ADVERTISEMENT

JRob

R

raleighpanther

Junior
Apr 26, 2012
3,308
1,616
113
I don't fully agree with the negative assessment of JRob often seen here on the board. He has his limitations (as do all of our players).
The big issue with him is how his limitations matched up with the his teammates. He is not a shoot first point guard, obviously. If he was surrounded by a couple of great shooters, his style of play would be fine. But his backcourt mate this year, Cam, shot 16% from 3, and 50% from the FT line, and basically couldn't score outside of 10 feet. That is an offensively deadly backcourt combo -- deadly in a bad way.

Next year, with Artis and the 2 Johnsons, we should have enough scoring to make JRob's limitation less of a problem. And I do thing he does a nice job of handling the ball and settling the offense. His defense is solid, although I do agree that against really quick PGs, his defense slips, but doesn't everyone's?
 
For some abhorrent reason the low mentality poster s here have made it a custom to hate point guards. Then after they leave,the hate grows to affection and then love. Jrob is a point guard.give him some serious outside threats to feed along with Young and Artis and he will be excellent. Except they will still hate him until he is gone.
 
I mostly like him

I tend to agree, he is a traditional lead guard, which I felt the team needed to get back to after JD tinkered with the shooting PG concept for four years or so.

And, he absolutely suffers from not having pieces around him.

However, he simply plays in a fog too much.

I put a lot of it on playing in the U19 and felt he would really come on this year.

But, he still "wore" down too much as some noted and still played in a fog too much.

I don't expect him to be what he isn't, but I do expect a big more aggressiveness and LOT more heady play, like the steal to seal the one win ...
 
The Mike DeCourcey line I used to have for my signature, something like "With the Burgh's not being a basketball town, they don't know what they don't know" remains VERY applicable today.

Many of the most vocal critics don't have a clue.

We have problems. Nobody is happy with the performance. Some things should improve with the return of the Johnson's. Other issues will remain until the roster has major turnover. Maybe Jamie Dixon won't get us back to getting #1 seeds again. Ben Howland didn't think success was sustainable here. He might have been right.

But pushing out Dixon and hiring a replacement is more likely to make us like Duquesne than Kentucky.
 
Jrob is valuable when he drives to the hoop and draws 3 fouls per game,

makes 5 of 6 from the line and gets a couple of layups on breaks. He has done this in about 3 games this year. He actually won a game doing this by making the bucket.

Next year he might be a better asset having confidence that some junk he can toss up at the glass gets rebounded by Pitt and not the other team.

Whatever coach did for Artis this year telling him to shoot more he needs to do the same with Jrob taking it to the rack. Hey, kick it out for an open 3 on occasion but draw fouls and use your best asset which is free throws.
 
He seems very disciplined. He is a pass first PG, not a shooter, and he simply is not going to try to become an aggresive scorer because that is not his strong suit. He would be getting even more criticism here if he started taking more shots and making a low percentage of them.

If he played for Kentucky, Duke or Arizona he probably would be on magazine covers.
 
I don't fully agree with the negative assessment of JROB either, but I also don;t fully agree that his greatest weakness is the lack of playmakers around him. Until this season, I still believed James would become an all-ACC and future NBA PG. I believed he had some scoring talent that he just hadn't been called upon to show off yet. After watching him this season, I no longer believe these things. With a team as offensively challenged as this one, especially in the backcourt, if James had the ability to score, he would have done so--because his team needed it. The team needed scoring from him, and he was unable to provide it. As the team's best FT shooter by a mile, it sure would be nice to get him to the foul line. He has the size, strength and handle to back an opposing PG down and either score, get fouled or dish. He never does that, and oopsing guards don;t have to work very hard or get into foul trouble to slow him down. Very rarely do we see him make a move to the basket while he's being defended. He puts very little pressure on the opposing perimeter defenders--he's an easy guard.

Sure he would look better if we had a real center and a real scoring guard. Any PG would. But i guess that;s the point--James is just another PG-ordinary, average, serviceable on an offensively talented team. He is a mechanical player, not very instinctive. he doesn't seem to have the vision that the better PGs have. He has been beaten badly defensively in certain games this year, like in the UVA game.

