Very disappointing

[Bethlehemjohn]

The refs sucked and UL's D was very good, but we weren't ready to play. Way too many unforced errors and we didn't compete. We held on to the ball for too long in the post instead of passing it quickly back out. Every time we got it inside, we let ourselves get double and triple teamed and still couldn't find the open guys.

I don't even think Young played that well and other than Mike, the rest were terrible.

We'll see what we learn from this game. It was obvious that we weren't ready for this kind of D. We have now played 2 good teams and had our asses handed to us both times. The really disappointing part about this game was that UL didn't even play very well IMO. We could play much better in game two and still lose.

This game can really help us if we learn from the mistakes and realize that we can't hang our head on only offense and that we must get tougher and better on D.

BC should be a breather, but the stretch of NC St, at FSU and at Clemson will be very important to win 2 of 3.

 

[MrGee]

The refs sucked and UL's D was very good, but we weren't ready to play. Way too many unforced errors and we didn't compete. We held on to the ball for too long in the post instead of passing it quickly back out. Every time we got it inside, we let ourselves get double and triple teamed and still couldn't find the open guys.

I don't even think Young played that well and other than Mike, the rest were terrible.

We'll see what we learn from this game. It was obvious that we weren't ready for this kind of D. We have now played 2 good teams and had our asses handed to us both times. The really disappointing part about this game was that UL didn't even play very well IMO. We could play much better in game two and still lose.

This game can really help us if we learn from the mistakes and realize that we can't hang our head on only offense and that we must get tougher and better on D.

BC should be a breather, but the stretch of NC St, at FSU and at Clemson will be very important to win 2 of 3.

Very disappointing---really never a contest---and JR disappeared again in a tough game---w need a PG who's the man

 

[recruitsreadtheseboards]

Most disappointing was how many unforced errors. People are talking about this great defense, but we have seen better Louisville teams. Pitt was intimidated and played like it.

 

[Harve74]

Very disappointing---really never a contest---and JR disappeared again in a tough game---w need a PG who's the man

Robinson has proven he is the kind of point guard who can make an offense run smoothly. He's not and never will be the kind of lead guard who IS the offense. Expecting someone to be something they are not is moronic.

We got a total of 4 shots from our shooting guards. Everybody other than Young and Artis disappeared and Artis spent most of the first half on the bench after a couple very questionable foul calls. There was no offense to run. Sterling Smith shot only once. Chris Jones played horribly his first stint, with two turnovers and narrowly missing his 3rd because a Ville player fumbled a pass off his hands. Then he got hurt on his next rotation. We ended up playing Damon Wilson 14 minutes, 9 at 2G.

It's simple. This team has to hit jump shots. If the jumpers are falling, the opposing defense has to extend, which opens up the lane for our scorers and offensive rebounding putbacks. We're not big and we're not fast. If we can't hit jumpers and we can't rebound, we're going to lose frequently.

If we play bigger teams, like Purdue and Louisville and we don't hit the jumpers, we're not going to beat them. We've built a roster much like Notre Dame's typical team, with mostly finesse players who aren't particularly athletic. We'll win or lose with the jump-shooting offense and some nights the jumpers just aren't there.

Pitino has taken a very different recruiting tack. He has 5 kids 6-10 or taller, plus another couple 6-9/6-8 PF's on his roster. His 6-9 guys look a lot taller than our 6-8/6-9 guys. We have a roster filled with slightly undersized 4/5 types. We will go as far as the skill level of those combo forwards take us. Generally, the smaller, quicker approach has been successful this year but we have had trouble when we've played long, physical front lines.

It is what it is. We don't have a Final Four caliber roster. We're not the rough and tumble Big East team who could physically beat up the long tall but slender front lines. We're an ACC roster, but probably need a few more quick athletic guards and wings to go along with the versatile forwards.

Damon Wilson, Kithcart and Crisshawn Clark are a step in that direction. Recruiting in the next year or two will determine where we end up, but there is no question Dixon has reworked the roster quickly for ACC style play.

 

[PittPoker]

Very disappointing---really never a contest---and JR disappeared again in a tough game---w need a PG who's the man

Haven't had one since Levance. I'll be glad when he is gone. Just shocking that kind of performance from a senior pg.

