Marcus had a series of very nice drives toward the end of the game. Maybe 5 or 6 drives and the were all makes! Not sure why this type of basketball is not in the game plan? Instead most of the game our players were posted all outside the arc chucking threes. Even if we made 50% from three, that would resulted in about 5 extra points?
Embarrassing
- Thread starter pittizit
- Start date
Probably because UNC by that point had their scrubs in and Marcus was playing against bench players? I don't know.
This team needs to LEARN to play defense and rebound. Those are 2 things that are coachable. And they aren't being coached. If we can play defense and rebound, we have a better chance of playing closer games and actually having a chance to knock off some good teams, even if we have awful talent. And recruiting guys with some size might help a little.
I think if Carr sticks around and gets a good coach, he has a chance to approach a level of play similar to Tray Woodall. He isn't as good as Woodall, but he does have some potential. Even with good coaching, that won't be seen until at least his junior year.
I agree about your point about rebounding and defense. That is an area where you can really see the gap between pitt and the rest of the acc.
These are the posts I love!
You have a hard on for Jamie Dixon, the guy who left Pitt, who without question contributed to on the some level to the pathetic situation we are in. And you have an equally strong desire to denigrate Stallings, the guy who Of the two chose to be here coaching YOUR Pitt panthers.
And to further this agenda you’re willing to denigrate current student athletes on this team and their talent.
Shame on you
Regardless of agenda, he's right - a lot of basic skills that all these kids have to learn, just aren't getting better. Is it the kids or is it the coaching or is it a combination of both? We should all be concerned about the fundamental issue with setting screens and rebounding.
These kids appear to be trying very hard. So what's the issue? And I get "but their freshman....". I'm not talking actually winning, but they should be a lot better than losing to UNC by 30 pts at this point. JMO.
When you aren’t talented enough that often can look like you don’t know fundamentals.
Does Marcus Carr dribble a lot? Yes but that’s because of the talent around him and how often they would turn the ball over 5x more if he was moving the ball around.
It’s like when people complain about the propensity to shoot 3’s. That’s the their only avenue to a conference win. People want them to “play inside” but then complain about Brown mercilessly. It’s ridiculous.
These kids are improving but so has their competition.
We play Navy right now I have no doubt we win. I’m not saying that as a feather but as an indicator these kids are better now then they were then.
Does Marcus Carr dribble a lot? Yes but that’s because of the talent around him and how often they would turn the ball over 5x more if he was moving the ball around.
It’s like when people complain about the propensity to shoot 3’s. That’s the their only avenue to a conference win. People want them to “play inside” but then complain about Brown mercilessly. It’s ridiculous.
These kids are improving but so has their competition.
We play Navy right now I have no doubt we win. I’m not saying that as a feather but as an indicator these kids are better now then they were then.
There are definitely some over the top JIGers, but how did he denigrate any current players? Do you think Marcus Carr has the potential to be a lot better than Tray Woodall? If you do, is that denigrating Woodall? If you do, your opinion is probably in the minority at this point.
I’m not comparing him to past Pitt players.
I think he will be an all conference caliber player and I couldn’t care less if I’m in the minority.
Notice I didn’t say Duquesne.
I haven’t watched a lot of Navy but I have two people I know (1 family member) in Division 1 basketball so I have watched some teams I wouldn’t typically.
Where in the hell do you come up with your assumptions and garbage? I never mentioned Dixon. And if you could read, you would know I always talk these kids up because they are trying very hard and are good kids. They just aren't talented and not ACC-level players. What's so hard for you to accept about that? Why do you think we haven't won an ACC game yet and are losing by double digits consistently, sometimes by 30? It's lack of talent and lack of coaching. We aren't improving.
Stallings had no choice but to be here. If he wasn't here, he may not be coaching anyone. He was being fired at Vandy. No one else wanted him. And Dixon was pushed out, so he really had no choice but to leave, even though he would have preferred to stay. What is so hard for your to comprehend about that? And you brought up Dixon, not me.
So don't come here with your crap about me denigrating these kids or having a hard-on, as you crudely put it, for Dixon. None of that is true. I know what I see and what the facts are. Anyone who knows anything about college basketball knows what the facts are. We are a laughing stock because of how we pushed Dixon out and what we hired to replace him. Sorry those facts don't coincide with your warped view of what Pitt is right now.
You should read you posts . You’d think KS killed the pope !
Not being able to recognize that the cupboard was bare when Jamie left is one of your failings . Jamie was a great coach for Pitt his first 8 yrs and compared to KS a very good coach his last 5 . But the program was heading towards the bottom of the ACC under Jamie . We’ll never know if JD could have turned things around here .
These kids have been put into an impossible position and there’s some talent there , they shouldn’t be seeing the minutes they’re getting and it’s exposing their weaknesses . Without any upperclassman support how could any reasonable person expect any different results from this
roster .
