Women beat Clemson

[Joe the Panther Fan]

In overtime, 78-73.

I only watched the last five minutes or so plus the overtime, but Pitt was down at the half and rode a big 3rd quarter to the lead. Led most of the 4th until late. Clemson took a one point lead with just under two minutes in regulation, then Harris made two foul shots to give Pitt the lead. Clemson hit a three to go up two with just over a minute to go and then Amber Brown scored on the inside to tie the game.

Pitt came out and hit two threes on their first two possessions of the overtime, one by Hayford and one by Everett to take a six point lead, and Clemson never got closer than two points the rest of the way.

Neither team shot the ball well, Pitt was 36/29/73, while Clemson was 33/27/59. Pitt had 14 turnovers to Clemson's 17. 14 for Pitt in an overtime game is certainly better than normal, so that helped. Brown ended up with 15 and 9 in only 24 minutes. Harris with 16 and Everett with 15, although neither of them shot the ball well again.

 

[Chescat]

They have been lowering
the TO's the past several
games. Hayford had a so-so
first half with some typical
TO's, but she played much
better in the second half
handling the ball well, and
hitting a few key shots. I
hope she keeps it up. She's
a good athlete.

White must be listening
LOL. He FINALLY started
playing King who definitely
can score in the lane. Come
on coach, put her on the
high post where she belongs.
She proved it tonight. It was
stated right here last week.

We still have a long way to go,
and Clemson is not a good ACC
team, but we looked better and
more confident tonight. There
are a few other ACC teams that
I feel we can beat.

 

[MajorMajors]

And Liatu King played 25 minutes and shot 5 for 7. Hope she stays in the lineup.

Everett’s poor shooting percentage is killing them. She was 5 for 20 tonight. I keep expecting her to get hot…. And Strother was cold tonight too - but I hope they make her keep shooting.

Go Pitt.

 

[Chescat]

And Liatu King played 25 minutes and shot 5 for 7. Hope she stays in the lineup.

Everett’s poor shooting percentage is killing them. She was 5 for 20 tonight. I keep expecting her to get hot…. And Strother was cold tonight too - but I hope they make her keep shooting.

Go Pitt.

True, but the good news is
she hit em when we needed
them. On this team, she has
to shoot when it's there.
Tonight she took a few ill
advised shots from way too
deep, and too early on the
shot clock.

As I posted above, White must
be listening.... playing King
more and Dunne less. Dunne
poorly played a few first half
minutes. I'm sure she's a good
team mate, but she can't play
inside in the ACC.

 

[HOF Coach]

 

[Black Panther]

Nice comeback win! Down ten at one point.

 

[DC_Area_Panther]

Second win in the ACC and a road win. Some progress being made. Maybe they have 2-3 more wins possible in ACC play.

 

[Chescat]

Second win in the ACC and a road win. Some progress being made. Maybe they have 2-3 more wins possible in ACC play.

The teams below Pitt in
the ACC standings are WF,
Clemson, Syracuse, and
UVA. We've already beaten
WF and Clemson. If they
beat Syracuse and UVA
that's four wins. FloridaST,
Duke, and Miami are possible
(not probable). Three more
wins would be great, and
show some improvement.

 

[MajorMajors]

—I found it interesting that 3 players off the bench had the best +/- figures for Pitt. King, Hayford and Cynthia were all plus 7.
Hayford did this despite having 4 turnovers…

—Pitt somehow won even though they scored only 7 points in the second quarter. Tough to overcome the scoring droughts this team has - emphasizing the need to bring in some better shooters…

—Rita had a decent game…

Go Pitt.

 

[Chescat]

—I found it interesting that 3 players off the bench had the best +/- figures for Pitt. King, Hayford and Cynthia were all plus 7.
Hayford did this despite having 4 turnovers…

—Pitt somehow won even though they scored only 7 points in the second quarter. Tough to overcome the scoring droughts this team has - emphasizing the need to bring in some better shooters…

—Rita had a decent game…

Go Pitt.

Well, I agree with some and
disagree with others. First
of all Hayford, (the player
I've crticized from day one
on here), Her T0's were early.
Later in the game she played
much better. 3-6 Fg'a and 2-3
threes. She even had 5 rebounds,
excellent for a guard.who is
mostly on the outside. Also 2
steals, 3 assists. and 1 block.
That's why the+/- was good.

Rita? Sorry, I can't agree. Yes
12 rebounds were good. The
Clemson bigs were awful IMOI.
I felt she should have dominated
inside. One thing she needs to
learn is to front the other team's
big down low in the lane. I feel
she not being taught this. +/-
stats don't reflect everything.
Lack of positioning, giving up easy
baskets, and getting beat down
court, just to name a few.