 

[33pitt99]

Haven't had one since Levance. I'll be glad when he is gone. Just shocking that kind of performance from a senior pg.

Same comments, every thread. We know what you think of James. You've made it crystal clear for the past two years. He's our PG and without question our best option at the position, so I'm not sure what all of your whining about him is meant to accomplish. I guess if it makes you feel better, then go for it, but sometimes you just need to let things go.

 

[Delpanther]

The other factor which makes last night's game disappointing is that player wise, Pitt had a huge edge in experience and still played nervous, soft and dumb for the ENTIRE game. We never adjusted even a little bit to what was happening on the court.

 

[PittPoker]

Same comments, every thread. We know what you think of James. You've made it crystal clear for the past two years. He's our PG and without question our best option at the position, so I'm not sure what all of your whining about him is meant to accomplish. I guess if it makes you feel better, then go for it, but sometimes you just need to let things go.

Not true at all. Thought James had been playing better than previous seasons except for the past few games. What would you like me to do, compliment the guy when he had an awful game?

 

[KiwiJeff]

Not true at all. Thought James had been playing better than previous seasons except for the past few games. What would you like me to do, compliment the guy when he had an awful game?

Perhaps only post it once or twice instead of 50 times I think is what he is saying, not to be complimentary of him.

 

[heybandguy]

More turnovers than FGs. They played horrendously bad at a very inopportune moment. There is plenty of blame to be distributed. I don't know that Louisville is overrated or underrated - they played their game, Pitt fell apart and the rest is a pretty ugly box score. Quick turn around till the next game, so they had best put it out of their mind and be ready for Saturday. We've seen better of them this year. Improvements (no matter how small) raise expectations. Failure to build upon improvements the next time raise criticism. Failure to meet expectations and regress...this game was just awful. I hope this is the worst we see all season.

 

[UpFromTheAshes]

Pitino has taken a very different recruiting tack. He has 5 kids 6-10 or taller, plus another couple 6-9/6-8 PF's on his roster. His 6-9 guys look a lot taller than our 6-8/6-9 guys. We have a roster filled with slightly undersized 4/5 types. We will go as far as the skill level of those combo forwards take us. Generally, the smaller, quicker approach has been successful this year but we have had trouble when we've played long, physical front lines.

It takes an astute observer to notice changes like this in an opposing team's recruiting.....but you are exactly correct. Louisville's roster is unlike any I've ever seen in my years as a Card fan, and it's because Pitino has been very intentional about recruiting length up front. A couple of years ago, I can remember saying to a buddy "ANOTHER 7 footer?? We're going to have 7-footers playing guard!"

But now we're starting to see what Pitino had in mind when bringing in all of that length. The Egyptian 7-footer who backed up Onuaku last night had been primarily playing the 4-spot all season until our other center broke his foot. 7 foot power forwards?? That's the stuff of the NBA man!

 

[UPitt '89]

The refs sucked and UL's D was very good, but we weren't ready to play. Way too many unforced errors and we didn't compete. We held on to the ball for too long in the post instead of passing it quickly back out. Every time we got it inside, we let ourselves get double and triple teamed and still couldn't find the open guys.

I don't even think Young played that well and other than Mike, the rest were terrible.

We'll see what we learn from this game. It was obvious that we weren't ready for this kind of D. We have now played 2 good teams and had our asses handed to us both times. The really disappointing part about this game was that UL didn't even play very well IMO. We could play much better in game two and still lose.

This game can really help us if we learn from the mistakes and realize that we can't hang our head on only offense and that we must get tougher and better on D.

BC should be a breather, but the stretch of NC St, at FSU and at Clemson will be very important to win 2 of 3.

I agree with everything you said except the "asses handed to us" vs Purdue.

Pitt had a 1 point lead with under 10 minutes left in that game.

I also don't agree that those were the only two good teams we played. Notre Dame is a very good team, especially at home.

 

[Fsgolfdr]

Pitt played a team that had length ,quickness and athletic ability that took them totally out of their comfort zone.
While playing an up tempo type style Pitt cannot do that against teams like Louisville ,they cannot compete athletically. That split second difference in getting your shot off made Pitts jump shooters ineffective . Their rhythm was so bad they couldn't even make FTs. Forcing the ball inside is no answer when the opposing players are taller ,quicker ,and more athletic. Pitt needs to dictate the tempo of games and yesterday they needed to slow it down healter skelter ball is Louisvilles game not Pitts.