That being said I think pitt will be better off when the KS era is over , but he’s not solely responsible .
Not sure how that’s any kind of surprise-this wasn’t exactly the Fab Five freshmen class. With Luther out, Of the top 6 on this team, Only JWF had played any version of college basketball prior to this year, and as I’ve said many times, JUCO ball is no better preparation for P5 basketball than AAU is.
It would take some real talent to win a few games in the ACC with a bunch of true rookies. While I’m not endorsing Stallings, I doubt the results would be any different if Dixon had this same group. Maybe a win or two in conference at best by the end.
I never said that Jamie left a Final 4 team or even a Sweet 16 team. He left an NCAA Tournament team, but his recruiting was not up to ACC levels. Unfortunately, the bill of goods we were sold with Stallings as some great recruiter were all false. His recruiting is worse than Dixon's. Then he chased everyone off and substituted a bunch of good kids but not Div.1 level players, or at least ACC level players.
Truthfully, there is no way to know if Dixon could have done any better with these kids than Stallings is doing. It doesn't matter now. But I do know he'd teach them defense and rebounding and that right there would help them win at least a few more games than they've won so far. It's not rocket science. It's just basics. Stallings isn't teaching these kids basics. Why is stating the obvious, crucifying him?
I doubt that Pitt would be at the bottom of the ACC or near it with Jamie here. But in one short year, Stallings put us there. He's the head coach. No excuses and no putting the blame on a previous coach. And as much as I don't like Stallings, I doubt that he'd place the blame for this poor performance on anyone else but him.
While I do agree that our biggest problem right now is largely in our roster construction I really also don't think that Stallings is doing a great coaching job either. And it isn't just a question of strategy that he is lacking, like I originally expected from him, but it's really both strategically and tactically that he's letting the team down.
Strategically Stallings has been lapped for years now, we knew that even before we hired him. His one big strategic innovation was a really good one many years ago and is actually the founding principle of modern basketball analytic offensive structures, namely that the two best shots that you can get offensively are three point looks and free throws and that your entire offense should be structured towards that achieving that end. It's a large chunk of the reason why he has such a reputation as an offensive guru. Unfortunately the world keeps on spinning and the game has changed enough so that all of his good ideas in this area have either been adapted into everyone's gameplans these days or, on the other hand, have been largely gameplanned against defensively (at least on the college level where the skill level is lower and the court is more cluttered).
On the tactical level Stallings has actually been much worse than I expected because he is extremely dogmatic in his approach. You can just look at his timeout usage as an example this season because letting a young team try their way out of trouble is literal insanity and has likely cost us at least one game this year. I can't imagine any opposing coach coming into play us and being surprised at what we are offering. Yes, he has moved to more of a zone concept defensively but even that is just passively shifting into a 2-3 for a little to a long while before going back to man after the zone stops working. There are no new offensive sets built on personnel groupings, no changing defenses, no interesting out of bounds action...there's literally nothing but the same things being run into the ground.
The only justification for all of this is that he wants to build familiarity with the basic concepts before introducing more exotic actions, and there is some truth to that approach, but there comes a time when things are bad enough where you need to try something, anything. And nothing in Stallings' resume or performance over the past two seasons leads me to expect that.
You can watch over-matched teams and still conclude that they are well coached.
I don't know about any of you, but in a year and a half of watching Stallings' teams, I've never once come away thinking that was a particularly well coached team or game. They've played hard at times, and that is about it IMO. Hell, I can't even say I thought that about Evans or Willard and I hated Willard's offense. But then, I was spoiled by subsequently watching 20 years of extremely well coached teams, so I don't even know if it is a fair comparison.
Agree with you that Pitt is not typically fundamentally sound. But still think attributes like quickness, foot speed, athleticism, strength, vertical leap - in comparison with and relative to those attributes of the players on the opposition - are required to even play D and rebound.
Pitt looks to be noticeably slower and less athletic than the opposition in the ACC. Very tough to stay in front of a dribbler, or beat a rebounder to a spot, when the opposing players are generally faster, quicker and more explosive athletes. For example vs Miami this past week, it looked like Pitt was in slow motion compared to Canes' players such as Lykes and Walker. Those are just the physical differences. They don't take into account the actual disparities in basketball skills: shooting accuracy; ball handling; decision making; anticipation.
I just don’t understand why he doesn’t use TOs more effectively. The NCSU game was literally thrown away while KS sat with TOs in his pocket.
The offense is just so hard to watch- i want to imagine there is something being taught besides jacking the first available long 3 with zero attempt to offensive rebound- but it certainly doesn’t look that way.
Even last night— I think Pitt could have gotten to UNC a bit and kept the game in reach if they looked to penetrate and get fouled with consistent effort— instead they let long 3 after long 3 go and the game was over seconds after halftime.
We must be getting outscored at the FT line by a significant margin in ACC play. And we’re actually a pretty good FT shooting team- but don’t look to use that to our advantage at all.
