Miami Game & Other Dribbles ...

[DT_PITT]

** After tonight's terrible defeat, the treacherous drive home was even more terrible. I had to try a couple different routes to find one my poor little car could navigate.

** The snowy drive required all my attention. And since I made it home safely, I can now say that was a good thing. I'm now home with a much better disposition than I had when I left the Pete.

** I never leave games early. But with a minute to go, I left my seat to be on my way. I watched the last minute from the TV at the Bottom of the Pete. I just couldn't bear it from my seat any longer.

** Like most of you, I suspect, I was pretty sure we weren't going to win this game when there 4 minutes left with the Panthers down four. I said to my seatmates, we'll need three stops to win this game and I said I didn't think we'll ever get them.

** We didn't.

** We lost this game for the same reason we've lost so many others this season. We just can't defend.

** We won't be in the NCAA Tournament because we can't defend.

** Our offense is that of a Tournament Team. Our defense is not close. The Pomeroy ratings do not lie. Offense … #16. Defense … #213. That's #213 out of 351 Division I teams.

** Our offense found a way this season to make up enough ground for a #213 ranked defense to make the season interesting. But in the last two games, they just didn't have enough to make up a difference that is far too great.

** The Hurricanes started off the second half with 14 points on their first six possessions. The scored on each. In the whole second half, Miami ended up scoring 38 points on the 26 times they possessed the ball.

** And heck, the Panthers started off the second half well enough on their end too, scoring on 7 of their first 9 second half possessions for 14 points. Many teams will stretch 4 point half time leads with that kind of offense. But it was pretty evident that the Panther offense would need to spend the rest of the second half trying to keep pace.

** But without any guards hitting shots, Mike couldn't carry that burden alone.

** I'd rather not try to delve into who was the biggest defensive culprit this night. Let's just say that everyone shared the blame.

** Along the same lines, I'm left to wonder why Dixon didn't even try a zone at any time.

** But because I got home safely, I'll try to offer my best at some positive perspective.

** First, congrats to our seniors. It always feels good to stand and applaud for our fine Panther men.

** Second, by no means do I think an NIT berth is a good thing. But maybe it's better for our Panther prospects next year that we won't be in the Big Dance. Finding a way into the NCAA's might have given the Panthers who return next year the false notion that better defense isn't all that important. Now they will know it.

** Third, personally I'm glad to have another home game this year for my young son to attend. Because of the little later start and the troublesome weather, I asked him to sit this one out.

** It wasn't really the late time returning home that made me most pleased he missed it. Instead, I'm glad he didn't have to endure Daddy swearing and pounding the seat next to him as the Hurricanes scored time and time again in the second half.

** If the Panthers can't find something within themselves to improve their defense, they are going to find the NIT, and perhaps even next year, just as terrible as this game and the ride home afterward.







This post was edited on 3/5 12:45 AM by DT_PITT

 

[noelr]

if rozelle nix logs as many points next year as tyrone Haughton did this year, look out

Guard play and D-lather, rinse, repeat

 

[SouthSidePanther]

A good IPA helps ease the pain. Tapped into my hop juju stash, which greatly improved my mood.

 

[DT_PITT]

Excellent choice ...

... but I need to go to sleep now. Leave for work at 6:45 am tomorrow.

 

[recruitsreadtheseboards]

I.......I.....ummm.......am just at a loss on how we can be so consistently bad on defense. There will always be bad games and just busts, but just the consistency of failure to make a stop, any stop, is just mindblowing. And it doesn't just go onto one or two players.

I dunno....

DT, I am looking to you, how? why? who? I just don't understand how they can be THAT bad, THAT often. I just don't. Even our so called best defensive guys like Cam and JRob are bad.

We have a really soft team.

 

[recruitsreadtheseboards]

I.......I.....ummm.......am just at a loss on how we can be so consistently bad on defense. There will always be bad games and just busts, but just the consistency of failure to make a stop, any stop, is just mindblowing. And it doesn't just go onto one or two players.

I dunno....

DT, I am looking to you, how? why? who? I just don't understand how they can be THAT bad, THAT often. I just don't. Even our so called best defensive guys like Cam and JRob are bad.

We have a really soft team.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Originally posted by recruitsreadtheseboards:

I.......I.....ummm.......am just at a loss on how we can be so consistently bad on defense. There will always be bad games and just busts, but just the consistency of failure to make a stop, any stop, is just mindblowing. And it doesn't just go onto one or two players.

I dunno....

DT, I am looking to you, how? why? who? I just don't understand how they can be THAT bad, THAT often. I just don't. Even our so called best defensive guys like Cam and JRob are bad.