 

[TIGER-PAUL]

We kinda got bullied with the pressure. Not too many teams can keep it up like that though. But Pitt had to be expecting it I think.

 

[UPitt '89]

You still owe me some dough.

Janie needs to go along with most of the roster.

Nope. I won the bet against you and you never paid.

To refresh your memory, the bet was pitt would make the ncaa tourney in 2014. If they did, you were to never post again on this site.

You lost the bet, and reneged.

 

[PittMan 72]

The refs sucked and UL's D was very good, but we weren't ready to play. Way too many unforced errors and we didn't compete. We held on to the ball for too long in the post instead of passing it quickly back out. Every time we got it inside, we let ourselves get double and triple teamed and still couldn't find the open guys.

I don't even think Young played that well and other than Mike, the rest were terrible.

We'll see what we learn from this game. It was obvious that we weren't ready for this kind of D. We have now played 2 good teams and had our asses handed to us both times. The really disappointing part about this game was that UL didn't even play very well IMO. We could play much better in game two and still lose.

This game can really help us if we learn from the mistakes and realize that we can't hang our head on only offense and that we must get tougher and better on D.

BC should be a breather, but the stretch of NC St, at FSU and at Clemson will be very important to win 2 of 3.

Looked to me like the Pitt team got lulled into a false sense that this game would be officiated like the first 3 ACC games they played: lots of touch fouls. The game last night appeared to be called (at least for 1 of the teams) very differently.

So Pitt needed to adjust to that. But they never did. Instead of responding, they appeared to be surprised by all of the non-calls against the Cards and were waiting for the whistle to change. But it never did. The Cards played D very well and looked like got into the Panthers; both their bodies and their heads.

For most of the game, the Cards offense and ball protection was almost as bad as Pitt's. But since the Panthers could never mount any semblance of a solid or consistent attack or finish by making shots, it turned into a rout at the end.

Have to hope it was a lesson learned. The guys can't anticipate or expect a game to be called a certain way, even though the way a game is officiated is supposed to have changed towards less contact. If the officials are going to allow contact, then Pitt has to respond and play the game according to how it is being called on that particular day.

 

[JS School]

Robinson has proven he is the kind of point guard who can make an offense run smoothly. He's not and never will be the kind of lead guard who IS the offense. Expecting someone to be something they are not is moronic.

We got a total of 4 shots from our shooting guards. Everybody other than Young and Artis disappeared and Artis spent most of the first half on the bench after a couple very questionable foul calls. There was no offense to run. Sterling Smith shot only once. Chris Jones played horribly his first stint, with two turnovers and narrowly missing his 3rd because a Ville player fumbled a pass off his hands. Then he got hurt on his next rotation. We ended up playing Damon Wilson 14 minutes, 9 at 2G.

It's simple. This team has to hit jump shots. If the jumpers are falling, the opposing defense has to extend, which opens up the lane for our scorers and offensive rebounding putbacks. We're not big and we're not fast. If we can't hit jumpers and we can't rebound, we're going to lose frequently.

If we play bigger teams, like Purdue and Louisville and we don't hit the jumpers, we're not going to beat them. We've built a roster much like Notre Dame's typical team, with mostly finesse players who aren't particularly athletic. We'll win or lose with the jump-shooting offense and some nights the jumpers just aren't there.

Pitino has taken a very different recruiting tack. He has 5 kids 6-10 or taller, plus another couple 6-9/6-8 PF's on his roster. His 6-9 guys look a lot taller than our 6-8/6-9 guys. We have a roster filled with slightly undersized 4/5 types. We will go as far as the skill level of those combo forwards take us. Generally, the smaller, quicker approach has been successful this year but we have had trouble when we've played long, physical front lines.

It is what it is. We don't have a Final Four caliber roster. We're not the rough and tumble Big East team who could physically beat up the long tall but slender front lines. We're an ACC roster, but probably need a few more quick athletic guards and wings to go along with the versatile forwards.

Damon Wilson, Kithcart and Crisshawn Clark are a step in that direction. Recruiting in the next year or two will determine where we end up, but there is no question Dixon has reworked the roster quickly for ACC style play.

