He's listed as 6'9" which is the same as Peace and 1" shorter than Brown.
Luther has scored 196 points on 2s, 63 points on 3s, and 55 points on FTs. He made a whopping 9 threes last year over 21 games.
Saddiq Bey
- Thread starter gary2
- Start date
He's listed as 6'9" which is the same as Peace and 1" shorter than Brown.
Luther has scored 196 points on 2s, 63 points on 3s, and 55 points on FTs. He made a whopping 9 threes last year over 21 games.
I don't know this answer. How many points did he score in the paint? Perimeter includes jump shots other than threes. Do you consider him a capable inside player on offense or defense? I have not seen post up play on offense and he can and does get backed down on defense.
He is not a big. He is yet another 6-7 small forward asked to be one. That has been our recent history. Everyone has the same size and skill set, there was no position distribution.
Which is the point I made, refuting the premise in the comment to which I replied. He whiffed on top tier recruits. He did not give up after Birch, he just failed to actually sign any.
Ryan Luther is not a star, but he's not garbage. He's developed over his career, as did previous bigs under Dixon. Is he really worse than Tyrell Biggs? Levon Kendall? Mark McCarroll?
I liked Kendall a great deal. The other two, with a good senior season, Luther is in the ballpark. Biggs may have been even shorter, though broader, than Luther.
Stallings openly mocked (though never corrected) the heights Pitt lists for many players on the official Pitt roster. Many on the board have commented on this as well. I don't think many believe Luther is 6-9.
I wasn't aware that you carried a tape measure to the Pete. Thanks for correcting me.
What?
This wasn't my point at all.
I never said any of this. Straining? I wasn't even thinking about Dixon. I was just confirming that he played the five.
This makes no sense at all.
The post answered some of levance's points made around both ends of your - well Luther defended the five post.
My first sentence or two asked do you want a 6-7 player defending the five and how effective was/is that?
I then moved on to some of levances's other points made before and after your post. I may have used some of what you had said long, previously about Luther in hopes that it would carry some weight with levance.
I hope that makes sense to you.
Again, all I was saying was that Ryan has played the five. Don't know where you got straining to support Dixon.
Again, that part of my post was in response to levance (though not in direct reply) who posted this in reply to Fsgolfdr:
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.
I am sorry if I confused the issue by making it appear that my entire post was directed to/at you, rather than the more broad discussion that was included in that portion of the thread.
Last edited:
I don't know what "subliminal" intent you are reading into this to couch my calling Luther a "Plan C recruit" as some sort of Dixon defense.
- 2012-13 - Taylor (SR), Zanna (JR), Adams (FR)
- 2013-14 - Zanna (SR), Randall (JR), Uchebo (SO), Young (FR), Artis (FR)
- 2014-15 - Randall (SR), Uchebo (JR), Haughton (JR), Young (SO), Artis (SO), Jeter (SO), Luther (FR)
- 2015-16 - Maia (SR), Ododa (SR), Young (JR), Artis (JR), Jeter (JR), Nix (JR), Luther (SO)
The original quote only discussed the 2014 and 2015 classes, in which Dixon brought in 6 players (including Jeter). It is hard to argue that anyone beyond Haughton and Nix was a bust. The 2016 class is where things get shaky, but we'll never really know what Manigault might have done under Dixon. He had buzz at the time.
I think there were far worse strategic errors than his handling of bigs. Other than Cam, who was the last good guard Dixon signed? It is way easier to find a capable freshman guard than a center, and Dixon wasn't augmenting with grad transfer guards or JUCOs to the extent he was with bigs. Beyond Robinson and DJohnson in 2012-13, you'd really have to go back to Gibbs and Woodall in 2008-09 as legit guards. I think that's a far worse indictment.
Steven Adams does the same things with OKC that he did in his year at Pitt. Steven Adams is now making $25 million per season. Only a Pitt fan could somehow spin that as a negative on Pitt. I will guarantee you, absolutely 100% guarantee you, that no college basketball coach in the country ever used the fact that Steven Adams came to Pitt as raw as he was and "only" ended up the 12th pick in the NBA draft one year later and when he signed his first non-rookie contract he "only" got $25 million per season against Pitt or Dixon. Because there are no college basketball coaches out there that are so damn stupid as to think that was anything other than a huge selling point for Dixon and Pitt.