We have a really soft team.

Some people can play defense, come can't. Lateral quickness is a big part of defense and guys like Robinson, Artis, Jones, etc have no lateral quickness. The most disappointing thing to me about Wright is that he never developed into anything more than average defensive player.........and really, he's probably below average. He's got the size and athleticism. I figured he could have been a Julius Page or Jermaine Dixon type of defender.

You can teach defense to an extent, but I think Jamie has done all he can do. These guys just can't defend and they never will. You just can't coach people to be great defenders, they have to have it in them. Could you coach your team to be an outstanding shooting team if they've never been good shooters? No. If you can't shoot, there's only so much improvement you can make.

 

[NCLee]

Great points, spot in as usual!

 

[zoomer]

Re: I said this earlier this year ...


DT. As I said early this year and say it now, Jamie first needs to up grade his assistant coaching staff.

: Jamie's teams have always got better as the year went on, this year they looked like they were in mud all year, Can't blame the players, you got to start looking at the coaching.


: Jamie Needs and Must bring in a true center that can play right now. Not a project . He needs to looks at the JR college ranks for this.


: If the problem with not being able to keep or get top assistants comes from the lack of funds for the program. Well you get what you pay for.

 

[recruitsreadtheseboards]

Originally posted by Sean Miller Fan:

Originally posted by recruitsreadtheseboards:

I.......I.....ummm.......am just at a loss on how we can be so consistently bad on defense. There will always be bad games and just busts, but just the consistency of failure to make a stop, any stop, is just mindblowing. And it doesn't just go onto one or two players.

I dunno....

DT, I am looking to you, how? why? who? I just don't understand how they can be THAT bad, THAT often. I just don't. Even our so called best defensive guys like Cam and JRob are bad.

We have a really soft team.

Some people can play defense, come can't. Lateral quickness is a big part of defense and guys like Robinson, Artis, Jones, etc have no lateral quickness. The most disappointing thing to me about Wright is that he never developed into anything more than average defensive player.........and really, he's probably below average. He's got the size and athleticism. I figured he could have been a Julius Page or Jermaine Dixon type of defender.

You can teach defense to an extent, but I think Jamie has done all he can do. These guys just can't defend and they never will. You just can't coach people to be great defenders, they have to have it in them. Could you coach your team to be an outstanding shooting team if they've never been good shooters? No. If you can't shoot, there's only so much improvement you can make.

What is funny (or sad) is Wright and Robinson are worse defenders that say Ashton Gibbs or Ron Ramon or even Levance Fields, none of whom were known for being stoppers.

I do think some of the penetration and driving can be stopped by a big body to block and clog lanes,

With Artis's offensive game, I can live with his lack of defense. But for a guy like Robinson and Wright...not so much.

 

[DT_PITT]

I have some thoughts ....

... but they are a little much to get into today. Maybe tonight.

 

[shortball]

DT Pitt..................... Great Post, Glad to see you made it home safely considering weather conditions.

Overall I feel it was a good year for team. They will walk away with a lot of questions answered and have a pretty good idea what direction they need to go in next season to get to next level. Defense is exactly the major issue for this team to over come. Offense really played pretty well but need outside shooting help at guard who can penetrate and breakdown defenses. Recruiting needs to pick up pace along with some changes to assistant coaches.

This team pretty much is what it is. Had a couple of hot games and took down some good teams but overall they played more as I would have expected based on youth, talent level and experience. Next year will be interesting based on areas of improvement that needs to take place along with recruiting. A lot of work needs to take place of defense. Players fundamentally do not anticipate well as to where and how to guard their man based on ball movement. Seem to lack the burning desire to get in your face and shut teams down. New mind set of players that needs changed.

A lot of talent and experience coming back but still not as optimistic as I should be base on bad defensive play. Not sure JD can swing things the other way to defend. Players just don't seem to really want to make it happen. I still believe they think they can improve and become a NCAA contender by just playing better offense. Not so and need a big change in mind set.

Good luck in ACC Tournament.

 

[recruitsreadtheseboards]

Re: I have some thoughts ....

Originally posted by DT_PITT:
... but they are a little much to get into today. Maybe tonight.

I am not mad at all at how this season has ended. Disappointed. Maybe even confused and somewhat concerned on the direction of the program. But...also hopeful.

Need some big, banging bodies and better guard play. We get that...........IF (biggest two letter word in the English language)...if we get that.......