Robinson shot the ball poorly himself, but it's pretty hard to get assists when the guys you pass the ball to refuse to shoot or miss the shots they do take.

 

[JS School]

The thing that made the game so disappointing for me was Seth Greenberg saying that Dixon is a great coach and that he does a great job of getting recruits that fit his system. Because he is absolutely correct. But what's disheartening is that Dixon's system appears to be no match for Pitino's system: find big, athletic, aggressive guys, recruit them with strippers, and have them play hard, tough defense.

I thought Pitt had their best chance of beating them in a while with their offense and the supposed rule changes, but this was as ugly as any Pitt-Louisville game ever. Pitt didn't lose, they got beat. Beat up, beat on, and beat down. I'm usually an optimist and I'm tempted to say that it was just a bad game, but it's going to take quite a few good games to remove the doubts I have from this bad game.

 

[gary2]

Robinson has proven he is the kind of point guard who can make an offense run smoothly. He's not and never will be the kind of lead guard who IS the offense. Expecting someone to be something they are not is moronic.

We got a total of 4 shots from our shooting guards. Everybody other than Young and Artis disappeared and Artis spent most of the first half on the bench after a couple very questionable foul calls. There was no offense to run. Sterling Smith shot only once. Chris Jones played horribly his first stint, with two turnovers and narrowly missing his 3rd because a Ville player fumbled a pass off his hands. Then he got hurt on his next rotation. We ended up playing Damon Wilson 14 minutes, 9 at 2G.

It's simple. This team has to hit jump shots. If the jumpers are falling, the opposing defense has to extend, which opens up the lane for our scorers and offensive rebounding putbacks. We're not big and we're not fast. If we can't hit jumpers and we can't rebound, we're going to lose frequently.

If we play bigger teams, like Purdue and Louisville and we don't hit the jumpers, we're not going to beat them. We've built a roster much like Notre Dame's typical team, with mostly finesse players who aren't particularly athletic. We'll win or lose with the jump-shooting offense and some nights the jumpers just aren't there.

Pitino has taken a very different recruiting tack. He has 5 kids 6-10 or taller, plus another couple 6-9/6-8 PF's on his roster. His 6-9 guys look a lot taller than our 6-8/6-9 guys. We have a roster filled with slightly undersized 4/5 types. We will go as far as the skill level of those combo forwards take us. Generally, the smaller, quicker approach has been successful this year but we have had trouble when we've played long, physical front lines.

It is what it is. We don't have a Final Four caliber roster. We're not the rough and tumble Big East team who could physically beat up the long tall but slender front lines. We're an ACC roster, but probably need a few more quick athletic guards and wings to go along with the versatile forwards.

Damon Wilson, Kithcart and Crisshawn Clark are a step in that direction. Recruiting in the next year or two will determine where we end up, but there is no question Dixon has reworked the roster quickly for ACC style play.

First off, Onauaku (sp) was much better than I anticipated. Second, I felt the refs allowed way too much contact and Pitt never adjusted to it and played tougher.

I thought a key moment in the game happened when Artis left with early foul trouble. I believe Jamie subbed with C.Jones and we went small. I would have liked to see Jeter at that point and a front line of Maia, Young and Jeter. I would have liked to see more of those medium range jumpers that Young hit early and that Jeter usually hits and less efforts to score inside. In a game like this, S.Smith also needs to look and work for his shot and James Robinson has to do a better job selling foul calls.

I know Maia is not particularly long or athletic, but he does the little things very well. He might not have been able to accumulate huge minutes ( I think he would have fouled out) and he would not be able to score inside, but Pitt would have been fundamentally better if he had played more.(Just my opinion)

Down only 3 at the half, I thought we had a chance - wrong. That was it - The wrong place at the wrong time (with the wrong officials - I really like to avoid Mike Roberts). Saying that, I give us a reasonable chance in the rematch. HTP

 

[Franb]

Not true at all. Thought James had been playing better than previous seasons except for the past few games. What would you like me to do, compliment the guy when he had an awful game?

You said you will be "glad when he is gone." This is a point guard who is the NCAA career leader in assists/turnovers. The primary role of a point guard is to run the offense, and he has clearly done that at a very high level.

