Saddiq Bey
- Thread starter gary2
- Start date
I would be thrilled if we could get him and/or Forrester.
This time last year we had a run of pretty solid top 125ish type kids who they were in on and the coaches felt good about, but it ended up being a brutal series of let downs.
That said, the last two commitments (the late juco add aside) have been Stewart and Golden, who are pretty solid adds.
Again, I hold out that slim hope that the retool of the staff will improve the results in recruiting.
Keeping mind that when the dust settles I probably will be let down, but my hope is to get Forrester with the JUCO guards, that would be a decent class.
That said, the last two commitments (the late juco add aside) have been Stewart and Golden, who are pretty solid adds.
Again, I hold out that slim hope that the retool of the staff will improve the results in recruiting.
Keeping mind that when the dust settles I probably will be let down, but my hope is to get Forrester with the JUCO guards, that would be a decent class.
I didn't say all of them stink. You questioned people who have "never seen them play" making judgements. Well, the people who get paid to evaluate them and get the best ones saw almost all of them and said, "Thanks, but no thanks." That is a far cry from them saying they are going to be "pretty good", too. Save a couple, practically no one thought they were even worth a flier or a scholarship risk.
And I said SOME of the players coming might be pretty good. To which you said the P5 coaches do not agree.
They are from tge College of Southern Idaho. PG Dayna kingsby and SG Charles Jones Jr.
Kingsby is a really athletic pg, Jones a pretty solid scorer with good size.
They both have a mix of one or two high major, one or two mid/low and a few lower D1 offers.
IMO decent for the ACC. With good coaching and things break right, could push top 5 ...
Wait, you think that class could be top 5? With the two JUCO Gs? Oh my. At least you are drinking the good stuff.
I wasn't saying that it would be a top five class.
I was saying with good good coaching and things falling into place they could be part of a team that could maybe sneak into the top five of the standings in the ACC.
At this point (early in the rebuild), I think we need to get to 7 or 8 first.
But a team of: - Is a team that I agree, could develop into something.
Carr, ???
Stewart, Ellison
Stevenson - ???
Golden, ???
Llegomah, Brown
Plus - George as an energy guy
Like if they land some 5 stars in 2019 and a new HC? Yeah, I'd agree. Otherwise, there seems to be no chance of that. I don't see any (even relatively realistic) scenario Pitt is top 5 in the ACC in 2018-19 or 19-20.
Gary -- I sincerely respect and admire your disposition looking at the potential you see when looking at the players joining the Panthers. I absolutely hope you (and ultimately all fans) are rewarded for your optimism, even if I don't share it.
I feel the same way, DT. I do respect Gary's optimism and hope for this season and for this group of players. They will certainly need all the support they can get. But I just don't share his optimism. Not until we have a coach who can coach them.
I wouldn't say that I have specific issues with his coaching acumen, at least not at the point. But I do not believe we have nearly the talent and potential needed to start moving this team back toward getting in the tournament on a regular basis.
HailToPitt1985, I will tell you what. I will accept your judgement as to if we have started a successful rebuild.
After 10 games (or more if you decide more are needed), you can tell me if YOU think Carr/Stewart/Davis are upgrades over Milligan/Wilson/Kithcart. You can tell me if Peace, Samson. Brown and Chuckwuka are upgrades over Nix/Manigault. You can tell me if you think Frame/Steveson can play or not You can tell me if recruiting has improved or not. We will both have to wait on Ellison and Golden.
I will readily accept YOUR judgement as to if these players have a future or not.
I will also accept your judgement about team chemistry. Is it better minus Young, Artis and Dixon? Do we play smarter, harder and as a team?
Fair?
I certainly am not optimistic about results next season. We will be fielding a freshman team against the other teams varsity.
I am optimistic about how what I laid out above will turn out.
Last edited:
I tend to agree the current players are probably a little better then the older ones you listed above. However it's not near good enough. Feels like having to decide whether to take a ride on the Hindenburg or the Titanic.
To join this part of the conversation, allow me to add how I will judge ...
More or less, little of what happens this year will help me judge where we are going. It's just going to be bad.
The following year is a different story. I won't try to judge individually if I think players have a future or not. And judging if we play smarter or harder is so very difficult.
I believe wins and losses will truly answer all of these question.
Ralph Willard made the NIT in year three. Ben Howland made the NIT in year two.
I'm not saying that I think Stallings needs to make the NIT in year three (2018-2019). But I would like to see a season with clear growth in regards to winning and losing. Something like 7 ACC wins in his third year would do that trick. If we have that kind of season in year three, I believe that would demonstrate that the individual players do have a future.
If we have this kind of season in 18-19, we will have several players who will become Sophomores, Juniors and Seniors in 2019-2020 who will look like they are primed to get a little older, and a little better. That will be a group that should be ready to get back in the tournament (or better) in 19-20.
These are modest goals which should be attainable.