If he was still a soph, I wouldn't be so critical of him after the season he had this year. But as a junior who and 3 year starter, I'd say the die is pretty much cast. I am not suggesting he should be a Trey Burke or even a Kevin Pangos, but he needs to be some kind of scoring threat or option, especially on an offensively challenged team. And he really isn't.
 
You're not wrong. He never was a scorer, even in high school and never will be. I'd disagree that he is an ordinary, average PG. This year he has had a major drop off in A:TO ratio and in assists overall but his career ratio is extraordinary.

The argument that he should try to back opponents down and draw fouls is moot. If Dixon wanted him doing that he would be doing it. Early in the season he was shooting more jumpers and was ineffective. James does what the coaches tell him to do, not what the fans want to see. Clearly he can generally get to the paint and get fouled when he tries and that is frequently something we use in the end game.
 
Originally posted by Harve74:
You're not wrong. He never was a scorer, even in high school and never will be. I'd disagree that he is an ordinary, average PG. This year he has had a major drop off in A:TO ratio and in assists overall but his career ratio is extraordinary.

The argument that he should try to back opponents down and draw fouls is moot. If Dixon wanted him doing that he would be doing it. Early in the season he was shooting more jumpers and was ineffective. James does what the coaches tell him to do, not what the fans want to see. Clearly he can generally get to the paint and get fouled when he tries and that is frequently something we use in the end game.
Click to expand...
His drop has him ranked 15th nationally.

Not bad.
 
40th nationally in assists per game. 3rd in the ACC in assists per game and A:T ratio.

I'm disappointed he hasn't become more of a scoring threat, but he's far down on our long list of problems.
 
He fits the bill that Coach wanted. He'll be better next year too. He and Durand will have a chip on their shoulders.We'll get some leadership back on this team.
 
Harve--James has a great career assist to turnover ratio. That's great. But I have watched him play, as you have, for three years. Simply put,I don't think he gives us enough from the point guard position. He doesn't turn the ball over much because he isn't aggressive offensively--as a scorer or distributor. This was a year when we needed him to score more, even if he isn't a "scorer". A Sporting News writer predicted after the Duke game, when James was in the midst of a horrible slump, that unless he started providing us with some scoring, we would be outside looking in in March. The team needed more from him than it got his season. 7.7 ppg and 5 apg in ACC play, while playing 34 minutes per game. 36% FG, 34% 3FG, 43 FTA in 18 ACC games = 2.38 FTAs/game. As a three year starter playing damn near the entire game every game with the ball in his hands more than any other player, those stats are anemic.

if JROB can get into the paint and do damage, or if he can get to the rim, but Jamie doesn't want him to do so in a year where we have almost no scoring from our backcourt, I don't even know what to say about that. 2 FTAs per game from the guy who handles the ball the most, and who happens to shoot 85%, is absurdly bad. To me it says the player is being too passive. I have a lot of respect for Jamie and I'd like to think he's not that stubborn or stupid.

I always respect your opinions and thoughts, but I don't think James is getting it done. IMO, he simply isn't the player I expected him to be at this point, nor is he the player I think he should be at this point. Given what a winner he was at DeMatha in H.S., as well as his high national recruiting ranking, I expected more from him, I expected him to be more than just a decent college PG with a strong assist to TO ratio by the end of his junior year. I think a lot of people that know their basketball more than I do expected that as well.
 
Serious question- aren't Brandon's senior numbers not much better and page couldn't shoot his senior yr. are we too hard on jr? I think leadership is big diff IMO and generalship
 
The basketball cognoscenti on here find it sacrilegious to criticize JROB's point guard skills. They resort to metrics that highlight his assist to turnover ratio and other favorable stats that fit JROB's limited game. There are lies, damn lies and statistics--all of the JROB stats are very misleading. He is not one of the top PG in the country of the ACC.. Yet they ignore the "EYE" test. Have any of you JROB supporters actually watched his game. JD does not ask JROB to do much except be a so-called facilitator. JROB is on the floor about 35 minutes a game and his principal role is to distribute the ball around the perimeter. JROB has possession of the ball He rarely pushes the ball on a break and does not possess the necessary quickness or explosiveness to consistently penetrate and break down the backbone of the opposing defense. To compound his limited skill set, he can't shoot with any level of consistency to make defenders challenge him on the perimeter (look at his abysmal FG percentage). Essentially JROB is a low risk, low reward point guard. JD relies on JROB to simply work within the scope of his limited talents Any decent point D-1 point guard would produce same metrics if they were simply asked to be to perform the same limited role as JROB. Someone mentioned JROB would be on magazine covers if he played for Duke, Kansas or Kentucky or other high level program. Get real--JROB would rarely see the floor on those type teams. JROB is a nice kid but vastly overrated as a player.
 