Coaches need to adapt to their roster. We have ONE decent outside shooter...and stand around the arc. Maybe he should put Peace at PG??
I’ve been thinking about Willard a bit as that’s really the last time we saw such mounting losing and a clear sense that something had to change.
For as much as Willard obviously didn’t succeed here - I never felt like Pitt was just totally overmatched literally every night. I mean Willard had some true heartbreak losses, had some bad luck with injuries and lost control at the end - but he brought in some future pros and players like Greer and Hawkins helped Howland jump start a turnaround.
This feels much different in a bad way.
I definitely agree with what you said. I also said that besides lacking the coaching that teaches defense and rebounding, we also lack the talent. So we're on the same page.
That being said, you can tell by watching a team for even a half, if they are coached to play defense and rebound, in spite of inferior talent. Look at player positioning and technique. And we're 2/3 into the season. I don't see any progress on those fronts with this team. Yes, they will get beat because they aren't as quick and long as most of the rest of the teams, but they aren't even in position to try and make something happen. And their technique is lacking. Any well-coached team is better than what we've shown, even with inferior talent.
You mean Kene is the ONE outside shooter, right NTOP?
Seriously, as far as consistency, not sure there is even one guy that can be counted on from deep in any given game.
That's funny because out to dinner with my family this weekend we too were talking about Willard. You touched on exactly what we all said - his recruiting was actually quite good almost the entirety of his time at Pitt. He personally was a very nice man - quite the change from Paul Evans - but discipline was an issue.
We also talked about how quickly they named Ben Howland as his successor and how none of us knew much, if anything, about him. We were all like WTF?
Good times.
There was a buzz around the program when Willard came on board. He was a rising star. His first team was completely over matched, but he had them playing over their heads. Heck, that is the team that dressed two managers because they were so thin at guard, but they still scrapped out 5 conference wins. He brought in an big time recruiting class and that in itself kept hope alive. He was somewhat snake bitten with injuries, but the discipline and off-the court issues were an absolute mess that obviously doomed his program.
Yeah, agree with that. They have played solid defense in spurts. For instance I thought they came out and played solid D for the first 8 minutes or so vs SU in their last home game. They went ahead 14 - 6.
But then they tailed off. Combination of stamina, fatigue, depth and maybe focus? Plus the Orange analyzed and adjusted some. There are certain lineup combinations that are particularly problematic. On BOTH ends of the floor. In that SU game he had Kene, Milligan and Davis on the floor at the same time for a while. I remember thinking to myself "who is going to score here"? Not a good look. In a few minutes I looked down at the scorers table and there were subs checking back in.
No question it is difficult to coach in this situation. BUT - except for Milligan right now - these are all players that KS chose to sign here. So he made the bed.
Absolutely they aren't fundamentally sound. That is ALL coaching. If you don't have the athletes, then you better drill fundamentals. Actually, you better teach fundamentals even if you do have the athletes.
Willard managed to win 5 league games with Oliver Antigua running the point for a few games. Imagine that. Who knows where Willard would have gone here had they say won that Umass game or Uconn game. Or won that crazy BET game vs Nova. Just a lot of tough breaks.
This is why - for those that are genuinely concerned about the success and future of Pitt hoops - there is still some hope. I remember the questions: "Who the hell is Ben Howland?" Maybe Pitt won't be so fortunate - or lucky - ever again. But maybe they will? Or at least come close? Have to wait and see.
Since it is Pitt, more like the Mickey Mouse Club since Pitt is a Mickey Mouse operation when it comes to running it athletics.
But your position is that if someone doesn't agree with your extreme (and the opinion Carr will be an All-ACC player is very extreme) minority opinion, they are denigrating the player?
Ok, but if you are saying we would beat Navy now when we didn't earlier and that proves we are getting better then you should certainly extrapolate that to Pitt's previous wins standing up. Otherwise you are essentially saying Pitt's improvement relative to their opponents is case by case and the improvement is not much greater than should be expected.
Can the Pitt fans who wanted Jamie gone remind the others why this was a good move.
LOL!!!!
AD Barnes.
So much damage in so little time.
HAIL TO PITT!!!!
LOL!!!!
AD Barnes.
So much damage in so little time.
HAIL TO PITT!!!!
What would be hard about it at $0 buyout? The possibility of having borderline P5 players transfer? The possibility of losing recruits who are barely P5 level? Losing a coach who was going to be fired by his previous school? Losing a coach who is an "offensive genius" but has us as a bottom 3% offensive team? What would be hard about that decision?
When your team is 0-11 in conference, it's hard to say that either coaching or recruiting has been acceptable.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
Heather wasn’t canned soon enough. Extending this clown…- Latest: UptownPrivileges
-
9-4 the rest of the way is the minimum to get a bid - I just don’t see it….
- Latest: UptownPrivileges
-
-