Sometimes I think a year like this maybe good for all, and a trip to the NCAA's may cloud some issues or mask things. Another thing, a run in the NIT (a one and done tourney) could also be beneficial, even moreso than perhaps a one and done in the NCAA..

So....it is no shame to miss the NCAA's. It is a shame to lose to Wake and lost to Miami who was playing w/o their PG at the Pete.

 

[braves2121]

Originally posted by Sean Miller Fan:

Originally posted by recruitsreadtheseboards:

I.......I.....ummm.......am just at a loss on how we can be so consistently bad on defense. There will always be bad games and just busts, but just the consistency of failure to make a stop, any stop, is just mindblowing. And it doesn't just go onto one or two players.

I dunno....

DT, I am looking to you, how? why? who? I just don't understand how they can be THAT bad, THAT often. I just don't. Even our so called best defensive guys like Cam and JRob are bad.

We have a really soft team.

Some people can play defense, come can't. Lateral quickness is a big part of defense and guys like Robinson, Artis, Jones, etc have no lateral quickness. The most disappointing thing to me about Wright is that he never developed into anything more than average defensive player.........and really, he's probably below average. He's got the size and athleticism. I figured he could have been a Julius Page or Jermaine Dixon type of defender.

You can teach defense to an extent, but I think Jamie has done all he can do. These guys just can't defend and they never will. You just can't coach people to be great defenders, they have to have it in them. Could you coach your team to be an outstanding shooting team if they've never been good shooters? No. If you can't shoot, there's only so much improvement you can make.

Defense is a mindset. You have to be competitive and determined to stop your man. When I played I was limited in talent offensively so I concentrated on playing great defense and playing smart and hard everywhere on the floor. Even as an adult I play pickup games and my #1 goal is to shut down my man on defense. You can't teach that and you can't force someone to care about it like that. Some do, some don't.

I think a lot of it is how these guys grow up. Many of them are stars at a younger age and get their enjoyment out of playing offense and making flashy plays. Defense is not their source of pride. and so its not something you can just switch on at a later age. People talk about how the Howland/early-Dixon teams had a lot of lesser recruited players who played great defense, and there is a correlation here. We might be in a weird purgatory zone where our program is strong enough now to get well-recruited players but not the elite talents who can get by with not playing great defense. It is an interesting psychological conundrum.

 

[SoufOaklin4Life]

Re: I said this earlier this year ...

Originally posted by zoomer:

DT. As I said early this year and say it now, Jamie first needs to up grade his assistant coaching staff.

: Jamie's teams have always got better as the year went on, this year they looked like they were in mud all year, Can't blame the players, you got to start looking at the coaching.


: Jamie Needs and Must bring in a true center that can play right now. Not a project . He needs to looks at the JR college ranks for this.


: If the problem with not being able to keep or get top assistants comes from the lack of funds for the program. Well you get what you pay for.

This isn't a good team.

But to suggest they haven't improved all year long is being detached from reality.

Artis scoring increased by 6 PPG from non conference to conference play.

We have a JUCO center coming in.

 

[Harve74]

**#224 this morning on KenPom.

** I didn't get home till 12:30. Glad Mrs 74 decided to sit this one out. She had to be at work at 7AM.

** Without any guards hitting shots.... " That plus lousy defense is the demise of this team. Chris Jones is inconsistent. Whirly's point on Josh having Steve Blass disease is unfortunately true. I don't know if we can afford to wait for both these guys to "get it." With Slim just having his surgery recently, (that's my assumption given the new sling) I doubt he is much of a factor next season. There's often a long rehab from a shoulder. Is adding Durand and Damon Wilson enough?

We're starting from a baseline of minus 9 ppg with Wright leaving. Cam has had a disappointing year but lately, his scoring has been better than the TOTAL of our remaining guards. That 9 points is Durand'shighest season average. Nix abd another big should help the defense and rebounding, but we gotta get some scoring from the backcourt.

** Unless the defense improves, the ceiling of this roster may be about where we are. Lateral quickness is a real issue but defense is mostly effort and attitude. I don't buy that the problem is in the assistants. The problem is inside just about every player. It doesn't help that Jamie stubbornly sticks with his M2M. This is a roster that may need gimmick defenses. We have the length to make a 1-3-1 possible and it woyld be hard to pkay worse than we have so far.

 

[DT_PITT]

I don't agree with ...

... going 1-3-1. I just don't think it's a good defense. And I think we need more speed than we have to make it work.

But we play the 2-3 like the Cuse with the back lower defender playing perimeter. That is even a little bit gimmicky to some. I think our length plays well to playing the 2-3 this way.