Originally posted by thebadby2:
Harve--James has a great career assist to turnover ratio. That's great. But I have watched him play, as you have, for three years. Simply put,I don't think he gives us enough from the point guard position. He doesn't turn the ball over much because he isn't aggressive offensively--as a scorer or distributor. This was a year when we needed him to score more, even if he isn't a "scorer". A Sporting News writer predicted after the Duke game, when James was in the midst of a horrible slump, that unless he started providing us with some scoring, we would be outside looking in in March. The team needed more from him than it got his season. 7.7 ppg and 5 apg in ACC play, while playing 34 minutes per game. 36% FG, 34% 3FG, 43 FTA in 18 ACC games = 2.38 FTAs/game. As a three year starter playing damn near the entire game every game with the ball in his hands more than any other player, those stats are anemic.

if JROB can get into the paint and do damage, or if he can get to the rim, but Jamie doesn't want him to do so in a year where we have almost no scoring from our backcourt, I don't even know what to say about that. 2 FTAs per game from the guy who handles the ball the most, and who happens to shoot 85%, is absurdly bad. To me it says the player is being too passive. I have a lot of respect for Jamie and I'd like to think he's not that stubborn or stupid.

I always respect your opinions and thoughts, but I don't think James is getting it done. IMO, he simply isn't the player I expected him to be at this point, nor is he the player I think he should be at this point. Given what a winner he was at DeMatha in H.S., as well as his high national recruiting ranking, I expected more from him, I expected him to be more than just a decent college PG with a strong assist to TO ratio by the end of his junior year. I think a lot of people that know their basketball more than I do expected that as well.
Click to expand...
Can't disagree that many expected more. I saw him twice, I think, in high school and he never really looked to score, so I never had any expectations of him as a scorer. His role was to get the ball to Anya or Grant. I think maybe the problems you and many others may have with James are related to your expectations, not really to his play.

I went to every Dapper Dan from 1972 until Sonny moved it to Detroit. They usually had at least one pure pass-first PG for each team. The guy wasn't supposed to score. He was there purely to distribute the ball to the stars. Oh, they had some shooters too. But often, unless the passer did his job, the game broke down into "whoever gets the rebound dribbles until he shot" chaos, which wasn't very entertaining.

Pitt had a pass-first PG in my class, Billy Knight's 1974 Elite Eight team. Ken Wagner played 4 years and shared time as a senior with freshmen Tom Richards who was a pure shooting point and Keith Starr. It was an interesting contrast.

The pass-first guys were common then, at most levels. . That was the PG's role. As I wrote in a post yesterday, Dixon tended to try to convert a short shooting guard to the point, but Ramon, Gibbs etc, were not penetrating guards. When they scored, it was generally a long jumper. Earlier, Sean Miller rarely penetrated. He had been a huge scorer in high school but accepted the role of distributing the ball to Shorter, Martin and Mathews.

I know we've had driving, attack-the-rim guards, but not as many as most programs. Carl certainly had that as his game. Brad slashed from his wing. Brandkn scored many ways.

Maybe it comes from my being a big, slow defensive tackle first. I learned basketball on the playground. When a little quick guard came into "my paint, " I knocked him down. After I did that a couple times, they quit coming in. I still don't see penetration as a good part of the game and I don't miss it when JRob doesn't do it.

I disagree on expectations from knowledgeable basketball folks. Color men, almost always former guards, with the exception of Doug Gottlieb, are effusive in praising Robinson. They almost always call him one of the best PG's in the country because of his A:TO ratio and few TO's.

