Thoughts from the weekend at Consol

[Sean Miller Fan]

If there's one good thing about Pitt not making the NCAA Tournament, its being able to watch the tournament and appreciate it for what it is without worrying about Pitt's game, potential matchups, and the depression over their early exit which causes me to not watch the tournament for about a week. So, as I settled into my seats at Consol, I was really looking forward to good basketball and tried to watch the game from a perspective a Pitt fan (ie why are these teams so much better than us?)

Before I get into Pitt, I wanted to make some general observations about Consol:

- The Friday sessions were dead. The afternoon drew 15,818, the evening drew 16,170. The upper deck endzones were 3/4 empty and lots and lots of no-shows in the seats that had already been sold in the rest of the arena. The most entertaining game of the day, by far, was NCSU vs LSU. Probably the most entertaining game I've seen in a while. Not sure what the offensive efficiency numbers were but my eye test says that was pretty exciting offense. Lots of dunks, fast breaks, big shots, etc. The fans got into the game late when NCSU mounted their comeback but by the time Anya hit that buzzer beater, I bet there were less than 10,000 people left in the arena.

- If I were to rank Thursday's fanbases in numbers, I'd say:

1. Nova
2. Northeastern, Lafayette, ND, Butler, NCSU (all sold their allotment)
7. LSU
8. Texas

I counted the Texas fans in their section and it was only about 100 and only saw 1 or 2 Texas fans in other seating areas. I realize they had the farthest to travel but for a diploma factory like that, you can't tell me there aren't tens of thousands of Texas grad within a 3-4 hour drive of Pittsburgh that could have made the trip. But I guess they dont care about hoops. Though that seems obvious since Rick Barnes is still employed there. He must crack up every time his paycheck comes in the mail. Nobody does less with more than that guy. I was actually embarrassed for him on Thursday. Butler isn't a bad team, but they only had 1 player who would start for Texas, just 1. Texas had 2 skilled big guys, a lottery pick on the wing and a Cat Barber-like point guard. Yet, I picked Butler to win the game because I knew how inept Barnes was.

- Just a pet peeve of mine (and I'm sure no one else's). I think its bush-league to just put little risers behind the basket like they did in the Civic Arena. Its supposed to be a first-class facility. The first 10 rows or so behind the basket fold-in so you can put up another seating area that stretches from behind the basket to about the 10th permanent row, on slightly less of an angle so that to the TV viewer, it looks like a basketball arena and not a hockey arena with people sitting overtop the ice.

- Can't believe there's no Wifi in the arena and the LTE signal sucks. I couldn't stream other games with the March Madness app, though when I used the Xfinity TV app to watch Live TV, it worked a little better but not great.

- Saturday the crowd was larger, 18,700 which was nearly a sell-out. Hopefully that's enough to make the NCAA come back. Not many no-shows though there were a good amount of people that left after the Nova-NCSU game and people kept leaving throughout that game. If you stayed till midnight to watch 39:30 of ND/Butler, couldn't you watch the last 30 seconds?

- Nova had a pretty big crowd for it. They even had around 50-75 students in the upper deck. I'd estimate there were around 1,000-2,000 Nova fans but they were loud. When they made little runs, the place would almost feel like a Nova home game. FWIW, this was nowhere near the estimated 5,000 Pitt fans I estimated took in the Butler loss a few years ago. ND brought out a lot of fans on Saturday also. Not as many as Nova but close.

- I cant tell you how great it was to watch Nova go down like that. I posted on their board before the tournament that I thought they would have finished 6th in the ACC and then, they get beat by the 7th place team in the ACC. I dont think Nova is bad. They're a pretty good team, but talent-wise, they're a 3-4 seed type of team but because of the RPI math, they were seeded extremely high for beating a bunch of average Big East teams who I thought were all 8/9 seed kind of teams but were way over-seeded because of the same RPI math. Don't ever change, RPI!

- Nova's lack of rebounding did them in as it usually does. All guards, all finesse. NCSU mashed them on the glass and they're not even noted for that. Nova's offense is fun to watch though, lots of quick passes, penetrations, and kick-outs for 3's. They move the ball really well and have 4 guys on the floor who can make 3's (imagine that) but when you can't rebound, forget it.

