If it's like the past decade of stallings career- it won't be successful.
Since he struggled in a weak conference.
Saddiq Bey
- Thread starter gary2
- Start date
Since he struggled in a weak conference.
It is amazing how Brandin Knight is killing it in recruiting at Rutgers. Now that he doesn't have mumbles as his boss.
You mean the guy who led the program to 2 number one seeds before Brandon became an assistant?
Something changed after the Birch class and JD was recruiting Pitt straight to the bottom of the ACC . That man was no longer the same coach/recruiter who brought Pitt two number one seeds .
This is the exact turning point, and it's regretful that nobody is interested in exposing why. Was it the administration appalled at what it took to get Birch (which was likely totally normal tactics for any other serious program) and cracked down (explaining why the assistant that got Birch also skedaddled) .... or did the experience sour Dixon himself on recruiting top prospects, so he doubled down on getting the easiest guys he could?
I can't believe the latter is true because once forced out, Dixon was immediately back on the horse, happy to bring in a great (i.e., sleazy) recruiter and recruiting higher level players.
It definitely looks like the administration went "JD" (J. Dennis) on JD (Dixon).
Administration apologists can now scoff and blame the cheap fans.
They never should have recruited Birch. He was athletic as heck but a had an exaggerated view of himself out of touch with reality. Did Birch ever develop any real basketball skills? All he was capable of was blocking shots and dunking when he was briefly at Pitt. They turned away a guy who had already committed and turned out to be a better player when they opted for Birch. What an awful mistake!!!
But he was a higher rated player ! The ones everybody now craves !
Say what you want but had he stayed at Pitt he'd have made a positive impact on the program .
I do think some things changed after Birch, but recruiting didn't go straight south after that.
The class the following year had Top 10 Adams and Top 75 Robinson. The following year, we brought in Young, Artis and Newkirk -- again not a terrible haul. It was the following two years where Dixon really struggled.
I would agree, I don't recall anyone on this board calling him "a really good coach" although I have seen him called "a good coach" quite a number of times and heard a few posters say he is regarded by other coaches "as an offensive genius." The latter remark may be regarded as the same as calling him "a really good coach" I suppose.
Personally, I have been castigated for being too negative about his coaching ability because I believe (just my opinion) he has a history of recruiting well (better than Dixon did) but underperforming his talent level in terms of Ws vs Ls. In other words, I have seen him as an upgrade in recruiting but a downgrade in utilizing the talent on hand and therefore not a net improvement over Dixon. I am hoping he proves me wrong.
Last edited:
As someone close to the situation, why do you think that happened? I don't think JD was working any less hard.
If you look at things--except for the weird CBI year with all those injuries, every successful season had a good post player and good post play. Think Troutman, Ontario Lett, Big Fella, Gary McGhee, Adams, and Zanna's senior season. After that we had no decent post player recruited and no decent post play. That was the killer!
Mike Young could have been that player if he embraced that role. Jeter could have contributed more if he played more inside. Unfortunately with no other choices, and the inability of both head coaches to break Young and Jeter (even Artis could have helped more inside) from their perimeter tendencies, we were forced to watch the basketball of the Young, Artis and Jeter era. It may seem crazy to say this, but the visual was even more disturbing to me than the actual results.
You need to recruit players willing to play in the paint. At this point, I don't know that Stallings has done a good job of that. Brown and Chuckwuka look like perimeter bigs. Samson definitely know where the paint is. Peace and Stevenson look capable of playing in the paint.
Last edited:
That piece of the puzzle is pretty simple. He didn't think Adams would leave so soon, and then Malcolm Gilbert didn't develop and left the program. You can't really find freshmen bigs who can walk in and fill that hole (like a Blair), so he just kept cycling through grad transfers and JUCOs. That was only two seasons, and he did sign Luther.
You act like he didn't have verbals from Rowan and Heron, and then going hard on whoever that MSU (?) kid was they were chasing. If anything, you've got the problem entirely backward. Dixon was still chasing those high level kids and ended up striking out, then settling for Plan C recruits after so much lost time.
Dixon had been lauded earlier in his career for not wasting time chasing kids that wouldn't play for him. His biggest downfall was losing sight of who was in that mold and who wasn't. Maybe he fumbled Heron and Rowan, or maybe each of those had their own specific reasons for blowing us off. Regardless, losing those two is likely one of the top reasons he is not our coach anymore.
I totally agree that Dixon and staff were always working just as hard to get recruits. That's a narrative that has cropped up here that really has no merit.