I said in answer to an earlier question that I don't consider him a high end PG, mainly because his defense has dropped off. But, I think he would be in the rotation almost anywhere. Creativity means little to me. Getting the routine job done routinely is what I want my PG to do. Robinson does.
This post was edited on 3/9 10:34 PM by Harve74
 
To have to keep hearing about his assist to turnover ratio just kills me. Do you know how misleading that stat can be? Forget about scoring, means very little in this conversation. I suppose many on here would like to tell me that they would take James over Brandin Knight or Carl Krauser or LeVance Fields or even Brad Wannamaker. These guys admittedly did not have the assist to turnover ratio that James has.

That said, they did so many more things for their team than James does. They actually drove the ball into high traffic areas where turnovers are going to occur. James does it about once a game if he is lucky. If he could shoot at all, like those mentioned above, he might be able to drive a little bit. But, when you can't hit from outside the defense has the luxury of playing off, and there is no way James is quick enough to get around guys who aren't real tight on him. Even when he does get out on the break and gets some chances to go to the hoop he has trouble finishing or drawing fouls.

James is average and that is about all I can say. He would probably look better if they did have a shooter or two around him. The problem mostly lies in expectations. I think, as I did, that many thought when he was a top 100 player signed out of DeMatha, he would be a four year player, possibly starting all for years and be the next in line great point at Pitt. I think, if you are honest, and shared the expectations that I did, then there is no way that you don't come away disappointed!

Even if you don't agree, please don't insult my basketball IQ. I know what I have seen for three years and that assist to turnover ratio that all the announcers mention and all his defenders on here mention is just a product of the most conservative approach to playing the point! If he did play a more risky brand of basketball where he had to drive to open things up he would not have those gaudy stats! He just does not have the talent to play that way. Not all his fault though, that lack of talent thing seems to be a big theme here lately!
 
No offense but if talking about assist to turnover ratio insults your intelligence, you might want to reassess your basketball intelligence at least. For point guards it has always been the main statistic to assess ball control.

It is also one of the three main statistics to predict team success according to a New York Times statistical study, along with field goal defensive percentage and rebounding margin.

Pitt stresses A:TO and as a team always ranks high.

If you don't like pure assist to turnover margin, you can look at total assists, assist percentage, assists per game, etc. Robinson ranks high in those too. The ACC has only tracked assist percentage for the last 5 seasons. Robinson's career rank is 11th of all ACC players in those 5 years. He is 3rd this year in total assists and assists per game.

Obviously you prefer a PG that is more of a scorer. Just as obviously if Dixon did, he'd try harder to recruit one. Robinson fits what he wants.
 
No, I don't need my point to be a big scorer. I want a point who can generate offense and create out there, when the offense goes stagnant such as in the Florida St. game on Saturday. James cannot drive! But he has a nice assist to turnover ratio!
Good lead guards know when their team needs someone to step up and create shots by driving and getting the defense out of position. Good luck ever getting that from James.

Furthermore, If Jamel gets open on the perimeter off of a nice screen, gets a pass from James who is standing at the top of the key, and drains the shot, James gets an assist. This is nice, but any one of our perimeter players could make that same pass.

What is obvious to me is that our team is not up to par with what we are used to here. Obviously you don't value the ability of a guard to penetrate and open things up, instead opting for a guard who is a good perimeter passer. James gets to the foul line 2.3 times per game. Wouldn't you like to see that number increase to 8-10 times a game. If he could drive and draw fouls it would be huge, because obviously James is great at the line.

One more thing, you can not tell me that coach Dixon would rather have a James at point instead of a Brandin or Levance. That is like comparing a Dodge Dart to a couple of Mercedes! Now if you would like to address what I have written please do, but I know he has a great assist to turnover ratio already!
 
Theres only like one guy in the NCAA who averages 10 free throw trips a game.

Furthermore, the only guys who average 8-10 trips to the line a game in the NBA:

Lebron, Demarcus Cousins, Russel Westbrook and James Harden
This post was edited on 3/10 11:32 AM by KennyTheKangaroo
 
Originally posted by raleighpanther:
I don't fully agree with the negative assessment of JRob often seen here on the board. He has his limitations (as do all of our players).
The big issue with him is how his limitations matched up with the his teammates. He is not a shoot first point guard, obviously. If he was surrounded by a couple of great shooters, his style of play would be fine. But his backcourt mate this year, Cam, shot 16% from 3, and 50% from the FT line, and basically couldn't score outside of 10 feet. That is an offensively deadly backcourt combo -- deadly in a bad way.

