I have listened to a ton of podcast interviews with him since he took the job and while he seems like a super nice guy, very smart, articulate, and very offensive-minded (rarely ever mentions defense and rebounding to the point I am worrying), he doesn't seem to have that smooth "salesman-type" personality. Its hard to put a finger on but he doesn't seem as much of a salesman as just a nice guy who likes offense. Kids gravitate towards smooth operators. I was listening to a Pat Chambers interview and he seems to have that slick East Coast sales style down. I'm not sure how successful Stallings's laid back "nice guy" approach will be in living rooms.
Stallings observation
- Thread starter Sean Miller Fan
- Start date
You may not be sure...
...But the guy has a long recruiting track record
He had 2 NBA picks in 2016
And 2 more projected in 2017
Maybe if you devoted less of your life to inane posts--as you approach 20K--this info might have penetrated the darkness
...But the guy has a long recruiting track record
He had 2 NBA picks in 2016
And 2 more projected in 2017
Maybe if you devoted less of your life to inane posts--as you approach 20K--this info might have penetrated the darkness
Says something about his coaching ability then, four first round picks and lost the play in game by 20.
Also, the fact is, his recruiting rankings have generally lagged behind his predecessor here over the past 13 years.
He certainly hasn't gotten off to a good start recruiting-wise.
Also, the fact is, his recruiting rankings have generally lagged behind his predecessor here over the past 13 years.
He certainly hasn't gotten off to a good start recruiting-wise.
Yep, need to repair a program that has gone to NCAA tournament 3 of last 4 years. By hiring a coach who was under .500 in 2 of last 4 years.
Well when you walk into a program that does not have a Division 1 viable point guard or center, I'd say the cupboard is pretty bare. I'd say Pitt basketball needs some pretty heavy duty repairs. Hopefully Stallings can get it done--is not going to be easy in the ACC. Hail to Pitt!
Damon Wilson was a top 100 recruit at PG who showed flashes last year. He looked like Wanamaker or Patterson their freshman years (Wanamaker did play PG then).
The cupboard is far from bare. 6 of top 7 scorers returning. Top 3 rebounders returning. Three seniors starters returning, along with 6th man last year, who is a senior.
They have more experience than just about anyone in the country. The only reason someone would say the cupboard is bare is to provide an excuse for Stallings up front.
The cupboard is far from bare. 6 of top 7 scorers returning. Top 3 rebounders returning. Three seniors starters returning, along with 6th man last year, who is a senior.
They have more experience than just about anyone in the country. The only reason someone would say the cupboard is bare is to provide an excuse for Stallings up front.
Not making any excuses at all--just objective observations. Pitt had a rough go of it last season without a center, and it has not improved for this season. It is always nice to have a "top-ranked" recruit. But the "recruit" has to become a player and perform. Apparently Wilson is not cutting it...or Stallings would not be converting Artis to be his point guard. Young is obviously a gifted player, but you need a PG and Center to truly compete in the ACC. Whether Pitt has a legitimate shooting guard may also be called into question. Time will tell, but to suggest that this 2016-17 Pitt basketball team was built to be competing at the top of the ACC is an incredible stretch. Hail to Pitt!
They definitely would be ranked in the top 5 preseason poll if Dixon was still here will all of the remaining incumbent talent. LOL.
Dear, God. Please take your clown act to the TCU board. Your love affair will be appreciated there. Huge bonus if you take the other 11 apostles with you.
How many Top 100 players?
Dixon landed 1 four star recruit in the last 3 full classes he brought in. That 1 recruit was Wilson who was ranked #100.
I think the point is, and it is pretty obvious, is that the same people that would have expected 25 wins this year from Dixon are now making excuses for stallings.
6 of top 7 scorers from a NCAA tournament team that lost in last 5 seconds to a sweet 16 team.
Top 3 rebounders from a NCAA tournament team that lost in last 5 seconds to a sweet 16 team.
3 senior starters and a senior 6th man from a NCAA tournament team that lost in last 5 seconds to a sweet 16 team.