- I absolutely LOVE Lennard Freeman. He doesnt start and doesnt get big numbers but he is the A #1 prototypical Pitt player. I can't believe we let him get away. Undersized 4, Jersey kid, tough, rugged. banger, etc. He would have started at the 5 for us this year and we would have made the tournament. That's what I think of him. He had a nice couple of games. Though that Abu kid played out of his mind. Not sure where that came from. Nova had no match for him.

- Really, really impressed with Barber. The kid is on another level. He changed the game on Thursday with his speed and penetration. He's come into his own and NCSU has a shot to go to the Final Four. If there's a better backcourt in the country than Barber and Lacey, let me know because I aint seen it, forgive my English. I always say guards win tournament games and Barber/Lacey are going to be a real tough out. If they both come back next year, NCSU might be preseason Top 5. There's no shortage of talent in Raleigh.

- ND had an interesting game plan. They totally took Kellen Dunham away, which I agreed with and told my buddy before the game that's what they should do because Butler can't score enough to beat them without him going off. Well, they almost did. Roosevelt Jones was unstoppable with his slow, fat-man unorthodox game. And that big center had the game of his life. Still, I dont know how Butler did it. Their players weren't nearly as good as ND's or Texas's and they play with anybody. At halftime, they only had 1 turnover. They are so fundamental, run their offense flawlessly and get good shots every time. ND was just a lot better and able to sneak it out.

- To bring this back to Pitt, after watching these games it made me realize how much we're lacking at 2 positions: Center and Point Guard.

- All 8 teams had centers that were significantly better than Uchebo, Randall, Nwankwo, and Haughton. This includes Lafayette and Northeastern. In fact, Northeastern's best player was their big guy, 6'8 Scott Eatherton from Hershey High, a couple hours down the turnpike. A little undersized but he's a legitimate ACC-level center. Lafayette had a similar player, not quite as good as Eatherton but also would have started for us, shifting Young to the 4. FWIW, Eatherton should be eligible to grad transfer. If I were Pitt, I'd go through some back channels to see if he's interested in playing his senior year closer to home. He's not great but he'd have Steven Adams-type numbers (8 and 7) at the 5 for us. Just saying. All these teams had a presence in the middle.

- 5 of the 8 PG's were better than Robinson. Robinson was better than Lafayette and NE's PG. Butler's PG, Barlow is basically the same guy as Robinson.......dribble the ball up the court and don't turn it over. After watching ND's Jackson and Grant, LSU's Quarterman, Cat Barber, and Arcidiacano, it made me realize something that I already knew. We are REALLY REALLY lacking at the PG position. I think Jamie has to look long and hard at James Robinson and may have to make the very tough decision in benching him in favor of somebody like Damon Wilson. Wilson's going to turn it over more but Robinson had a bad year defending (except the ND and UNC games ironically) and a really bad year offensively. Almost anybody in the country could have did what he did if they played as cautious as him. I'd say the theme of the weekend was PG's making plays. Barber vs Quarterman was very entertaining and Jackson played out of his mind on Thursday throwing ridiculous passes.

- In short: Games good and we desperately need a Center and Point Guard. If we don't get Diallo, I'm not sure how much we're going to improve playing Young so out of position. He needs to play the 4, offensively and defensively. Figure out what to do with Artis but he's a defensive liability. Also, somebody get Scott Eatherton's number.

 

[levance2]

Originally posted by Sean Miller Fan:

The most entertaining game of the day, by far, was NCSU vs LSU. Probably the most entertaining game I've seen in a while. Not sure what the offensive efficiency numbers were but my eye test says that was pretty exciting offense. Lots of dunks, fast breaks, big shots, etc.

NCSt 97.9, LSU 96.5

Those are worse than 14 of Pitt's ACC offensive performances. Pitt's ACC Tourney game was NCSt 131.0, Pitt 113.2.

But again, let's all blame the offense.

This post was edited on 3/23 2:44 PM by levance2

 

[TIGER-PAUL]

Saturday was fun and I think overall it was a success and they would come back.
Would have to have similiar fairly strong matchups though.

 

[PittMed]

Nice report!

 

[Harve74]

Originally posted by levance2:

Originally posted by Sean Miller Fan:

The most entertaining game of the day, by far, was NCSU vs LSU. Probably the most entertaining game I've seen in a while. Not sure what the offensive efficiency numbers were but my eye test says that was pretty exciting offense. Lots of dunks, fast breaks, big shots, etc.

