Round 2 Game 2: Joe the Panther Fan vs. ThirteenNINE

Joe the Panther Fan vs. ThirteenNINE

  • Joe the Panther Fan

    Votes: 15 39.5%
  • ThirteenNINE

    Votes: 23 60.5%

  • Total voters
    38
  • Poll closed .

Ski11585

Athletic Director
Gold Member
Oct 25, 2008
18,872
10,219
113
Reminder:

Please evaluate the teams based on each players best single season AT PITT ONLY. Professional basketball or transfer seasons elsewhere do not count towards evaluating the teams.

No more pinned threads since people complained!

@Joe the Panther Fan
PG - James Robinson 10.2 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 5.0 apg
SG - Garrick Thomas 8.2 ppg, 2.2 rpg, 44.7% 3%
SF - Clyde Vaughan 21.9 ppg, 9.2 rpg
PF - Chris Gant 10.0 ppg, 7.4 rpg
C - Jaime Peterson 13.9 ppg, 9.4 rpg
Extra Dude - Billy Culbertson 6.8 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 5.4 apg

VS

@thirteenNINE
PG: Ashton Gibbs: 16.8 ppg, 2.0 rpg, 2.4 apg
SG: Brad Wanamaker: 11.7 ppg, 5.2 rpg, 5.1 apg
SF: Rod Brokin: 13.0 ppg, 3.9 rpg, 1.6 apg
PF: Justin Champaigne: 12.7 ppg, 7.0 rpg, 0.7 apg
C: Andre Williams: 9.1 ppg, 5.0 rpg, 1.0 apg
6: Dante Taylor: 5.1 ppg, 4.3 rpg, 0.3 apg
 

thirteenNINE

Heisman Winner
Gold Member
Dec 20, 2007
8,018
5,220
113
Yaj48yO.png


Short story long, my team is designed to get buckets and chew bubblegum and we're all out of bubblegum.

I've surrounded Brad, one of the best shot creators in Pitt history, with two of the best three point shooters in Pitt history, an ultra efficient off of the ball scorer who doesn't turn the ball over, and a rotation of two-way big men who use their possessions and don't need a lot of the ball to be successful. We'll be running top/bottom mover/blocker concepts on offense to free up Gibbs and Brookin for threes, getting corner cuts off of screens from Champagnie, and using high screen and roll action from Brad and the 5s.

Defense isn't our strong suit but Taylor and Williams were solid position defenders on the inside and Brad was a great man to man perimeter defender so it will be good enough given how efficiently that we will be scoring points on the other end. Rebounding isn't an issue, in fact it's something of a strong suit, as every player outside of Gibbs was a very good rebounder for their position with Taylor and Champagnie being very good on the offensive glass.

I expect this team to score 1.2 points every trip down the court no matter the opposition and that's a number that's going to be pretty tough to beat.
 

Ajntrw

Freshman
Gold Member
Mar 18, 2018
1,331
1,887
113
so how did you image the excel spreadsheet in there?

i haven't been able to do that...
 

thirteenNINE

Heisman Winner
Gold Member
Dec 20, 2007
8,018
5,220
113
so how did you image the excel spreadsheet in there?

i haven't been able to do that...

Oh it's a pain in the ass on rivals' board and always drove me nuts when doing the Cup 'o Stats. You have to use your cutting tool to create an image file of the fields that you want, then upload that to an image hosting site, then copy that address into the image field.
 

Ski11585

Athletic Director
Gold Member
Oct 25, 2008
18,872
10,219
113
Yaj48yO.png


Short story long, my team is designed to get buckets and chew bubblegum and we're all out of bubblegum.

I've surrounded Brad, one of the best shot creators in Pitt history, with two of the best three point shooters in Pitt history, an ultra efficient off of the ball scorer who doesn't turn the ball over, and a rotation of two-way big men who use their possessions and don't need a lot of the ball to be successful. We'll be running top/bottom mover/blocker concepts on offense to free up Gibbs and Brookin for threes, getting corner cuts off of screens from Champagnie, and using high screen and roll action from Brad and the 5s.

Defense isn't our strong suit but Taylor and Williams were solid position defenders on the inside and Brad was a great man to man perimeter defender so it will be good enough given how efficiently that we will be scoring points on the other end. Rebounding isn't an issue, in fact it's something of a strong suit, as every player outside of Gibbs was a very good rebounder for their position with Taylor and Champagnie being very good on the offensive glass.

