Good News: Pitt is 7-1 in their past eight first-round games
- Thread starter UPitt '89
- Start date
One of the amazing things to me about Pitt's run has been how well we've played in first round games.
Outside of the Wichita loss, did we ever even play a first rd game to single digits?
I know we've had high seeds, but you woulda think someone woulda put a real scare into us. Instead we got a lot of teams on their worst day.
CCSU, Wagner, Kent (2006), oral Roberts, wright state, Colorado, Oakland. Asheville.
None of these games were ever in doubt.
The only two that were remotely close was UCF in 2004 because Pitt at that point literally forgot how to score, and then ETSU in Dayton where the game was so frustrating I literally thought I was going to pass out in the arena.
But even those games were I think double digit wins.
Law of averages would say at some point a double digit seed gives you a tough game or beats you, unfortunately for Pitt, those games were Kent and Bradley after the first rd.
Outside of the Wichita loss, did we ever even play a first rd game to single digits?
I know we've had high seeds, but you woulda think someone woulda put a real scare into us. Instead we got a lot of teams on their worst day.
CCSU, Wagner, Kent (2006), oral Roberts, wright state, Colorado, Oakland. Asheville.
None of these games were ever in doubt.
The only two that were remotely close was UCF in 2004 because Pitt at that point literally forgot how to score, and then ETSU in Dayton where the game was so frustrating I literally thought I was going to pass out in the arena.
But even those games were I think double digit wins.
Law of averages would say at some point a double digit seed gives you a tough game or beats you, unfortunately for Pitt, those games were Kent and Bradley after the first rd.
I posted this in another thread, but ETSU nearly gave me a heart attack. One of the Most stressful games I have seen.
That team was too good and explosive to allow ETSU to hang around. But they did, much to the detriment of most of our blood pressure's.
"I'm sure Pitt will be one and done again this year."
I've heard this about a half dozen times over the weekend.
Well, we had one guy on here (Sisco Kid) who said Pitt is always one and done, then changed his definition to one and done being one win, then a loss.
I thought you were one of those analytics guys?
Each game is an independent event. This year, we happen to be an underdog to a team that has better RPI, BPI, a better record against the RPI top 50, etc. So seeing as each game is its own independent event and each opponent has its own independent analytics, I don't think what we've done in the first round the past 8 years has any bearing at all on this particular game. We absolutely CAN win this game if we play well, although having watched our Panthers all season, I do not expect us to win it. This year, I'm just glad we made it. A tourney win or two would be a nice way to wrap it up. If we do get past Wisky, we drew the weakest 2 seed in the tourney, so we can't task for much more as a 10.
I don't think he disagrees with that, just sticking it to people who say we are one and done every year, which we could be this year, or not. Historically we haven't been one and done very much, but not with these players.
I don't subscribe or endorse the "narratives" that posters like to accuse each other of on this board, and certainly not that we will be one and done because we "always" are--that's inaccurate anyway.
However, this year, due to the quality of our first round opponent, we have our work cut out for us. Wisky is no juggernaut but they are better than us by most measures. We can certainly beat them but we will have to play a lot better than we have since Duke to do so. Because of how poorly we have played of late, including in the Cuse win, I am pessimistic about our chances. If that makes me a lesser fan, then I'm guilty as charged.
I don't think we played poorly in our Cuse win at all.
After 37 minutes we had a 12 point lead. Failure to shoot FTs and some poor decision making in the final three minutes caused the game to be a nailbiter.
But from the 10 minute mark of the first half until 3 minutes to go, Pitt outscored Syracuse 52-30.
We almost blew it, but we played much better than the final score indicated.
The UCF, ETSU, UNCA, and CCSU games were very close for a long time. ETSU went down to the end. We pulled away from UCF and CCSU around 5-8 minutes left. UNCA was about midway through 2nd Half.
The crazy thing is Pitt has only beaten a higher seed 2 times. An 8 seed 2 years ago and in 1981 I think.
We were up 5, not 12, with 3 minutes to play. Beginning at the 4 minute mark Cuse went on a 14-2 run before JROB's game-saving steal and layup with inside a minute left. Games are 40 minutes long. There are a lot of 35 minute champions out there that will be watching the NCAA tournament from their living rooms. At the end, the game as virtually even statistically, and SU shot 47% form the field, 5 points above their season percentage. That;s a pretty high percentage for a pretty mediocre team. Thankfully we held on, almost entirely because JROB went Rambo in the last 60 seconds and pulled our feet out of the fire. Find a coach who will tell you we played well in that game--hell ask Jamie Dixon.
I don't think many would suggest that makes you a lesser fan. A realistic one. Though, there are crazies on both sides, so who knows.
Wasn't the UCF game also very close? I just remember leaving the room for a while.
Can't remember. I do remember VCU game as I was there, also horrifying. Levance missed FTs to ice it, went to OT, the whole stadium was behind VCU (who had just beaten Duke) at that point, but we still pulled it out.
I always kind of think of Jamie Dixon as a pretty good preparation guy, thus given more time, I think his teams perform better relative to their opponents. By that same logic though, I also feel he's kind of a 1 game at a time guy, and not really prepping for the Xavier game right now at all. To that end, I wonder how the PAC12 teams do on the second day of the tournament, as their schedule is always a 2 games per weekend deal. I bet those teams prep for both the teams each weekend.
True but it may be enough of a sample size to conclude that Jamie does a good job of preparing his teams given a few extra days.
Just FYI, UW is 12-2 in the first round since Bo took over in 2002. I think most good programs have similar marks considering the mismatches a high seed affords them.
I thought in years past two assistant coaches were assigned to scouting the next possible game (one of 2 opponents) and practicing a bit for each.
Yes. 1 assistant will be scouting and preparing for Xavier and 1 coach will be scouting and preparing for Weber State. My guess is that Jamie trusts Brandin the most so he will be on Xavier. Jamie won't and shouldnt know a thing about Xavier until 9:00 Friday night. If we win, then he'll watch the Xavier game and get with BK to develop a game plan.
I heard a sound bite from Dixon today that said getting a late Friday game is a big advantage over a Thursday late morning/early afternoon game. They have 1 extra day of practice and the chance for a shoot around the day of the game.
JD was on with the creeps on 93.7 this morning. Said that the three coaches would each have a team to scout/prepare the guys for. He was referring to Wisky. "X" & the 'eers.
One and done or 2 and done same thing. Still unachieve majority of the times. Although this year we overachieved by just making the tournament
We were losing by three about halfway through the second half and we winning by two late until Julius hit a three after missing almost all of his shots all night.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
OT: Would you pay $30,000 for this Super Bowl experience?- Latest: pghsonj1325