NCSt 97.9, LSU 96.5

Those are worse than 14 of Pitt's ACC offensive performances. Pitt's ACC Tourney game was NCSt 131.0, Pitt 113.2.

But again, let's all blame the offense.

This post was edited on 3/23 2:44 PM by levance2

Efficiency and excitement are two vastly different things.

 

[PITTLAW]

Reply

Certainly agree with your view of Pitt's biggest needs---a 5 and a guard [point or otherwise]. Surprised the board mafia has not come out to take you out at the knees...as they keep telling me that Young is a 5. By the way, Cat Barber was a McDonalds All-American coming into NCSU. So it should not be a big surprise that he has turned into an excellent player. Only Pitt gets those kind of guys that don't live up to their clippings Hail to Pitt!

 

[wbrpanther]

Re: Reply

I think this board is pretty much in agreement that Pitt needs a true 5 and a penetrating point guard. And that isn't all.

 

[PITTLAW]

Reply

Hopefully that is the case...as it seemed pretty obvious and uncontroversial when I said it in December. But even as recent as January/February...people were still trotting out Young's offensive stats versus Talib from the year before to explain why I was "wrong". Hopefully Nix will be the answer? Hail to Pitt!

 

[DT_PITT]

My disagreement is with the concept ...

... of a "true" anything. I want good players to be productive.

For example, if Pitt were to secure the services for "PF" Diallo to go with "PF" Mike Young, that's probably who I would want to play the majority of the minutes as my 4-5 or 5-4 before Rozelle Nix.

Mike was quite productive as a 5. But between the rest of the lot, he got no help. Derrick Randle was a true 5. Joe Uchebo was a true 5. It's just that neither were very good.

I also do not believe we need a penetrating "point guard," as much as a penetrating guard or wing.

The biggest need on this team, by far however, is the ability to stop dribble penetration.

This post was edited on 3/23 6:58 PM by DT_PITT

 

[recruitsreadtheseboards]

Re: My disagreement is with the concept ...

Originally posted by DT_PITT:
... of a "true" anything. I want good players to be productive.

For example, if Pitt were to secure the services for "PF" Diallo to go with "PF" Mike Young, that's probably who I would want to play the majority of the minutes as my 4-5 or 5-4 before Rozelle Nix.

Mike was quite productive as a 5. But between the rest of the lot, he got no help. Derrick Randle was a true 5. Joe Uchebo was a true 5. It's just that neither were very good.

I also do not believe we need a penetrating "point guard," as much as a penetrating guard or wing.

The biggest need on this team, by far however, is the ability to stop dribble penetration.


This post was edited on 3/23 6:58 PM by DT_PITT

Along with dribble penetration by our own players.

 

[RA time]

Eatherton......played at St Francis PA for tow years and then transferred to NU and sat out a year. His eligibility is done.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

You are "wrong"....

because you refuse to admit that Mike Young was better this year at the five, on both ends of the court, than he was at the four. And you also refuse to admit that Jamel Artis was better this year at the four, on both ends of the court, than he was at the three.

Look, we all get that a guy who is so fixated on the sizes of the players rather than their skill sets thinks the way that you do. But then again you think that DeJuan Blair should have been a four and maybe even a three. And that's kind of laughable. But none the less, typical of someone who thinks that size rather than skills determines position.

 

[PITTLAW]

Reply

Well the problem with your "analysis" is that basketball is team sport. The few minutes that Young got at the 4 this season...who was playing the 5? Artis rarely saw the 3 position during ACC play...and when he did...who was at the 4 and 5 during those moments? Clearly Artis is a major defensive problem in man defense regardless of position--unless it happens to be the bench. My comments had very little to do with Young's "size" [presuming you mean height]. But getting back to your rant...and just for the fun of it-- accepting as true your comment that Mike Young "was better this year at the five, on both ends of the court, than he was at the four," HARDLY stands for the proposition that Mike should be playing 5. Nary a commentator that did a Pitt game failed to mention he was playing out of position. Nobody looks at Young and the way he plays defense--and says, he belongs at 5. Young is not physical, does not disrupt the paint, and is not much of a force on defensive rebounds [and of course those deficiencies are magnified because he has Artis beside him playing the 4]. Hey, I get that he was the best option Pitt had this season...but I love laughing at how hard you and others try to make the case that he belongs at the 5. Hail to Pitt!