If you really think the cupboard is bare, then you probably don't watch basketball outside of when Pitt is on.
Stallings is an A+ recruiter. Right? That's what I've read here anyway.
1) There is 1 - Top 100 player in the last 3 classes Dixon brought in.
2) We are a bubble team with or without Dixon.
3) If Dixon wanted to be here and was all in last year during the Big Dance, then we would have beaten Wisky and possibly made the Sweet 16. Playing that Grad Transfer big man against Wisky for all those minutes was ridiculous.
Pretty nice spin job. Those "top scores" and "rebounders" were on a 9-9 ACC team that struggled the entire season. If Pitt were highly ranked in scoring or rebounding your spin may be encouraging for the upcoming season. Unfortunately Pitt ranked 104 in scoring per game and 74th in rebounding--so pretty far from stellar. Pitt was one and done in the Dance, in a game that may have set back college basketball several decades in how poorly it was played. Regardless of who was coaching the Panthers in 2016-17, this is a very flawed team that is going to struggle to surpass what they did last season--which was mediocre. Hail to Pitt!
The old points per game argument. Pitt ranked 28th in offensive efficiency last year. The issue was defense.
Well apparently you did not read the thread--neither poster was making an argument based upon points per game or offensive efficiency. The point was about returning scorers...not efficiency. Take away last years starting point guard...and whether the new addition team will be efficient is anyone's guess. As for defense, rebounding is a big part of that...and last years team was ranked 74th--not good by any measure. Hail to Pitt!
No matter how you cut it, returning 6 of the top 7 scorers, including 4 seniors, 3 of whom were starters (the other the 6th man) from a NCAA Tournament team is far from leaving the cupboard bare.
This team should compete for the upper half of the conference and absolutely should make the NCAA tournament. They are amongst the most experienced teams in the country.
Dixon finished Tied for 9th in the ACC the last two years with these same players. Now you expect Stallings with the same group and a tougher schedule to be in the upper half of the conference. Are you Dixon's agent?
Have you been been paying attention to how this team played under Dixon? The players were tuning Dixon out, the team lacked leadership, it lacked chemistry, and it lacked toughness. Your head is buried in the sand if you think anything was going to change.
And yet, they still made the tournament, still nearly beat a sweet 16 team, and beat a final four team 3 times.
11 wins is the goal this year for a successful year. 9 wins is treading water. Under .500 is awful, and stallings will be on the hot seat hopefully unless things improve drastically on year two.
I don't really care how many wins, I think the baseline is making the tournament. I'll be satisfied with that. I think anything less is a big disappointment.
Stallings not mentioning or talking about defense isn't good. We're not going to outscore that many opponents based purely on offensive output. We're going to need to play even a modicum of defense at some point in the ACC to even finish 12th. Does Stallings even know what that is?
Not using Wilson as your PG also is a head scratcher. This season is turning into a concern even before it starts. Will we get to 12 total wins? Where are the wins, other than some in the OOC and against the bottom feeders in the ACC?
Not using Wilson as your PG also is a head scratcher. This season is turning into a concern even before it starts. Will we get to 12 total wins? Where are the wins, other than some in the OOC and against the bottom feeders in the ACC?
Rooting against a Pitt coach before he even coaches a game. Why are you on a Pitt message board? Go troll elsewhere.
I believe everyone will be surprised and things will end up better than expected.
New coach, new style, players trying to establish themselves with the new guy imo will result in improved results for at least one year.
Hard to say after year one with lots of team player turnover so recruiting is key! If results improve recruiting may as well!
Well hopefully the returning players improve. However, if you have below average players, expecting significant improvement is not logical. Playing in the ACC without a center or a proven point guard was not going to be easy if Dixon returned. Having a less than stellar shooting guard and a team that did not want to rebound or play defense was going to be tough to compete for the top half of the ACC had Dixon returned. I have no idea what to expect of this years squad, but I am hopeful and will be there cheering them on despite the departure of Dixon. While I would have loved to see Pitt make a "splash" hire to replace Dixon, it was not in the cards. I certainly will, and I would hope that all Pitt fans would support the new coach until he demonstrates on the basketball court that he does not merit that support. The harsh comments and constant attacks before a single game is even played is very sad to see and hear.
