could develop into a decent player but we really need an influx of ACC-level talent from recruiting and the portal.
Like I said, stating the obvious…
Go Pitt.
Like I said, stating the obvious…
Go Pitt.