 

[DT_PITT]

Re: My disagreement is with the concept ...



We didn't use dribble penetration as main focus of our offense, but we were pretty effective without it times. But things were tougher when our jump shooting game wasn't working.

However, at almost no time during the season did we guard dribble penetration well.

As has been pointed out, our offensive production was enough to get us into the NCAA tournament. Our defense was absolutely nowhere close.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

Well first off.....

just to make sure we are talking about the same people, these commentators that you are talking about are the same commentators that through about the first 3/4 of the season continued to talk about how Pitt was a tough defensive team, right? The same ones who have been talking up our great defenses for years, even though the reality was something different. So yeah, obviously the experts.

Secondly, at least you are now admitting that on this team Young was Pitt's best option at the five. It only took how many months to get you there? So at least that's some progress.

Thirdly, Mike "should be" playing the five this year because that is the position that he was the best at. He was very good shooting the ball around the rim. He was a poor jump shooter. Those are simple facts. That you wish to continue to ignore the facts doesn't change them or make them not true. I love laughing at how much you are willing to ignore the facts in an effort to make an argument, and I wonder if you are similarly so willing to ignore the facts in your professional life, and how that plays out for you. My guess would be not very well, so my guess is that you don't do it there. Why here, I wonder?

Your problem is that you continue to wait for an in prime Bill Russell to come walking through the door to fix things. Sure, if that guy was here he'd be starting at center. The reality is that that guy isn't here, and he's not coming here. Sure, if he was here Young would play some four. Just like he played some four this year when guys who weren't nearly as good as Bill Russell were on the court. That still wouldn't change the fact that Young played better on offense closer to the basket and he defended better (note, not well, better) in the post than he did in space. But as I said, it's unlikely that someone who thinks that DeJuan Blair should have been a four or even a three would understand that.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Re: Well first off.....

Young should have played the 5 this year because there was no other option and when looking at the centers from Northeastern and Lafayette, I can't believe how bad we missed on our "5" recruiting. However, Pitt is playing with one hand tied behind its back asking Young to play the majority of minutes at Center. For one, he's not really playing "center" when he's out there. He's not a shot-blocker, not a good help defender, not an intimidating presence to deter penetration, not a great defender, nor a great rebounder. He's an adequate defender and rebounder but here's the thing, Artis is a terrible defender and a below average rebounding power forward. Artis, in my opinion, is a "net negative" player similar to Eron Harris at WVU last year. He scored a lot of points but gave up far more. He just wants to play offense. So when you have a power forward who can't rebound or defend, you are heavily reliant on your 5 to be a dominating rebounding and defensive player, which Young is not. Young is more of a finesse big guy. So, while Young's numbers at the 5 were good, they don't tell the whole story. This team would be so much better with another good player playing the 5 sliding Young to the 4. As for Artis, he's even worse defensively at the 3 so I don't know what you do there but he's got to play somewhere.

If we got Diallo or another good center, I'd start:

C - Diallo
PF - Young
SF - D. Johnson
SG - by committee (Wilson, Jones, Newkirk, D. Johnson, Cam Johnson)
PG - Robinson

I'd have Artis coming off the bench, playing 25-28 minutes between the 3 and 4. I think he'd be a good sparkplug off the bench.

 

[Hailpitt]

Artis coming off the bench in 2016. LOL. Some of you guys post on here just to get chuckles. Butler's PG was better than Robinson-- Barlow's bball IQ was 10 times higher than Robinson. Barlow wasn't merely a facilitator but created shots for teammates. Also had a way better handle than Robinson. Lastly, Barlow defense was terrific--ND guards could not penetrate (go back and watch ND-Pitt video and count the number of times the ND guards blew past Robinson) and Barlow "help" defense resulted in at least 5 steals/turnovers (by my count). Some of you guys are better off eating your popcorn at the games and then SHUTTING UP!

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Originally posted by Hailpitt:
Artis coming off the bench in 2016. LOL.

I guess you also predicted WVU would be much better after losing Eron Harris and Terry Henderson to transfer, right? I mean they scored a lot, so.........