 

[PittMan 72]

First off, Onauaku (sp) was much better than I anticipated. Second, I felt the refs allowed way too much contact and Pitt never adjusted to it and played tougher.

I thought a key moment in the game happened when Artis left with early foul trouble. I believe Jamie subbed with C.Jones and we went small. I would have liked to see Jeter at that point and a front line of Maia, Young and Jeter. I would have liked to see more of those medium range jumpers that Young hit early and that Jeter usually hits and less efforts to score inside. In a game like this, S.Smith also needs to look and work for his shot and James Robinson has to do a better job selling foul calls.

I know Maia is not particularly long or athletic, but he does the little things very well. He might not have been able to accumulate huge minutes ( I think he would have fouled out) and he would not be able to score inside, but Pitt would have been fundamentally better if he had played more.(Just my opinion)

Down only 3 at the half, I thought we had a chance - wrong. That was it - The wrong place at the wrong time (with the wrong officials - I really like to avoid Mike Roberts). Saying that, I give us a reasonable chance in the rematch. HTP

Looked to me as if there was an anticipation - really probably more of an expectation on Pitt's part based on how games were being called so far this season - that Pitt could get the Cards in foul trouble and Pitt could get to the FT line often - by getting the ball inside and trying to score from down low and that was a key element of Pitt's game plan. Thought they may try to change tactics in the 2nd. But then again, like you said, they were amazingly only down 3 at the half.

But none of what it seemed like they wanted to do materialized. Not a lot of fouls called on the Cards bigs. When Pitt did get to the line (mostly in the 2nd half) for the first time in quite a while, the Panthers struggled to make FT's. Of course this was all also even made worse for Pitt by how well and how tough L'Ville played on D; and how poorly Pitt handled the ball and shot jumpers.

 

[Fsgolfdr]

You said you will be "glad when he is gone." This is a point guard who is the NCAA career leader in assists/turnovers. The primary role of a point guard is to run the offense, and he has clearly done that at a very high level.

I'm not a JR brasher I think he's a fine player within his ability and that is as a facilitator and leader ,but sometimes it's just time to move on and see what's next. Next season will tell you whether a new point guard is a plus or a minus ,but until then he's the best that Pitts got and when the players around him struggle so will he and Pitt.

 

[Scruffy the Panther]

You said you will be "glad when he is gone." This is a point guard who is the NCAA career leader in assists/turnovers. The primary role of a point guard is to run the offense, and he has clearly done that at a very high level.

Remember, this is a guy who lost 500 bucks because he bet on Pitt to win at a place they haven't won in like 10 years. Not the sharpest tool.

 

[33pitt99]

Not true at all. Thought James had been playing better than previous seasons except for the past few games. What would you like me to do, compliment the guy when he had an awful game?

Certainly not, there was nothing to compliment in his game last night. However, when you say, "I'll be glad when he's gone" it takes it to another level. That's not talking about just last night, if it was just about last night, you could say the same about every player on the team, but your sole focus is on one player, and you repeat it in every thread. That's all I meant.

We were all frustrated by the game last night so I definitely understand wanting to criticize everyone and everything. I've been more focused on the refs, but that's just my natural bias. I tend to try to give the players the benefit of the doubt even if they may not deserve it.

 

[Zaratoughda]

I don't think the phrase 'we got beat' is accurate.

More like 'we didn't show up'.

I think the problem is Pitino is a very smart coach and he knows what Dixon does and is prepared for it.. and Dixon doesn't know what to do to counter it.

It is very similar to when Brey at ND was running the BURN against us... Dixon did not have a clue as to how to respond.

Also.. Dixon's situation on this seems to affect the players. When one player plays bad that is one thing, but when the ENTIRE TEAM is playing bad, as we saw against Ville, then it is something else and that means the coach.

There are two things in general that IMO Dixon should do.

1. The team as a whole has to respond much better when Young gets double (or triple) teamed. A lot of this is Young passing out of it but it is the other players getting in position to respond as well. We were pi** poor on this against Ville. Yeah, Pitino knew he could take advantage of us there (others have tried but failed) and, he did in no uncertain terms.