I was really surprised Dixon didn't even try zone last night.

And it can't be said this was a mistake, because who knows if it would have helped, Heck, it probably would not have.

Still, usually when his defense gets beaten trip after trip like it was last night, eventually Jamie does try it.

My guess is that after scoring for the first 6 trips of the second half, Jamie might have been ready to try zone. But then we actually started having a little bit of success guarding, and were burned by offensive rebounds. So many he thought that we got the defense fixed, now we have to get the rebounding fixed, and zone isn't the way to do that.

Anyway, pretty soon after the offensive rebounding stretch for Miami, we went back to an "unfixed" defense.

This post was edited on 3/5 11:46 AM by DT_PITT

 

[Harve74]

Re: I don't agree with ...

The 1-3-1 is gimmicky but I like it. At least as a change of pace. With length on the wings, it's a good defense to trap and get some turnovers. I'm not sure most teams today have the patience and structure to move the ball fast enough to beat it. You may be right that Jamel and Sheldon might not be quick enough for the wings.

Dr Roy rode it to a couple NCAA bids.

It ALWAYS gives us fits.

 

[recruitsreadtheseboards]

Re: I don't agree with ...

Originally posted by Harve74:
The 1-3-1 is gimmicky but I like it. At least as a change of pace. With length on the wings, it's a good defense to trap and get some turnovers. I'm not sure most teams today have the patience and structure to move the ball fast enough to beat it. You may be right that Jamel and Sheldon might not be quick enough for the wings.

Dr Roy rode it to a couple NCAA bids.

It ALWAYS gives us fits.

Actually, I was thinking a 2-3 Syracuse type zone. With Durand Johnson, we have the length to make that defense become really troublesome to play against.

 

[DT_PITT]

There's probably a reason so few teams play it ...

... cause it's tough to get right. One thing I seem to have noticed. It seems to give most teams (including us) fits the first trip it's seen. Then after that, I notice it gets burned quite a lot.

I loved Dr. Roy's 1-3-1 with Carlton Neverson running the baseline. I loved it so much that I later taught it to my community league team when I was in 11th grade. (My first coaching job!) I played Neverson's spot along the baseline, which I was able to do quite well many sprained knees and some 50+lbs ago.

But if you recall, Chipman used it to get to the NCAA's when we played in the A-10. Didn't work so well in the Big East.

When I was a freshman in 84, I asked Curtis Aiken if they would be playing anymore 1-3-1 in the coming year (Curtis was a soph). He said: "Not with me on the baseline. Not in the Big East!"

 

[gary2]

Re: I don't agree with ...


The 1-3-1. I think I suggested it and asked questions about it earlier this season.

Jamie will never go to it. Jamie believes in fundamentals. Jamie believes in being more fundamentally sound than the other team: not turning the ball over, not taking bad shots and not getting lost on defense while playing exotic defenses. If you have that and play smart and tough, you have a recipe for success. He is like a lot of coaches we have had in football and basketball: Stubborn, set in his ways, does not adjust scheme to the talent on his roster, will not changeup to deal with the strengths or weaknesses of individual opponents.

His style can and did win when he has Jamie Dixon type players. The problem is he does not.

Next year Young stays at the 5 backed up Nix. Artis is at the 4 backed up by Jeter. D.Johnson is at the 3 backed up by C.Jones. Robinson stays at the 1. Young, Artis, D.Johnson and J.Robinson all play 30+ minutes a game. If Uchebo and Haughton leave, I would take the best two guards I can possibly find.

I would replace Barton with a Philly recruiter. Philly kids are tough.
This post was edited on 3/5 1:35 PM by gary2

 

[DT_PITT]

Re: I don't agree with ...


"He is like a lot of coaches we have had in football and basketball: Stubborn, set in his ways, does not adjust scheme to the talent on his roster, will not changeup to deal with the strengths or weaknesses of individual opponents."

This is all coaches, really. Not just Pitt coaches.

I also don't believe there aren't any coaches in college who make major changes to deal with strengths or weakness of individual opponents. For example, there isn't a college coach who is going to teach his team a 1-3-1 to play against a team who really struggled with it last week.

But Jamie (and all coaches) DOES make more subtle changes based on the strengths or weakness of opponents. For example, based on the opponent, we will change how we play the ball screen. Sometimes we switch it, and other times we'll hedge it.

Also, sometimes we will switch spots 1-3, while others we'll switch 1-5.

Offensively, you'll see the same kinds of changes game by game. For example, last night we played more four out sets to get Mike the ball, earlier in the shot clock. Against BC, we were running down screen sets to get the ball into the hands of shooters on the perimeter.