If 18-19 is something like another 4 win ACC season, it will be obvious to me (as it should be to everyone), that the players Stallings has recruited will not move the program forward.
I guess DT I'm not sure why we wouldn't have the expectation that at a minimum we should make the NIT by year three? That's still a far cry from making the actual tourney. I do agree that wins and losses are the ultimate measuring stick.
That certainly seems like a reasonable question for some reasonable expectations of the NIT in year three. I would have no argument if that was someone's stance.
I guess what I'm saying is that I want year three of Stallings to be one that makes any reasonable fan think that year four will be a certain NCAA Tournament team. At this point, it's hard to say exactly what situation would make that true.
But here's an example. If at the end of year three we are playing our best basketball, and a young guy like Carr is a budding star, Stewart is really coming on, Brown is coming into his own and Golden is an ACC All-Freshman performer, 7-11 in the ACC means more to me.
If we are inconsistent all year and Senior Wilson Frame is by and large our best player, and the 2019 recruiting class does not contain a high impact freshman, 7 wins and no NIT means something else.
I don't think anything short of a miracle NCAA berth in 2019 would give me any hope that Stallings should be retained.
NIT in year 3 and an 8-12 seed in year 4 is enough for all of you? That's worse than 2012-2016.
NIT in year 3 and an 8-12 seed in year 4 is enough for all of you? That's worse than 2012-2016.
2012-2016 was the beginning of the end to the end of the end.
2017 is the beginning of the beginning
You do get the difference?
The Mike Young, J.Artis and Jamie Dixon ACC recruiting era did the program no favors. In fact, it inflicted a real toll. It is the reason why the program is where it is today. The program was left without a foundation.
Thankfully that has ended.
I hope we are on our way up. I accept DT's yardstick as a reasonable expectation.
Last edited:
There is no difference. Stallings is being paid hansomely, just like every other coach in the conference. I don't care if he demonstrates incremental progress in somehow eventually moving us up to 13th place.
I don't get the difference.
Last year Stallings had a team capable of at least making the NIT. They were awful. This year, Stallings chose to turnover the entire roster and lost the best returning player, while cutting all of his first year recruits. This year we will be terrible. Next year, he will have a roster that is ENTIRELY his. This is basketball, not football. You need 8 real players in a year to be a good team. He should have a roster with his own recruited Juniors, Sophomores, and Freshman. How can you not expect him to make the NCAAT with that? His lack of interest in recruiting in 2016 (and thus having class of 2016 JRs) and 2017 (until April) doesn't get him a pass.
2016-17 was Stallings beginning. He is paid to coach the team. If he wanted to add players or recruit players to improve last year's team, he could have. The best part about you essentially championing his 2017 class as building us for the future is: He could have done that in 2016, but decided he would do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, despite the fact he was essentially on the same timeline as when he recruited half of the 2017 class. Plus, he was already recruiting 2016 and 2017 at Vandy. It wasn't like he was an NBA coach who just came to college and basically had to start recruiting from scratch. He had YEARS recruiting the 2016 and 2017 classes and chose inaction and then failure.
I guess a point I'm trying to make -- which is likely close to your point -- is that I absolutely don't want to see incremental progress in 2018-2019. I want to see significant progress. How that is actually defined -- NIT or whatever -- I can't say for sure at the moment. I guess I can say that 13th place in the ACC in 2018-2019 is absolutely not what I would consider significant.
Gary, I don't expect for you to accept my judgement because I'm not as knowledgeable as many on here about college hoops, including you. What I look at is improvement, progress throughout the year, and significant improvement by the end of the ACC season. If Stallings can improve this team, and he has demonstrated he can't do that with the previous veteran team, then expecting an NIT bid in year 3 is not out of the question. Possibly and NCAA bid if he's really as good of a coach as some on here seem to think he is.
Like you, I want to see these kids motivated to play hard every play and have the desire to play. It didn't seem like Stallings was able to motivate his players to play like that last year, with possibly the exception of one or 2 games. From his results so far, nothing leads me to believe he is the kind of coach that can motivate like that. But maybe these kids are more easily motivated. I don't know. I do know that Young and Artis, supposedly our best 2 players last year, were short on attitude and motivation.
Yes - the end of the end was and will Ben more successful than the beginning of the beginning
I would expect an ACC record of 7-11 would bring something higher than 13th place.
The first part I agree with. NIT in year 3 is not asking much and should be the low bar.
The last sentence I disagree with. I'm not sure anyone on here thinks Stallings is a really good coach. I do think plenty of people think he's a bumbling idiot of a coach, and when folks disagree it's misinterpreted as thinking he's really good. I think he's Dave Wannstedt, not great but you could do a lot worse.
I also think people are way overselling what was left behind. The band of misfits they just brought in won't be any worse than the players that just transferred. I'm not so convinced he's the guy to build it back up, but I am convinced they were going to crash and burn no matter who was coaching.
It's his team now and the buck stops with KS. If he can't get to the NIT in year 3, you eat the last years of his buyout and move along.