What I believe happened more than anything else is Dixon message and resolve to stick to that message started working against him.
When Dixon was getting solid recruits, he what he was selling was "working hard, learning the system and getting better, commitment to defense, and going to class as a student athlete. To the last point, the first place that Dixon took recruits on official visits was to meet Chancellor Nordenberg (I don't know if that practice was continued with the new Chancellor). This is not a practice that happens at many (or most) recruiting visits.
I do think that some of those recruiting "values" of Dixon were stretched (and perhaps forgone) when Birch was recruited. When Birch was here, after 10 games he thought (and was being told by those close to him) that he should have been playing much more, even though his play didn't warrant that, and he was starting anyway.
Birch wasn't ever really "bought into" what Dixon wanted. If you remember, Tray Woodall's quote around that time was "Pitt Basketball is not for everyone."
From that point on, it's my take that Dixon delivered that message to potential recruits so that he could get the guys who really wanted "Pitt Basketball" instead of trying to sell guys on Pitt Basketball. For example, I know Dixon's reluctance to promise starting jobs or playing time caused some key recruits to go elsewhere.
Another issue was Dixon's reluctance to break rules. In fact, I once heard from someone who would know that Dixon wouldn't even do some things that would have been within the rules.
Beyond that, what Dixon had to "sell" wasn't quite as appealing. Around 2008, working hard to be a huge part of a new great program in the Big East was something that was appealing to recruits. In 2014, this same kind of message was somewhat tired. And if you believe that Dixon isn't a great natural salesman and his assistants weren't enough help, one can see how it all adds up to real recruiting struggles over his last three years.
This all makes sense now when we realize that Dixon isn't having any problems getting recruits at TCU. He's got a new message that is much easier for him to sell -- "come by a part of a program we are going to build to the top of the Big 12." This is a message that fits Dixon and his coaching style well and he can deliver successfully.
Didn't Birch have a terrific game at Penn then started playing less minutes soon after? I think he barely played versus Oklahoma State and that was his last game as a Panther.
Birch should have been playing more due to his shot-blocking ability but it seemed his heart was never into Pitt from the start. These comments from other players about him I never understood. None of them had a leg to stand on at the time.
Birch should have been playing more due to his shot-blocking ability but it seemed his heart was never into Pitt from the start. These comments from other players about him I never understood. None of them had a leg to stand on at the time.
His heart wasn't in Pitt from the very start. If you recall he left campus for three days at the start of the semester.
In Khem's first few games, he was playing behind Nasir at the four, and playing very little. He was also playing pretty poorly. Against Albany, he had 2 points and 3 rebounds in 17 minutes.
So for the Penn game, the fifth game of the year, Dante Taylor got hurt, and Khem was inserted as the starter at center. He had 15 points and 10 rebounds against a team that started 4 guards.
Khem played 29 minutes that following game, but played less against Duquesne when Dante returned (Dante had 15 points and 11 rebounds against the Dukes).
Khem continued to start and split time with Dante, but the reality is that Dante was producing more effectively. In the fateful OK State game, Khem struggled early and picked up 2 quick fouls and that's why he played only 15 minutes.
I think the truth is the Khem was getting all the playing time he deserved to that point.
And like we both said, he never really wanted to be here anyway.
I watched two different interactions with Birch and his teammates at Greentree and while I'm sure giving the new kids a tough time is somewhat normal I got the feeling that there was a little animosity towards him from the other players . Maybe nothing , but maybe not .
"come by a part of a program we are going to build to the top of the Big 12."
Why would "come be a part of a program we are going to build to the top of the ACC", be different?
Maybe an even better message (to those Duke and UNC rejected recruits) would be:
'I took Pitt to the top of the Big East, now I aim to do the same in the ACC." (Of course, one would need to believe that and be committed to that in order to credibly sell it).
Last edited:
All I'm suggesting is that is Dixon has a whole new message to sell at TCU, sort of starting from scratch or him. Maybe that's what he needed, and it appears that it's working for him.
But that's not really not what we need to worry about, one way or another. Our reality is that we have a new coach who doesn't yet seem to have figured out what his message is to sell recruits. I'm hoping that perhaps Stallings can start convincing some top recruits that he can take Pitt to the top of the Big East.
I think he will have a tough time convincing them that he can take Pitt to the top of the BIG EAST..... heck, he'll have a tough enough time convincing them that he can take Pitt to the top of the ACC ....... LOL !
I continue to suspect that JD burned his bridges with post players at Pitt because of the way he used Adams -actually the way he didn't use Adams.