I expect this team to score 1.2 points every trip down the court no matter the opposition and that's a number that's going to be pretty tough to beat.

200.gif
 

Ajntrw

Freshman
Gold Member
Mar 18, 2018
1,331
1,887
113
Oh it's a pain in the ass on rivals' board and always drove me nuts when doing the Cup 'o Stats. You have to use your cutting tool to create an image file of the fields that you want, then upload that to an image hosting site, then copy that address into the image field.

ok too much work for me -- I'll continue to play the cut and paste game from excel to word to here....
 

Joe the Panther Fan

All P I T T !
Jul 6, 2001
32,011
13,071
113
Let's run this down.

I'm better at the point. Gibbs was certainly the better player, but he was no point guard. As evidenced by the fact that the season that thirteen is using is not the season that he was the point guard. Gibbs was much better as a two than a one.

He's much better than me at the two, no argument there.

Rob Brookin makes the all time Pitt "what if" team, but here in the real world my three has an advantage over his. A huge advantage.

Champagnie is going to be a better basketball player than Gant but this is about how they were in the seasons in question. He isn't better yet. Call it a push.

Peterson is better than Andre Williams. Better scorer, better rebounder, better defender. Advantage me.

The bench guys are two completely different types of players, so I'm not sure what the best way to compare them is. A decent point guard versus a decent big. I guess it depends on what you are looking for.

I'm not sure how thirteen's team stops mine on offense. Vaughan would absolutely destroy Brookin. If they come double with Wanamaker on the perimeter to try to stop him they leave my 45% three point shooter open. If he starts with Wanamaker on Vaughan, Vaughan takes him down in the paint and scores on him at will, and you still have the problem of where can you double from that won't cost you somewhere else.

For the people that like offense this is going to be the game for them. But I have, by far, the best offensive player in this game. I win in a shootout.
 

SoufOaklin4Life

Lair Hall of Famer
Jan 7, 2004
75,715
14,114
113
Another State of Mind
Let's run this down.

I'm better at the point. Gibbs was certainly the better player, but he was no point guard. As evidenced by the fact that the season that thirteen is using is not the season that he was the point guard. Gibbs was much better as a two than a one.

He's much better than me at the two, no argument there.

Rob Brookin makes the all time Pitt "what if" team, but here in the real world my three has an advantage over his. A huge advantage.

Champagnie is going to be a better basketball player than Gant but this is about how they were in the seasons in question. He isn't better yet. Call it a push.

Peterson is better than Andre Williams. Better scorer, better rebounder, better defender. Advantage me.

The bench guys are two completely different types of players, so I'm not sure what the best way to compare them is. A decent point guard versus a decent big. I guess it depends on what you are looking for.

I'm not sure how thirteen's team stops mine on offense. Vaughan would absolutely destroy Brookin. If they come double with Wanamaker on the perimeter to try to stop him they leave my 45% three point shooter open. If he starts with Wanamaker on Vaughan, Vaughan takes him down in the paint and scores on him at will, and you still have the problem of where can you double from that won't cost you somewhere else.

For the people that like offense this is going to be the game for them. But I have, by far, the best offensive player in this game. I win in a shootout.
That’s how I broke it down

gave you the edge because James feeding Vaughn and Peterson and locking up Gibbs
 

thirteenNINE

Heisman Winner
Gold Member
Dec 20, 2007
8,018
5,220
113
Yeah, Brad is the point guard here and Ashton is off of the ball. They just weren't listed that way in the database so I'm playing by the rules.
 

Sean Miller Fan

Lair Hall of Famer
Oct 30, 2001
44,022
12,613
113
Hmmmm.

1 team has the backcourt from a #1 seed. The other team has the frontcourt from Pitt's all-time worst team pre-Stallings and the backcourt of Robinson/Thomas dont add much. I'm not sure they can stay within 30 after pulling a massive 1st Round upset.
 

Joe the Panther Fan

All P I T T !
Jul 6, 2001
32,011
13,071
113
Hmmmm.

1 team has the backcourt from a #1 seed. The other team has the frontcourt from Pitt's all-time worst team pre-Stallings and the backcourt of Robinson/Thomas dont add much. I'm not sure they can stay within 30 after pulling a massive 1st Round upset.


For anyone still on the fence, consider this endorsement of my opponent from the guy who "knows" basketball.

