I believe in coach Stallings, I think he will build a nice program here , and one we will enjoy once his players are in place. I like his recruiting to this point
Stallings observation
- Thread starter Sean Miller Fan
- Start date
It amuses me that you are all-in on Stallings but are already calling for Narduzzi's head. This fanbase is comical.
I don't care if you lost in the last five minutes, last five seconds of regulation, or on a buzzer beater in triple OT....you still lost. Dixon did a lot of that in the tourney. Stallings may or may not be the answer, but it was time for Dixon and Pitt to part ways. Momentum was gone, moral was low, fan support was on the down turn. Program needed a change. I wish Dixon the best at TCU. I hope the signed basketball I have from him is worth something someday.
Let's solve that problem by going to fewer tournaments! You can't lose a game that you don't play. Brilliant.
All stats are valid to look at when evaluating a team. The stat that was most important was 9-9 in the ACC. So for the love of God, consider what really mattered...which was the team was mediocre in conference and the stats back that up pretty accurately. Being "efficient" is a useless stat as well if you do not win the game
If you are the more efficient team in the game you will win every single time. Kind of by definition.
Lets agree to wait and see what happens this year before we throw the team under the bus shall we?
Well Joe,
Here are the 2015 -2016most efficient college basketball teams:
Indiana
Mich St
St Marys
North Carolina
Duke
SMU
Vill
Oakland
Virginia
Here is the round of 16 for the same period:
Kansas
Maryland
Miami
Villinova
Oregon
Duke
Tx AM
Oklahoma
North Carolina
Indiana
Notre Dame
Wisc
Virginia
Iowa St
Gonzaga
Cuse
Lets see how your theory of the efficient teams always wins works out!
Hint ! It doesn't!
If you need a language translation let me know!
Last edited:
Well, SMU couldn't go, so 5 of the 9 most efficient teams made the sweet 16. Most of those teams were top 4 seeds. And of course you will probably use a one game sample for a team like MSU to show efficiency doesn't matter...lol.
Now, why don't you show is the top ten scoring teams and see how they did?
I was responding
50% - 60% win rate isn't ALWAYS WINNING or even close!
Keep up your support and I'll officially enter into the Joey The Panther Club.
I was responding to Joey The Panther Fan comment that the most efficient teams ALWAYS win?? Go back in this thread and look at his ridiculous post which matches most of the garbage he posts!
50% - 60% win rate isn't ALWAYS WINNING or even close!
Keep up your support and I'll officially enter into the Joey The Panther Club.
Lol. You are really dumb if you can't understand what he said, and I'm not going to explain it to you.
So awful.
The person here who needs the translation is you, because you obviously have no idea what I was saying.
I'll help you out a little. Go back and look at Pitt's results from last season. Pitt played 33 games. In 21 of them Pitt was the more efficient team. In 12 of them Pitt's opponent was the more efficient team. Oddly enough, Pitt's record ended up 21-12. I know that you apparently think that's just a coincidence, but maybe go back and check the results and then get back to me.
If Pitt's results aren't enough to convince you, pick any other team you want. You are going to find this strange, odd coincidence where the number of times a team was more efficient is going to exactly equal the number of games that they have won. I know, right? Who could have predicted that? I mean sure, anyone who understands what we are talking about. But what about all the other people, like you?
As I said, being efficient is of no significance if you do not win--I'll stand by that comment. Where did Pitt finish in efficiency overall last season? Being "efficient" against the dregs of the schedule is hardly some remarkable feat. 9-9 ACC is all you need to know about the squad last season. Hail to Pitt!
Once again, since this seemingly simple concept continues to escape your grasp, the more efficient team wins EVERY SINGLE GAME. By definition. If Pitt plays North Carolina and Pitt averages 1.05 points per possession and North Carolina averages 0.97 points per possession then Pitt has won the game. If those numbers are reversed then North Carolina has won. Every time, all the time.
The fact that so many people cannot grasp such a simple and easy concept is, quite frankly, surprising. Shocking would probably be a better word.
The fact that so many people cannot grasp such a simple and easy concept is, quite frankly, surprising. Shocking would probably be a better word.
Your problem is that you assume or expect PITTLAW to actually understand the definition of the term before arguing that it is meaningless.
You'll stand by your comment which is wrong?
Shocking g
you,'ll stand by being wrong then.
You conveniently left out the significant fact that the original poster indicated that Pitt was the 28th most efficient team last season. So what...they were 9-9 in conference games. Being efficient means totally nothing if you are not winning conference games. So Pitt racked up some nice efficiency numbers playing dreg schools, yet finished .500 in conference, and lost one of the worst played games I have ever seen in the NCAA tournament. I guess Pitt's efficiency is a thing of beauty I missed last season--as I watched a lot of ugly basketball. I stand by my comment, as it was in fact very accurate in the context of when and where it was made. Hail to Pitt!
Not at all. Read my comments to Joe. The most efficient team may in fact win when it is one-on-one--I never said that was untrue. However, Pitt's nice efficiency ranking did them nothing...because they racked up those stats against cream puffs and when they actually played conference games that mattered--.500. Pitt was a middling/mediocre team last season...and their average points scored/yielded was a much better reflection of the team overall than looking at a ranking that placed them 28th. Hail to Pitt!
Their avg points scored/yielded was more of a reflection on their tempo than anything.
By the way, in ACC play, Pitt was 9th in points per game, and 6th in points allowed per game. Was that an accurate depiction of the team they were?
The NCAA tournament had them as the #37 overall team in the nation by the seed list. End of year Sagarin ratings had them #37 overall. End of year Pomeroy Ratings had them #36 overall (#28 offense, #54 defense). They lost to the #25 overall team according to the NCAA tournament seed list, by four points, with a shot to win it inside of 5 seconds.