Anyone going against Pitt for a post player could show stats on how infrequently Adams touched the ball. We rarely passed the ball into our future NBA center. He mainly touched the ball if he got a rebound -- even against the cupcakes!
It was maddening to this fan.
I think by going far away and hiring better recruiters with a counter message, JD has perhaps been able to put a little distance between himself and this issue. Would have been tough to do had he stayed at Pitt, IMHO.
Go Pitt
Anyone going against Pitt for a post player could show stats on how infrequently Adams touched the ball. We rarely passed the ball into our future NBA center. He mainly touched the ball if he got a rebound -- even against the cupcakes!
It was maddening to this fan.
I think by going far away and hiring better recruiters with a counter message, JD has perhaps been able to put a little distance between himself and this issue. Would have been tough to do had he stayed at Pitt, IMHO.
Go Pitt
I don't imagine that there was one coach in the country that recruited against Jamie Dixon by saying "just look at how he ruined Steven Adams, he was only the 12th pick in the NBA draft!"
And if any of them did, Dixon should have sent them a thank you note.
And even so, he played (desperation) minutes his freshman year and is likely the most talented big we have. If Luther is evidence that Dixon was a recruiting failure, then what we have now is downright shameful.
The point is, Luther was the kind of developmental Big that Dixon had groomed for a decade prior. Saying that he failed to bring any in, in a span as short as two classes, is an odd allegation to hang one's hat on. If you want to complain about his whiffing on PGs and SGs for more than two classes, you'd have a much stronger point.
In the spring before Birch came here, Pat Skerry took the job at Towson. He made some comments that gave the impression that he might consider going elsewhere. That talk ended however, when he was presented with a better understanding that he had already signed a binding letter of intent.
I know Luther has to be considered a big on this team, but is he really a big?
How tall is he? What area of the court is he most effective?
I'm not sure how you could argue he isn't. He's certainly not a guard. I'd argue he plays a more typical "big" game than we saw from our C Young last year.
Maybe he'll be Stallings' new PG this year?
Yeah Joe, any hot-shot HS post player would love to come to Pitt under JD and hardly ever touch the ball. That's a great selling point.
You won't get any offensive stats (what kid cares about scoring points?) but we'll show you how to hedge...
Go Pitt.
Luther is what 6-7? He did guard the other teams fives but was/is that a positive? It seemed to me he scored the majority of his points from the perimeter. I don't think he resembles in any way previous developmental bigs. His body type and offensive game are completely different.
He is a senior, yet I believe you have him tagged as a 20 mpg, 6-8 ppg scorer and 4-5 rpg rebounder. He has yet to play at that level. I think you also have expressed concerns about his ability to shoulder more of a load.
On this team he has to be considered a big. What I am saying is that is not much to hang your hat on.
If he is the best big you point to for a Dixon recruiting success, you are really straining.
Many on this board felt his injury last season had almost no impact on our final record. How good can he be?
I thought his loss because of the impact on our depth, hurt the team greatly, many others disagreed.
Last edited:
The point is that recruiting was suffering big time under JD the last few seasons he was here . He whiffed on all his main targets otherwise Luther wouldn't be a Panther and Cam would never have been offered a scholarship . Had he recruited the players he wanted he'd still be the head coach of the university he never wanted to leave . Even when he landed a 4 * in DWilson it turned out to be an underachieving player who was over rated .
On paper this class doesn't have the pizazz ( hype ) we'd all like to see , but let's at least give them a chance to play before we pass judgement .
Everyone also questions KS ability to coach , I personally never folowed Vanderbilt bb and there's no disputing that last season was definitely a disaster here at Pitt , but with these recruits we'll definitely see his coaching abilities .
I really see no reason for your constant gloom and negativity , if everything's as bad as you say it is then it will hasten the change you so desire and if it's not we will all be pleasantly surprised .
Stevan Adams would've been no higher than the 12th pick in the draft no matter where he played college ball .
I would disagree with you on one thing. Neither Young nor Jeter were low post players. It wasn't their refusal to play that role but that they were physically unsuited. Young was too short at 6-8 (despite being listed as taller) and didn't make up for it with either width and wingspan (think width and wingspan with Lett and Big Fella) or extra hops (think Zanna). Jeter was shorter than Zanna and lacked Zanna's rebounding and shot blocking skills and not physical enough to play post. Dixon recognized this so he tried unsuccessfully to get grad transfer posts who might be adequate but none of them worked out.