2. Dixon has to start giving Sheldon Jeter time at SF, where he started last year (yeah, IMO this ain't gonna happen but I am saying it anyways). IMO Dixon has had an infatuation with going small for years... and now he starts with Maia but then goes small with Young at C and Jeter at PF. In the Ville game... Jeter was ending up covering their C and was getting eaten alive. In the ND game, Young got 3 fouls at the end of the first half and that was a blessing in disguise as that meant he ended up playing Maia 32 minutes at C. The results speak for themselves. But Dixon, stubborn as a mule, won't budge on this.

Uh... a VERY UNPLEASANT EXPERIENCE to see the team... OUR TEAM... perform like that. Of course, it has happened before so after a while you get used to it. The team has to regroup and get going again. We will get another chance against Ville at The Pete but I would expect more of the same, just not as bad. We still have NO wins against top 25 teams, home or away.

 

[yc_ballcat]

This is a point guard who is the NCAA career leader in assists/turnovers. The primary role of a point guard is to run the offense, and he has clearly done that at a very high level.

Translation: games like Louisville are the fault of everyone else except Robinson. He was his usual extraordinary self advancing the ball across mid-court and waiting for everyone else to deliver while hoisting a few bricks in the process.

Robinson is the NCAA leader in the Panther Lair's favorite category largely because he takes no chances. That's great if you're clicking on all cylinders or playing keep away instead of basketball. But when you're actually playing basketball and not clicking on all cylinders, it would seem that precisely in these moments is when you really need a master court general to step his "running the offense" up to the next level.

For a player who garners so much praise for "running the offense," Robinson seems, even by his fan club's own admissions, extraordinarily dependent upon everyone else to actually make the offense run, which strikes me as contradictory. Robinson's great at running the offense that everyone else makes great by making the plays themselves. That's like me saying I'm a great chef because I went to Giant Eagle for Kevin Sousa.

Those of us who are more reserved in our praise for Robinson are told incessantly how much "smoother" and "better" the offense runs with Robinson on the court. Yet, Robinson was indeed on the court last night, and nothing was at all smooth. Why so? Because no one else made plays?

"Run the offense" seems to be the Robinson supporter euphemism for "sit back and take statistical credit while everyone else does the work."

 

[PittPoker]

Spot on YC, spot on!!!

 

[Fsgolfdr]

Is it the qbs fault if his receivers don't get open or they run the wrong routes and passes are intercepted or the ol is overwhelmed ? JR cannot put the team on his back he's not that kind of player and I doubt that he's as interested in stats as some on this board are , all he wants to do is win. And the answer is yes if everyone around him sucks Pitt will lose that's not all on him.

 

[thebadby2]

Robinson has proven he is the kind of point guard who can make an offense run smoothly. He's not and never will be the kind of lead guard who IS the offense. Expecting someone to be something they are not is moronic.

We got a total of 4 shots from our shooting guards. Everybody other than Young and Artis disappeared and Artis spent most of the first half on the bench after a couple very questionable foul calls. There was no offense to run. Sterling Smith shot only once. Chris Jones played horribly his first stint, with two turnovers and narrowly missing his 3rd because a Ville player fumbled a pass off his hands. Then he got hurt on his next rotation. We ended up playing Damon Wilson 14 minutes, 9 at 2G.

It's simple. This team has to hit jump shots. If the jumpers are falling, the opposing defense has to extend, which opens up the lane for our scorers and offensive rebounding putbacks. We're not big and we're not fast. If we can't hit jumpers and we can't rebound, we're going to lose frequently.

If we play bigger teams, like Purdue and Louisville and we don't hit the jumpers, we're not going to beat them. We've built a roster much like Notre Dame's typical team, with mostly finesse players who aren't particularly athletic. We'll win or lose with the jump-shooting offense and some nights the jumpers just aren't there.

Pitino has taken a very different recruiting tack. He has 5 kids 6-10 or taller, plus another couple 6-9/6-8 PF's on his roster. His 6-9 guys look a lot taller than our 6-8/6-9 guys. We have a roster filled with slightly undersized 4/5 types. We will go as far as the skill level of those combo forwards take us. Generally, the smaller, quicker approach has been successful this year but we have had trouble when we've played long, physical front lines.

It is what it is. We don't have a Final Four caliber roster. We're not the rough and tumble Big East team who could physically beat up the long tall but slender front lines. We're an ACC roster, but probably need a few more quick athletic guards and wings to go along with the versatile forwards.