I met coach in Chapel Hill before the Pitt v. UNC football game. He was personable, well-spoken and had a lot of very thoughtful things to say. Whether that translates to wins...only time will tell. However, if you really are a PITT fan, you must give the man a chance to see what he can do. Hail to Pitt!
As much as everyone needed the JRob era to be over with this teams future would be a lot more promising if he was still here. Kithcart could understudy a guy whose actually a point guard . Wilson under Dixon showed very little last year and thinking that he can step in as the starting point guard is asking an awlful lot. The fact that Artis is even attempting the transition to point guard tells you everything you need to know about this team . Plus there's also NO inside presence unless you count 6'7/8 thin guys as your beef inside .
There's two wild cards as I see it , one is if Artis becomes a viable pg and the second is if Cam Johnson has a breakout season.
Jamie did not leave behind a team ready to make a jump up the standings and this isn't an excuse for Stallings it's just the sad truth .
There's two wild cards as I see it , one is if Artis becomes a viable pg and the second is if Cam Johnson has a breakout season.
Jamie did not leave behind a team ready to make a jump up the standings and this isn't an excuse for Stallings it's just the sad truth .
Wilson got his chance off the bench last year and failed. He was pretty good on the defensive end but was so bad on the offensive end Dixon hardly played him at all towards the end of the season. If you go into a season with a player like Wilson, where he is now, starting at PG you got BIG problems.
So, you gotta give Stallings credit for coming up with the idea of starting Artis at PG. He can vary that and how much the 'three amigos' (Wilson, Kithcart and Milligan) play there based on how well they play.
You can also give him credit for deciding to start Young at C. Would be better for Young to start at PF but we don't have anybody at C otherwise.
But... we gotta see how well the team does once the real games begin. Stallings, better do good this year because next year is gonna be a disaster.
Wilson had a freshman year almost exactly like Wanamaker and Patterson. The kid needs to be given a chance.
Artis is no doubt driving the decision of him playing PG, and Stallings is letting the players steer the ship seemingly. Artis is not even closer to being a PG than Ashton Gibbs was.
Unfortunately the new guy hasn't shown he can even make the tournament half the time in an easier conference.
But hey, recruiting is going to better, right? Right? Err...
But hey, recruiting is going to better, right? Right? Err...
Gibbs could penetrate (though not finish)
Gibbs could handle the ball - pressure did not bother him
Gibbs could pass the ball - he was not careless with the ball and made accurate passes
When he wanted to, Gibbs could stay in front of his man on defense
Gibbs could have been not ideal, but adequate, as the primary point guard
Gibbs did not want to play point guard (something Jamie would not recognize). Gibbs started that season disgruntled and it was not helped by being forced to play the point.
Gibbs wasn't a PG. The entire reason he came back his senior year was to try to show he can play the PG spot to get to the NBA. Which he couldn't.
Gibbs was a really good SG. He wasn't a PG, but he was much more of one than Artis is.
Gibbs wasn't a PG - No shit
Gibbs was not trying to show the NBA he could play the point. Gibbs played the point because Woodall was hurt. Gibbs hated being forced to play the point and it showed. Dixon was too dense to play J.Johnson or Epps. (not good choices, but better than a disgruntled Gibbs)
You've got it completely wrong. The entire reason he came back to school was because the scouts told him he needed to be able to show he can play the PG spot.
He went to the Deron Williams PG camp after pulling out if the draft to help that process along.
http://www.espn.com/blog/collegebas...id/32400/letters-from-camp-gibbs-expands-game
It's not my position, it's the reality of what the situation was.
At any rate, Gibbs was much more of a PG than Artis will ever be, and Gibbs wasn't good at the point guard spot.