Next year, with Artis and the 2 Johnsons, we should have enough scoring to make JRob's limitation less of a problem. And I do thing he does a nice job of handling the ball and settling the offense. His defense is solid, although I do agree that against really quick PGs, his defense slips, but doesn't everyone's?
Click to expand...
Here's what I would ask a James Robinson fan?

What does James Robinson really do well?

The answer would be: "He gets us into our offense, runs the offense, and doesn't turn it over."

OK, those are good things but also would be considered the bare minimum requirement for a major college point guard. Admittedly, many point guards can't even do that much and the fact that Robinson can leads me to at least call him an "average" major college point guard. But, he's nothing more than average. He doesn't turn the ball over, but he also creates almost 0 offense. He doesn't score and his assists are mostly just basic passes along the perimeter where the guy he threw it to actually made the shot. He's not beating his man, getting into the lane, drawing a defender and dropping it off to Young for a dunk.

Robinson is a perfect PG on an elite offensive team. On a team like Pitt, its a pretty bad fit. We're playing 4 on 5 on the offensive end with him in the game most of the time though I admit he has a strong offensive game 3-4 times per year.
 
Someone said this in a post I can not find: Earlier in the season, it seemed Robinson drove to the basket a lot more. That poster and I agree that it appeared he was hit and fouled a lot, the majority of which were not called. That poster believes Robinson quit taking the ball into the lane because he was being hit, fouls were not being called and some turnovers or bad shots resulted. I agree.

One thing I would add - When Robinson gets into to the lane, it appears his primary intent is to get fouled. I think that is why a lot of contact against him is not called. When the call does not come, Robinson is often left in a poor position to do something: pass or shoot
 
My mistake, that was over the top! Did not really want to argue numbers but, clearly a guy who is our best free throw shooter would hopefully get to the line more. I was just thinking even 4-5 attempts would get us 2 to 3 more points a game.
 
I definitely think you stated my main point of my posts better than I did! "He creates 0 offense."
For our team, we need someone that can create!
 
Harve74 believes, perhaps not unreasonably, his opinion might be more valid because he saw Robinson play in high school. Thus, Harve74 has had the proper expectations and appreciation for Robinson's game all along, while other observers, presumably having not seen Robinson play in high school, foolishly expected Robinson to play a different style and/or be "better" based on his rather lofty ratings. In other words, Harve74 believes the expectations of all Panther Lair.com posters except his own and perhaps a few other Robinson supporters may have been unreasonable. Fair enough.

Harve74 and other Robinson fans look at the box score for last year's Florida game, for instance, see 6 assists and 2 turnovers (for the golden 3:1 ratio), and apparently conclude that Robinson played his role, had a great game, and was his usual extraordinary self. Harve74 and the Robinson fans apparently are not interested in looking any closer to see when those assists and turnovers happened nor their ultimate impact on the game; they're only interested in the end result (i.e. the final statistical tally).

Harve74 and the Robinson fans apparently don't care that 4 of the 6 assists in the Florida game came in the final 8 minutes of the game, when Pitt was already down 13, when Pitt had already been down double-digits for 7+ minutes, during which time Pitt never made a serious push, when everyone in the gym and everyone watching except Harve74 and the Robinson fans realized, for that Pitt team, on that day, the game was basically over. No, Harve74 and the Robinson fans will tell you, as they told me last year, 'every assist counts!' and 'it's never over until it's over!' Garbage time stats are essential, in other words.

For Harve74 and the Robinson fans, there is no such thing as garbage time nor stat sheet stuffing. (Stuffing only happens during Thanksgiving.) The stat sheet also equalizes all assists, so the remarkable Lamar Patterson assist that requires real vision and skill is no different than the generic James Robinson assist that only requires someone else to make a perimeter shot. Context is also neutralized. Remember that meaningless 3 Artis hit at the end of the Wake game? Harve74 and the Robinson fans still can't decide which shot was bigger: that meaningless Wake 3, or Artis' late 3 against Syracuse at home.
 