Damon Wilson, Kithcart and Crisshawn Clark are a step in that direction. Recruiting in the next year or two will determine where we end up, but there is no question Dixon has reworked the roster quickly for ACC style play.

Our offense depends on Robinson, and Robinson is not particularly difficult to defend. Pitino is smart enough to recognize that if you take him out defensively, the rest falls apart. Pitino said after the game that the defensive game plan based on scouting reports on Pitt was to force James and Artis to go to their off hands. Pretty simple stuff, and it worked beautifully. Probably a pretty good blueprint for the rest of our ACC opponents, but fortunately they don't all have the length and quickness all over the floor that Louisille has.

 

[Delpanther]

Is it the qbs fault if his receivers don't get open or they run the wrong routes and passes are intercepted or the ol is overwhelmed ? JR cannot put the team on his back he's not that kind of player and I doubt that he's as interested in stats as some on this board are , all he wants to do is win. And the answer is yes if everyone around him sucks Pitt will lose that's not all on him.

It's the PG's fault if he can't break down his defender and force the defense's hand. That creates offense. Mediocre PG's may not be able to do that but reallygood PG's do. The aspiration is to have a playmaker at PG and not a caretaker.

 

[Franb]

Translation: games like Louisville are the fault of everyone else except Robinson. He was his usual extraordinary self advancing the ball across mid-court and waiting for everyone else to deliver while hoisting a few bricks in the process.

Robinson is the NCAA leader in the Panther Lair's favorite category largely because he takes no chances. That's great if you're clicking on all cylinders or playing keep away instead of basketball. But when you're actually playing basketball and not clicking on all cylinders, it would seem that precisely in these moments is when you really need a master court general to step his "running the offense" up to the next level.

For a player who garners so much praise for "running the offense," Robinson seems, even by his fan club's own admissions, extraordinarily dependent upon everyone else to actually make the offense run, which strikes me as contradictory. Robinson's great at running the offense that everyone else makes great by making the plays themselves. That's like me saying I'm a great chef because I went to Giant Eagle for Kevin Sousa.

Those of us who are more reserved in our praise for Robinson are told incessantly how much "smoother" and "better" the offense runs with Robinson on the court. Yet, Robinson was indeed on the court last night, and nothing was at all smooth. Why so? Because no one else made plays?

"Run the offense" seems to be the Robinson supporter euphemism for "sit back and take statistical credit while everyone else does the work."

Your "translation" has nothing to do with my comment. I referenced his career, not the Louisville game. He was clearly bad in this game, as was every other Pitt player. You don't like him as a player - fine. No need to bash him because he is not Magic Johnson.

 

[Harve74]

Your "translation" has nothing to do with my comment. I referenced his career, not the Louisville game. He was clearly bad in this game, as was every other Pitt player. You don't like him as a player - fine. No need to bash him because he is not Magic Johnson.

yc has consistently bashed Robinson. He wants a different style of lead guard instead of a game manager type PG. That kind of thinking certainly didn't work out too well for the folks who were pushing for Newkirk to take Robinson's minutes last season. We will see how much we miss James when we play without him next season.

 

[Fsgolfdr]

Everyone wants the perfect point guard one that can break the press ,penetrate, dish off ,control the tempo,defend and shoot. These guys do exist they go to Kentucky and Duke,stay a year and go to the NBA. PITT had a point guard who did most of that , Carl Krauser and how's he remembered?

 

[yc_ballcat]

Is it the qbs fault if his receivers don't get open or they run the wrong routes and passes are intercepted or the ol is overwhelmed ? JR cannot put the team on his back he's not that kind of player and I doubt that he's as interested in stats as some on this board are , all he wants to do is win. And the answer is yes if everyone around him sucks Pitt will lose that's not all on him.

To be sure, the responsibility is shared. But if a QB only throws to a receiver when he is "open," that QB is going to leave a lot of plays on the field. In many instances, the QB makes the opening with his throw. Minus the great throw (and / or great catch), there is no opening. Great "run the offense" QBs don't rely on their guys being wide open all the time. They have the ability to make an opening where an obvious one is not there.