I guess if you are saying the 2015-16 squad played slow, did not score a lot of points and played poor defense...I'd have a hard time arguing with that. I was actually one of a handful of Pitt fans that traveled to St.Louis, so be sure, I remember the pain of enduring that game. It was a very ugly win, even in the eyes of the team that won. You must have been a huge fan of the 2008 Sun Bowl game? Hail to Pitt!
Wait until you get a load of Stallings.
If pitt won 6-3 I would have enjoyed it.
More so than, say the okie state game this year.
Come on now, Stallings team put up 50 in the play-in game! Up tempo, exciting basketball, here we come!
As I have said before many times, with fans like these, who needs enemies?
Hey, I have season tickets and plan on being at the ACC Tournament. I suspect I will have plenty of time to judge the first edition of the Pitt/Stallings basketball era up close and personal. Unfortunately for Pitt sports fans, there do not seem to be many happy endings. Maybe we are due one? Either way, I am willing to give the coaches, players and program a little breathing room before I say much one way or the other. Hail to Pitt!
I'll never understand the whining about points scored in a game. If Pitt had won the Sun Bowl 3-0, I would remember that game forever. If Pitt had beaten Wisconsin 30-29, I would think that was a game for the ages. Losing 100-99, not so much.
Conversely, when you loose a game 3-0, you also will remember it forever. My comments were not anywhere close to a whine. The media that covers the game said all they needed to say about Pitt's very ugly loss to Wisconsin at the time [just Google it if you forget]....and yes, I will remember it for a very long time. Hail to Pitt!
A loss is a loss just as a win is a win , but losing in a poorly played game to an opponent you should have beat leaves you sick in the stomach . Losing a well played game while still a loss you can be proud of your effort .Only one team can win in the end and getting beat is far preferable to skinking up the joint with your poor play .
Winning while playing poorly does trumps losing a well played game.
Ps even when Pitt was leading Wisconsin it was a horrible game to watch
The only thing I remember about that game is Mike Young running right into James Robinson as Robinson was about to put up the game winning shot, knocking him off balance.
As Robinson was headed downcourt, it reminded me of the breakout he had late in the Syracuse game in the ACC tournament that he hit.
Oh well, wasn't meant to be and here we are.
As Robinson was headed downcourt, it reminded me of the breakout he had late in the Syracuse game in the ACC tournament that he hit.
Oh well, wasn't meant to be and here we are.
That's just stupid. When have Pitt fans ever been "proud of [our] effort"? Pitt made a pretty miraculous turnaround in 2010 and people were still pissed we were "upset" by Xavier. Win or lose. That's all that matters.
I really couldn't care less what the media thought of the game. If JRob had won the game in the final seconds, Pitt moves on and nothing else matters. If Stallings manages to win an important game and the score is in the 40s, good for him. I'll take it.
Pretty simple thoughts. I wish more could get on board with this simple idea.
Have you ever played competitive sports ? Embarrassing yourself with how poorly you played and lose is a lot harder on you than playing well and having someone out play you . You absolutely play to win and that's what your fans want also , but there'd have been a lot less anger towards JD had his team lost a well played game . That was the worst played and coached game I've ever watched . Just ask anyone who watched it . I'd also be willing to bet you that the areas CBS telecast that game into as it was being played was Pgh and Wisconsin . I'm sure they switched everyone else to a game worth watching .
My only reference to the media accounts of the game were to demonstrate that it was not just my personal opinion, but that the Pitt v. Wisconsin NCAA game was widely viewed as one of the worst basketball games played last year. Cannot wait to see the excitement build here as Stallings starts winning games. Hail to Pitt!
Who's to say if the team were less efficient that they would have lost by even more. Maybe they lost but ended up being closer making a game of it. I'd think the team with the most talent would usually win, but if the lesser team could keep it close by keeping possessions down and playing efficiently, it may improve your chances.
Sorry, dt..
The saga standards have be raised.. I refuse to grade on a sliding scale
Hell they melted down after the nova game, where Pitt played really well and got sunk by a last second shot and a freak performance from the line by the other team.
The people saying over and over again that they only wanted Dixon to move on recently are liars. I ca remember back 7-9 years ago people constantly complaining about him, and his recruiting, his tourney performance and the minute he had one down year people wanted him fired. People should At least be honest about it and don't act like this criticism of Dixon is recent.
This fanbase is garbage. Absolute trash. And in two years most will be praying for barely making the tournament.
You will always have idiots, especially on this board. Up until the last few years the Pete had very good attendance for conference games and the large majority of people were very happy with Dixon. He received very good ovations when his name was called during introductions.
I left out nothing. You said "being "efficient" is a useless stat as well if you do not win the game." I pointed out the fact, and it is a fact that "if you are the more efficient team in the game you will win every single time. Kind of by definition."
YOU were referring to winning the game. Not all games, not conference games, THE GAME. When you are referring to any specific game the team that is more efficient wins, every single time. That's why basketball coaches and people who understand basketball look at efficiency numbers and not raw points per game as you seem to think is important. You can now deflect or talk around it all you want, but it is pretty clear that you don't have any sort of real understanding as to what wins basketball games.
And for the record, in the spirit of trying to help you understand, the reason that Pitt's record wasn't better even though it's offense was relatively efficient was because the defense was not. You do understand that there are two sides to the game, right? You do understand that you can have a pretty good offense and not win a lot of games because you have a bad defense, right? Or conversely you could be a pretty poor offense but if you play defense well enough you can still win too. You understand that when someone tells you that a team has a good or great or poor or whatever offense that they are only giving you half of the picture right? And without the other half you don't have the whole story, right?