These are the kinds of changes that college coaches make.

But using a 1-3-1 defense for one game would be akin to a College Football coach switching from a pro set to an option set for one game, because the team they are playing really struggled with the option.

Switching up defenses like that is something I liked to do when coaching 8th grade, or community or CYO leagues. But it's not something you see much at all from any College Coaches these days. Offenses and defenses have been become much more variable to adjust to what the opponent is doing to you play by play. (That's really what a motion offense is).

 

[gary2]

Re: I don't agree with ...


I was in no way suggesting Jamie go to a 1-3-1 for one game (although Roy Williams brought it out successfully for one half last season).

Some coaches might bleed more clock - see Graham versus Iowa.

Some coaches might blitz more and be less conservative with game day decisions - see Wannstedt throughout his time at Pitt.

Some coaches do switch to the wildcat in the red zone to steal a cheap touchdown using the element of surprise.

Bowling Green had that crazy formation that cost Pitt a quick touchdown.

Mike Brey switched to the burn offense for one year and it worked.

Wichita State and two players blitz Woodall on each side of the screener in our game against them. We were never able to do anything to counter that. One of the next teams that played them (Louisville? I think?) countered by using two screeners.

Jamie and most Pitt coaches I have seen stay with their stuff. There may be some game plans that might be somewhat different but I see very little in game adjustments. I remember the last time Pitt won a game due to a strategic move, Dorsett to fullback versus PSU. It has not happened much.

We have had this conversation before. I have said I like a coach who plays all the clubs in his bag. The kind of coach that wins some games on strategy, particularly in game strategy. If that means full court press out of the blue on a made basket, or changing off and not covering the in bounder. The element of surprise can steal you a basket or two and that can be the difference.

Or maybe going big against Vir,Tech and attempting to put them away with rebounds and fouls when rebounding and size is their weakness. Or maybe pressing Miami when they were down to their third point guard and we were not stopping them anyway.

How about fouling at the end of the half last night with a foul to give ? Or fouling with a 3 point lead? or taking a calculated risk and fouling with a nine point lead and little time remaining doing the math on the limited possessions left in the game when only threes can truly bring the other team back (Vir.Tech)?

Why did it take so long to determine who to play and where to play them?

Jamie is a great coach doing things his way. He is not going to change much and I would not want him to. I thought we were discussing if a change to 1-3-1 might benefit this defensively challenged team next year. I think we all know it was just an exercise.


This post was edited on 3/5 3:10 PM by gary2


This post was edited on 3/5 3:24 PM by gary2

This post was edited on 3/5 4:04 PM by gary2

 

[DT_PITT]

I would contend ...


... that Dixon (and most coaches) do much of the stuff you mentioned. (Except this: "taking a calculated risk and fouling with a nine point lead and little time remaining doing the math on the limited possessions left in the game when only threes can truly bring the other team") I'm not sure there's a coach in college or pros that would ever go for this.

Sometimes doing stuff works, and deserves credit. Sometimes playing all the clubs in the bag doesn't work as well.

What I think most coaches do, and Dixon certainly falls into this category, is doing the things that they practice.

And if doing almost only what they practice wins lots of games, coaches deserve credit for that as well.

 

[recruitsreadtheseboards]

Re: There's probably a reason so few teams play it ...

Originally posted by DT_PITT:
... cause it's tough to get right. One thing I seem to have noticed. It seems to give most teams (including us) fits the first trip it's seen. Then after that, I notice it gets burned quite a lot.

I loved Dr. Roy's 1-3-1 with Carlton Neverson running the baseline. I loved it so much that I later taught it to my community league team when I was in 11th grade. (My first coaching job!) I played Neverson's spot along the baseline, which I was able to do quite well many sprained knees and some 50+lbs ago.

But if you recall, Chipman used it to get to the NCAA's when we played in the A-10. Didn't work so well in the Big East.

When I was a freshman in 84, I asked Curtis Aiken if they would be playing anymore 1-3-1 in the coming year (Curtis was a soph). He said: "Not with me on the baseline. Not in the Big East!"

Didn't we run that with little Georgie Allen underneath?

 

[Harve74]

Re: There's probably a reason so few teams play it ...

George was short but was solid like a a fireplug. Not quite the shoulders of Levance but I'd never call him little.

 

[gary2]

Re: There's probably a reason so few teams play it ...

George Allen - Was he the kid that did not graduate from high school? Didn't he miss a breakaway dunk or something that cost us a game against Duquesne?