Robinson supporters imply that Robinson has this "make an opening" ability on the basketball court. His skeptics, like me, disagree.

We saw this in the Syracuse game: Artis was the one making all the great "create an opening" type passes. Robinson had one (the Jeter dunk).

Otherwise, fair points.

 

[yc_ballcat]

yc has consistently bashed Robinson. He wants a different style of lead guard instead of a game manager type PG. That kind of thinking certainly didn't work out too well for the folks who were pushing for Newkirk to take Robinson's minutes last season. We will see how much we miss James when we play without him next season.

I'd prefer to say I'm a skeptic rather than a basher. I think you & other supporters greatly overstate his impact and importance. Robinson quite literally can do no wrong in your view. If he goes 0-4 or 1-10, you say "oh well, not his job to score." If he goes for 2 assists and 3 turnovers, you say "oh well, his teammates didn't make shots." He is simultaneously invaluable and inconsequential. When the team plays well, he's invaluable. When the team plays poorly, he's inconsequential.

 

[yc_ballcat]

Everyone wants the perfect point guard one that can break the press ,penetrate, dish off ,control the tempo,defend and shoot. These guys do exist they go to Kentucky and Duke,stay a year and go to the NBA. PITT had a point guard who did most of that , Carl Krauser and how's he remembered?

I remember Krauser fondly. On the typical Pitt team (which is to say basically every Pitt team) I would much rather have him over Robinson. On the 1982 Carolina team where I just need someone to pass the ball to Jordan, Worthy, or Perkins and then get out of the way or get back on D, I'll take Robinson.

 

[PittPoker]

I loved Krauser. He would be really needed on this current team.

 

[yc_ballcat]

I loved Krauser. He would be really needed on this current team.

Agreed. He was a tough player. Classic NYC savvy. Defenses would absolutely have to game plan for him. He could go get you 18 + several dimes & carry the team if Artis was struggling.

 

[Delpanther]

I'd prefer to say I'm a skeptic rather than a basher. I think you & other supporters greatly overstate his impact and importance. Robinson quite literally can do no wrong in your view. If he goes 0-4 or 1-10, you say "oh well, not his job to score." If he goes for 2 assists and 3 turnovers, you say "oh well, his teammates didn't make shots." He is simultaneously invaluable and inconsequential. When the team plays well, he's invaluable. When the team plays poorly, he's inconsequential.

When it comes to Robinson, Harve and his clique of JD adulators can't see the forest for the trees. What a dumb statement regarding Newkirk-the objective is to recruit a GOOD PG who can score and penetrate. The fact that Newkirk didn't work out doesn't mean that seeking that type of guard isn't the right course of action, it only means Dixon recruited another guard in Newkirk who was a stiff which more often than not has been the case.

 

[Harve74]

Agreed. He was a tough player. Classic NYC savvy. Defenses would absolutely have to game plan for him. He could go get you 18 + several dimes & carry the team if Artis was struggling.

Krauser is almost exactly what many fans currently want in a point guard. However, at the time he was playing here, he was roundly criticized by many of the same armchair coaches for dominating the ball, shooting too much and not passing enough. We have a lot of fans who have been brought up with the contrarian media in this town. They basically always want something different from whatever we have.

If he were playing today, with the current rule interpretation, Carl might average 30 pts and foul out the entire opposing backcourt. He was superb in initiating contact and drawing fouls, even when more defensive contact was allowed.

It's not that Dixon hasn't recruited fast, scoring lead guards. Those who came here just didn't work out.
Ron Ramon proved to be more of a short SG than a PG.
Travon Woodall blew a knee out as a freshman and lost his athleticism. Arguably, like Ramon, more a short SG.
Isaiah Epps put on 30# between high school/prep school and his arrival here and never regained the promise he showed as a schoolboy. Lack of work ethic or just peaked at 17?
John Johnson was a bust. Not as fast, skilled or consistent as advertised. Simply totally unable to defend even a stationary object.
Josh Newkirk could look great at Greentree but regressed horribly his sophomore year. Nice kid, maybe he can resurrect his career at IU.

Hopefully Kithcart can break that chain.

Robinson is what he is. He is exactly the game manager many coaches crave. When he tries to do too much, his limits show. He does what he does as well or better than anyone around, but he's never going to be what some people want.