 

[upj87]

Not a big fan of the huge arenas for the first weekend. It is a shame that they cannot go to an on campus facility like they used to. A 12,500 sellout at the Pete would have a whole hell of a lot more atmosphere than 18,000 downtown. I have been to two opening weekends. One was at the old Cole field house at Maryland back in the early 90's and the other was at the Wells Fargo Arena in Philly about 15 years ago. No comparison. The Cole rocked while the huge arena was stale. It was also nice to hit some college bars and restaurants between the afternoon and evening sessions. It is a shame they have to chase the almighty buck and dampen the experience for the fans.

 

[JohnnyGossamer]

Dixon's gonna shake it most likely. He did so after the CBI year. And, did so again after the departure of Adams, Woodall, Moore, Zeigler, Taylor, etc. the following year. It wouldn't shock me at all if either Artis or D. Johnson came off the bench. Didn't Arizona bring one of their best ballers off the bench earlier this season? Toole does so with Lucky Jones too. And, of course, Durand came off the bench last season but played starters minutes before tearing his ACL. I'm not saying that it's going to happen but it's hardly and uncommon practice in college hoops.

 

[PITTLAW]

Reply

Joe, you need to pay closer attention to what I write if you really want to try to "catch me." I've said since DAY ONE that Young was Pitt's best option at 5 this season--DUE TO MAJOR RECRUITING FAILURES BY DIXON. However, I've also contended that Young is absolutely not a 5, whether you measure it with skills, mental make up, or physical style of play [at least not in Dixon's offensive and defensive schemes]. That guys that get paid mega dollars to commentate [some former coaches] all seem to agree with me, really is not surprising. Why is it such a uncomfortable thing for you to admit that Young is playing out of "position?"

And no, not likely the same commentators...as the ones I listened to seemed to go on and on about how this Pitt team was not like most Dixon teams...and that they were playing really bad defensive basketball. Pitt does not need Bill Russell to play 5...just a real legit college center. Even a guy of the caliber of Gary M....and you'd see Young majorly improve on defense with such a guy by his side. And consequently, you'd see a much better Pitt team were it to happen. Young can play very much around the rim at 4. If Young has any professional aspirations, he will need to work on and develop his offense from beyond point blank. All you really need to do is remember Nas at 4...please don't try to tell me he had some outside game...LOL.

My professional life and my discussions here are very different. Not sure what it is you do, assuming you work, but my guess is it is pretty similar--you post here for your own enjoyment and amusement. Nobody types my responses for me here. Nobody does any research for me here. And worst of all, nobody is paying my hourly rate for my posts here. Perhaps one day that will change. Hail to Pitt!

 

[DT_PITT]

Actually, I really don't ...


... disagree with any of this, SMF.

I just wouldn't get too tied up into who's the 4 and who's the 5 if the Young/Diallo scenario comes to pass. Who they defend would depend on matchups at times, I suspect.

But having Diallo and Young playing more of the minutes at the 4-5 would seem to make sense to me, even though neither is a "true center." And actually, FWIW Cheick has a much less developed post game that Mike. Also, I suspect Mike's defense and rebounding will improve regardless of whether he plays more at the 4 or 5, very much like was the case with Talib (who was the 3rd or 4th best center in the ACC last year -- and don't forget that Talib played plenty of his minutes with Artis playing the four last year, and even Lamar at times.)

Like you said, if such a scenario was to happen, things would certainly get interesting for Jamel. There's no doubt that his offense carried this team for a better part of the year. But if he's going to spend time at the three, he's going to need serious work on defense (as his defensive work was even weaker at the three than the four).

Of course, let's not get ahead of ourselves with Diallo of course.

The bottom line is that here's hoping that Dixon has more good players to work with!


This post was edited on 3/24 10:42 AM by DT_PITT

 

[levance2]

Originally posted by upj87:



It is a shame that they cannot go to an on campus facility like they used to. A 12,500 sellout at the Pete would have a whole hell of a lot more atmosphere than 18,000 downtown.

In 2009, Pitt's first two games were at Dayton Arena which only holds 13.4K. I think the Pete could host if they really wanted, but chances are Pitt has no interest.

Honestly, I've never really understood what schools like OSU or Louisville get out of hosting. If you're assuming that you make the tourney every year, that seems like nothing but an impediment. For a school like Duquesne, it's a no-brainer.

If Suzie keeps up the trajectory she's on, I would expect Pitt to be hosting women's tournaments.