Some people prefer objective facts to the "eye test". And some people prefer not to disregard data that doesn't match up with their "eye test". You know, smart people.Although if you want go through the video of every game and mark down every assist for James Robinson and for Lamar, categorize them into "real" and "fake" assists, I'd be gladly willing to accept that data. Better get to it, it will probably take a while.

I'm glad you are still butthurt about being called out on the Florida game though.
 
Re: I mostly like him

Originally posted by Jeffburgh:
I tend to agree, he is a traditional lead guard, which I felt the team needed to get back to after JD tinkered with the shooting PG concept for four years or so.

And, he absolutely suffers from not having pieces around him.

However, he simply plays in a fog too much.

I put a lot of it on playing in the U19 and felt he would really come on this year.

But, he still "wore" down too much as some noted and still played in a fog too much.

I don't expect him to be what he isn't, but I do expect a big more aggressiveness and LOT more heady play, like the steal to seal the one win ...
Click to expand...
How does Robinson not have pieces around him? He has a future All American in Jamel Artis that can score from anywhere and an All ACC Caliber Forward / Center in Mike Young.

He has 1 Ncaa Tournament win in his career, the absolute worst for any Pitt guard since 2001. And if you look at Robinson's shooting and scoring numbers his last 6 games of the season, they are beyond awful. You can look at Robinson's numbers for the whole all conference play, they are still awful.


We aren't going anywhere with Robinson at point guard. Forget about it.

We are going places and deep into the NCAA Tournament with Heron at Point Guard. You watch what Heron does if Artis and Young stick around as a freshmen. We are going to tear people up.
 
Here's what I would ask a James Robinson fan?

What does James Robinson really do well?

The answer would be: "He gets us into our offense, runs the offense, and doesn't turn it over."

OK, those are good things but also would be considered the bare minimum requirement for a major college point guard. Admittedly, many point guards can't even do that much and the fact that Robinson can leads me to at least call him an "average" major college point guard. But, he's nothing more than average. He doesn't turn the ball over, but he also creates almost 0 offense. He doesn't score and his assists are mostly just basic passes along the perimeter where the guy he threw it to actually made the shot. He's not beating his man, getting into the lane, drawing a defender and dropping it off to Young for a dunk.

Robinson is a perfect PG on an elite offensive team. On a team like Pitt, its a pretty bad fit. We're playing 4 on 5 on the offensive end with him in the game most of the time though I admit he has a strong offensive game 3-4 times per year.



Here is what I would ask a fraud like smfraud....Why are you such an idiot..... Is there any subject that you write about that you have any knowledge of? Its one thing to be clueless. its a disgrace when someone as clueless as you tries to act like you have any knowledge.
 
YC, you are completely missing the gist of my argument.

I'm NOT saying I saw anything in Robinson that others didn't because I saw him sooner. Anybody with satellite TV and a sports package could have seen him. The difference between us is I am accepting Robinson for what he is.

I'm saying that you and a whole lot of other people, mainly on these Pitt boards, are upset with a guy because you are trying to make him be something he is not and never was and he hasn't changed to align with YOUR expectations.

Let's say you go out and buy a rabbit dog. Why would you get upset three years later when the dog still chases rabbits but doesn't point birds?

There are plenty of people who are happy with rabbit dogs and praise the dog. The dog chases rabbits and chases as many rabbits as the best rabbit dogs around, but not birds, So, you have decided he's worthless because he doesn't point birds.

The Robinson critics have an idea of the kind of point guard they want. Since Dixon clearly is not prioritizing going out to get that kind of point guard, it seems pretty obvious the ideal you have and the ideal he has are different.
 
JROB was RIVALS #8 ranked PG in 2012. He faced 4 Top 20 PGs from the class of 2012 this year:

#2 Yogi Ferrell
#4 Marcus Paige
#9 Codi Miller-McIntyre
#12 Terry Rozier (twice)

And here's how he fared:

Players Min FG 3P FT Rebounds PF A TO B S Pts

Y. Ferrell 25 4-7 1-2 2-3 0 1 1 3 4 3 0 1 11
J. Robinson 26 1-9 0-2 0-0 2 4 6 3 5 3 0 0 2


M. Paige 32 3-11 1-7 1-2 1 4 5 0 6 0 1 1 8
J. Robinson 35 5-7 2-2 0-0 0 4 4 1 8 1 0 0 12


C. Miller-McIntyre 32 3-8 0-3 7-13 0 7 7 2 5 2 0 1 13
J. Robinson 37 1-6 0-3 4-4 0 4 4 3 4 0 0 1 6


T. Rozier 39 10-16 2-4 4-5 1 4 5 2 6 5 0 1 26
J. Robinson 33 4-6 2-3 6-7 0 1 1 3 6 3 0 2 16


T. Rozier 38 6-16 0-1 10-10 2 8 10 2 3 2 1 0 22
J. Robinson 35 1-5 1-3 2-4 0 1 1 3 5 2 1 2 5

Pitt as a team was 1-4 in those games. This isn't hockey, you don't get points for assists.
 
JRob would be a great backup point guard who does the bare minimum to not allow the team to lose too much ground while the starting point guard takes a blow. All he does is starts the offense far away from te basket then he'll reverse the ball, reverse the ball, reverse the ball. He rarely drive-draw-and-dish, rarely makes a skip pass, rarely make a thread the needle pass, rarely sets up a guy on the fast break, rarely hits a shot when you see others struggling to score. He doesn't "make his teamates better".

Being pass first is not the problem-I would rather have pass first point guards, it's the lack of being able to setup his teamates for better scoring opportunities than just passing to the wing and reversing the ball along the perimeter.

This post was edited on 3/11 5:39 AM by Wednesday Morning

This post was edited on 3/11 5:40 AM by Wednesday Morning
 
Harve,
You're not getting it. To use your metaphor,if I were hungry for birds (wins ;) but my rabbit dog was still chasing rabbits 3 years later, I would find a good bird dog to replace him. Yes I would be very frustrated that my rabbit dog cannot make the transition to behaving like a bird dog.
 
Pitt's bigger problem is not having a shooting guard. I would have liked to have a point guard like Robinson when Stephen Adams was here, it seemed like the guards would refuse to pass the ball to Adams when he was in the post. I love the fact that Robinson is unselfish, and he hustles his butt off out there, he just has physical limitations that can't be overcome.

Pitt just doesn't have the talent surrounding Robinson so the fact that he is limited offensively is more apparent. One thing that Robinson can fix is his outside shooting when left open.
 
You are missing Harve's point. Dixon wants rabbit dogs. You want bird dogs. Harve is saying that JRob is a good rabbit dog, always has been always will be. Obviously, Dixon feels the same way. You are imposing your preferences on the evaluation of JRob. Does he fit your needs / desires? Obviously not. But that's not Harve's point.
 
Sean Miller once said that ass/to ratio is nice, but it also can tell you that the point guard is not trying to make things happen by penetrating and dishing off. That pretty much sums up this whole JRob thread that we are talking about. JRob is what he is, a good but not great pg who gives it his all.
 
Originally posted by hollowpanther:
You are missing Harve's point. Dixon wants rabbit dogs. You want bird dogs. Harve is saying that JRob is a good rabbit dog, always has been always will be. Obviously, Dixon feels the same way. You are imposing your preferences on the evaluation of JRob. Does he fit your needs / desires? Obviously not. But that's not Harve's point.
Click to expand...
Exactly HP. That's what I've been trying to get across.

Dixon has signed a PG for the '15 class. While he scores more than James ever did, Damon Wilson is usually described as a "bigger, stronger, James Robinson type."

Dixon is not deceptive. It's pretty easy to see what he's doing. His entire system is based on doing things which improve offensive efficiency. Take good shots. Get offensive rebounds. Limit turnovers. We worship assists. It's one of the first stats Jamie talks about after every game. Guys who can consistently play consistently (redundancy fully intended) are valuable to him.

Guys with a lot of flashy, risky plays, not so much.

If he wanted to sign a bird dog ( to continue the analogy), he'd be prioritizing Marcus LoVett now or Cassius Winston or Charlie Moore in the '16 class. Instead, it looks like TJ Gibbs is the priority at PG. TJ is more athletic than his brothers but he's not Cat Barber or Olivier Hanlan. Or Jerian Grant.

Really, this is the same as the "hire new assistant coaches" argument so many critical fans support. Dixon had the chance to replace Barton last Summer when his contract expired. Instead, he renewed him. Jamie has his own vision of what he wants to do and it rarely coincides with the more vociferous fans.