"Come on kid, why would you want to go to Pitt? That last guy in your situation was only an NBA lottery pick one year later and only signed a $100 million contract as soon as his rookie deal expired. Why on earth would you want any of that?"
Well, in spite of your claimed "huge selling point," Coach Dixon didn't sniff even an average post player after Steven Adams left... Wonder why that was...
Go Pitt
Well it certainly wasn't because other coaches were so damn stupid that they were helping Jamie Dixon recruit kids.
One last time -- what elite or semi-elite post player wants to go to a team where the coaching approach led to an eventual NBA center hardly ever touching the ball?
Opposing recruiters show a kid the stats on how often Pitt fed the ball to Adams and then show stats for how involved the center was at his school. The recruiter shows the kid the wide disparity in the number touches, shots taken and points scored...
One last time -- kids want stats, especially points. You can't score many points if you don't get to touch the ball.
Any "smart" recruiter used this against Pitt and Coach Dixon on every center recruit because the stats were so damning against Pitt...
Go Pitt.
Opposing recruiters show a kid the stats on how often Pitt fed the ball to Adams and then show stats for how involved the center was at his school. The recruiter shows the kid the wide disparity in the number touches, shots taken and points scored...
One last time -- kids want stats, especially points. You can't score many points if you don't get to touch the ball.
Any "smart" recruiter used this against Pitt and Coach Dixon on every center recruit because the stats were so damning against Pitt...
Go Pitt.
Kids don't want "stats", they want dollars. Steven Adams got a lot of them. Recruiting against Pitt on the account of a guy who became a lottery pick one year after being a raw recruit and who signed a $25 million per season contract when his rookie deal ran out would be so completely, utterly moronic that I can't believe that anyone could seriously be suggesting it.
Ask any kid in the country, you can average 17 points per game in college and be a second round draft pick and generally an NBA afterthought or you can average 7 points per game in college and be a lottery pick and sign a second contract worth $25 million per year and every single guy picks the second option. Literally every single one of them.
Ask any kid in the country, you can average 17 points per game in college and be a second round draft pick and generally an NBA afterthought or you can average 7 points per game in college and be a lottery pick and sign a second contract worth $25 million per year and every single guy picks the second option. Literally every single one of them.
The have been players with similar stats coming out of UK and Kansas, also drafted high. This happens with big men sometimes.
There's no way Stevan Adams experience while at Pitt hurt Pitts future recruiting .
Pitts development of Stevan Adams had no factor on his draft position . He'd have been a lottery pick no matter where he played . NBA drafts potential not stats not hype .
Not being able to get anyone capable to replace SA along with a point guard ( to replace JRob ) and a shooting guard ( ever ) tells you just how bad JDs recruiting had become .
Pitts development of Stevan Adams had no factor on his draft position . He'd have been a lottery pick no matter where he played . NBA drafts potential not stats not hype .
Not being able to get anyone capable to replace SA along with a point guard ( to replace JRob ) and a shooting guard ( ever ) tells you just how bad JDs recruiting had become .
The guard recruiting is the worse indictment for sure. (I don't think you can even include Durand as he was really only a three, and really only had half of a decent season.)
Losing out on Rowan really screwed things up.
Now way Luther is 6-9, he is at best 6-7 1/2.
That said, everyone bumps listed heights by 1 1/2 inches give or take a half inch.
He has scored a good bit on put backs, he has a sneaky knack for getting a rebound or pass and scoring quickly, albeit as a secondary threat.
I can't imagine he is going to be a primary post scoring threat.
Bloody shame he did not redshirt, and bloody shame he had his junior year (when a kid starts to round out as a player) derailed by his injury.
That said, everyone bumps listed heights by 1 1/2 inches give or take a half inch.
He has scored a good bit on put backs, he has a sneaky knack for getting a rebound or pass and scoring quickly, albeit as a secondary threat.
I can't imagine he is going to be a primary post scoring threat.
Bloody shame he did not redshirt, and bloody shame he had his junior year (when a kid starts to round out as a player) derailed by his injury.