If that doesn't convince you my team is better I don't know what will!
 

Sean Miller Fan

Lair Hall of Famer
Oct 30, 2001
44,022
12,613
113
For anyone still on the fence, consider this endorsement of my opponent from the guy who "knows" basketball.

If that doesn't convince you my team is better I don't know what will!

Basketball 101

Players who play on historically bad teams typically aren't very good. Response?
 

Joe the Panther Fan

All P I T T !
Jul 6, 2001
32,011
13,071
113
I'd like to get a ruling from the administrators if I could.

Is it Ok for me to start whining and moaning now that the only reason I'm losing is because I understand basketball and none of you other dummies do and that most of you people just can't comprehend my brilliance, or do I need to wait until the voting is complete?
 

Sean Miller Fan

Lair Hall of Famer
Oct 30, 2001
44,022
12,613
113
The notion that there are never any good players on bad teams is moronic. As anyone who understands any sport, let alone basketball, knows.

Dude, 40% of your starters were on the WORST modern-era Pitt team pre-Stallings. Then you have Garrick Thomas, another guy who played on bad teams. You have Clyde Vaughn and a mediocre PG. That's it. Your team blows because you have no idea what it takes for winning basketball. Peterson and Gant were losing basketball players. Period. Are there good players on bad teams? Yes. Put calling 2 of 5 players on a team so bad it had to have Nate Cochran the punter and Orlando Antigua's brother (who was a team manager) play major minutes, good is laughable. That was arguably the worst Pitt team ever besides the 0-19 team.

Oh, but stats. Yea, stats. Terribe team but stats.
 

DT_PITT

Lair Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Jul 17, 2001
38,434
17,678
113
Dude, 40% of your starters were on the WORST modern-era Pitt team pre-Stallings. Then you have Garrick Thomas, another guy who played on bad teams. You have Clyde Vaughn and a mediocre PG. That's it. Your team blows because you have no idea what it takes for winning basketball. Peterson and Gant were losing basketball players. Period.

Ummm ... don't you think you are taking this a tad too seriously?
 

Fk_Pitt

Lair Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Dec 3, 2007
36,274
24,440
113
The notion that there are never any good players on bad teams is moronic. As anyone who understands any sport, let alone basketball, knows.
So the same notion holds true for players like his PG (Sean Miller) who would not have had the career he did if on a Stallings or Willard team. What if Tray Woodall or Xavier Johnson played on that Charles Smith team? Think they might be valued a bit more? SMF...SMH.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HOF Coach

Joe the Panther Fan

All P I T T !
Jul 6, 2001
32,011
13,071
113
Dude, 40% of your starters were on the WORST modern-era Pitt team pre-Stallings. Then you have Garrick Thomas, another guy who played on bad teams. You have Clyde Vaughn and a mediocre PG. That's it. Your team blows because you have no idea what it takes for winning basketball. Peterson and Gant were losing basketball players. Period. Are there good players on bad teams? Yes. Put calling 2 of 5 players on a team so bad it had to have Nate Cochran the punter and Orlando Antigua's brother (who was a team manager) play major minutes, good is laughable. That was arguably the worst Pitt team ever besides the 0-19 team.


It's as if you cannot comprehend that the reason that those teams were bad wasn't because of players like Peterson and Gant, it was precisely because they had to play people like Cochran and Mahdi Sprull. You get that that isn't those player's faults, don't you?

But no, you are right. Bad teams simply do not have good players on them. For instance from the 84-85 season to the 86-87 season the Chicago Bulls winning percentage was .439. They had a 30 win season in there (a winning percentage strikingly similar to the Pitt team in question). They only made the playoffs because pretty much everyone in the NBA made the playoffs in those years. In those three playoff series they won a grand total of one game. They stunk. It's pretty clear that it's just not possible that they could have had any good players on those teams. After all, anyone who looked even decent only looked that way because someone had to score the ball and get rebounds, right? Anyone who played on those crappy teams obviously stunk.

Even that dude who made second team all NBA one of those season and first team all NBA in one of the others. Clearly those idiots voting on those all league teams back then didn't know basketball nearly as well as you.

The fact that you think that you know basketball better than the guys who voted Jaime Peterson second team all Big East, guys like Jim Calhoun, Jim Boeheim, John Thompson and Leonard Hamilton, is hilarious.

Jester.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ski11585