He's the coach. They pay him millions. When the Administration decides that he is no longer worth more than the cost of replacing him, they will or he might leave before that. But message board posters are not going to affect his strategy. Whether I or you or anybody else agrees with him is simply not relevant.
 
Originally posted by Harve74:

Originally posted by hollowpanther:
You are missing Harve's point. Dixon wants rabbit dogs. You want bird dogs. Harve is saying that JRob is a good rabbit dog, always has been always will be. Obviously, Dixon feels the same way. You are imposing your preferences on the evaluation of JRob. Does he fit your needs / desires? Obviously not. But that's not Harve's point.
Click to expand...
Exactly HP. That's what I've been trying to get across.

Dixon has signed a PG for the '15 class. While he scores more than James ever did, Damon Wilson is usually described as a "bigger, stronger, James Robinson type."

Dixon is not deceptive. It's pretty easy to see what he's doing. His entire system is based on doing things which improve offensive efficiency. Take good shots. Get offensive rebounds. Limit turnovers. We worship assists. It's one of the first stats Jamie talks about after every game. Guys who can consistently play consistently (redundancy fully intended) are valuable to him.

Guys with a lot of flashy, risky plays, not so much.

If he wanted to sign a bird dog ( to continue the analogy), he'd be prioritizing Marcus LoVett now or Cassius Winston or Charlie Moore in the '16 class. Instead, it looks like TJ Gibbs is the priority at PG. TJ is more athletic than his brothers but he's not Cat Barber or Olivier Hanlan. Or Jerian Grant.

Really, this is the same as the "hire new assistant coaches" argument so many critical fans support. Dixon had the chance to replace Barton last Summer when his contract expired. Instead, he renewed him. Jamie has his own vision of what he wants to do and it rarely coincides with the more vociferous fans.

He's the coach. They pay him millions. When the Administration decides that he is no longer worth more than the cost of replacing him, they will or he might leave before that. But message board posters are not going to affect his strategy. Whether I or you or anybody else agrees with him is simply not relevant.
Click to expand...

I don't understand your point, at all.

Ashton Gibbs junior season he averaged 17 points per game and shot 49% from 3. He was a weapon on offense. All Conference Player

Sterling Gibbs averages 17 points per game and shoots 45% from 3. He is a weapon on offense. All Conference Player




Temple Gibbs is going to be at least as good as both his older brothers. You already know what to expect out of him. A lot of points, a high shooting percentage. Great player on offense that can kill you from 3. How on earth we were not recruiting him from day 1 is a travesty at the highest level. Another Dixon screw up with recruiting. Pitt would rather reinvent the shooting guard, with a 10% 3 point shooter and 50% free throw shooter with Cam Wright.



James Robinson is like a dog with flees. He is so limited on offense it cripples the team. He can't score and he can't shoot and he offers zero spacing help for Artis and Young.


Lovett and Moore are 5'9 defensive liability smurfs. Gibbs projects to be way better than both of those players in my opinion. Winston would be nice, but that's a dream, not reality.

I'd start Temple Gibbs over James Robinson right now.
 
And Harve,

If you want to run Gibbs at the 1 with Heron at the 2, Im fine with that. It's interchangeable. The ball will be going through Heron anyway, and that would be a lights out backcourt with a ton of offensive firepower.
 
C'mon. Pitt was relevant when they had a horrible coach playing in a glorified high school gym. Dixon leaving means nothing.
Originally posted by Harve74:

But pushing out Dixon and hiring a replacement is more likely to make us like Duquesne than Kentucky.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Vader_Storm

Vader's Radford Post Game

Replies
14
Views
2K
Basketball Board
DC_Area_Panther
D
N

Credit to Duke and their defense

Replies
13
Views
936
Basketball Board
Sean Miller Fan
S
DT_PITT

Stanford Game & Other Dribbles ...

Replies
28
Views
2K
Basketball Board
NCanton Panther
N
DT_PITT

Sam Houston Game & Other Dribbles ...

Replies
44
Views
3K
Basketball Board
PittGlory
P
Chairman Moe

Chairman Lowe!

Replies
0
Views
577
Basketball Board
Chairman Moe
Chairman Moe
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back