King? I totally agree . She played
a great geme. She's a threat on
the high post, can score in the
lane, can rebound, and she's
physically tough. Again +/- stats
don't measure everything, for
example toughness. Speaking of
toughness...how about Amber
Brown. IMO she's a warrior.

 

[gary2]

Well, I agree with some and
disagree with others. First
of all Hayford, (the player
I've crticized from day one
on here), Her T0's were early.
Later in the game she played
much better. 3-6 Fg'a and 2-3
threes. She even had 5 rebounds,
excellent for a guard.who is
mostly on the outside. Also 2
steals, 3 assists. and 1 block.
That's why the+/- was good.

Rita? Sorry, I can't agree. Yes
12 rebounds were good. The
Clemson bigs were awful IMOI.
I felt she should have dominated
inside. One thing she needs to
learn is to front the other team's
big down low in the lane. I feel
she not being taught this. +/-
stats don't reflect everything.
Lack of positioning, giving up easy
baskets, and getting beat down
court, just to name a few.

King? I totally agree . She played
a great geme. She's a threat on
the high post, can score in the
lane, can rebound, and she's
physically tough. Again +/- stats
don't measure everything, for
example toughness. Speaking of
toughness...how about Amber
Brown. IMO she's a warrior.

I think you crossed Rita and Cynthia? Rita had a decent game seemed more of an afterthought than the central point.

Once again the “talented” stars shot a ridiculous percentage. They were a combined 10-36. Against (as you said a not good) Clemson team.

 

[Chescat]

I saw the stats on Cynthia
and Rita. Cynthia's +/- was
actualy pretty good. However
I'll make the same point
about Cynthia as I did with
Rita.....fans often don't
understand what +/- really
means. All it does is reflect
the sccore when a player
enters the game and the
score when the player leaves
the game.

So in Cynthia's case as in
Rita's it was positive. The
fact that Cynthia can barely
make a putback from point
blank range is not reflected
in a +/- .She does rebound
though and that is seen in a
more revealing stat. Same
with Rita, there's a lot of
difficiencies in her game, but
not revealed in a +/-. I can
assure you coaches look at it,
but really rely on FG%, Assists,
Assist/TO ratio, and rebounds
to name a few.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

I saw the stats on Cynthia
and Rita. Cynthia's +/- was
actualy pretty good. However
I'll make the same point
about Cynthia as I did with
Rita.....fans often don't
understand what +/- really
means. All it does is reflect
the sccore when a player
enters the game and the
score when the player leaves
the game.

So in Cynthia's case as in
Rita's it was positive. The
fact that Cynthia can barely
make a putback from point
blank range is not reflected
in a +/- .She does rebound
though and that is seen in a
more revealing stat. Same
with Rita, there's a lot of
difficiencies in her game, but
not revealed in a +/-. I can
assure you coaches look at it,
but really rely on FG%, Assists,
Assist/TO ratio, and rebounds
to name a few.

I am certainly not a fan of plus/minus (in basketball or hockey) as I have said on here before, but if you are consistently "more plus" than you teammates that certainly tells you something. I mean if you say that someone's deficiencies don't show up in their +/- then what you are really saying is that their deficiencies don't show up on the scoreboard. And if they aren't showing up on the scoreboard, are they really a significant deficiency?

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

If they
beat Syracuse and UVA
that's four wins. FloridaST,
Duke, and Miami are possible
(not probable).

They actually still have two games with Syracuse left, up there on Sunday and then back here two weeks later. Duke might be a possibility, but they are a ranked team and have been most of the season. Beating them would be a really good win. Beating Florida State would be a lot more likely than beating Duke (although we can hope they win them both!).

 

[Chescat]

I am certainly not a fan of plus/minus (in basketball or hockey) as I have said on here before, but if you are consistently "more plus" than you teammates that certainly tells you something. I mean if you say that someone's deficiencies don't show up in their +/- then what you are really saying is that their deficiencies don't show up on the scoreboard. And if they aren't showing up on the scoreboard, are they really a significant deficiency?

Good question!
To answer your question,
depending on the "deficiency"
it could really show up on the
scoreboard, and of course
there are times where it
wouldn't.

Here's an example.
Rita had a positive +/- last
game. I pointed out a number
of "deficiencies" in her game.
Poor positioning on both
ends of the floor. Not fronting
down low, getting beat down
the floor, and as even you
mentioned a game or two ago,
throwing up an airball on a
putback. Ok....with all those
deficiencies we won anyway
and it didn't show up on the
scoreboard. If it didn't go to
OT and we lost by 1 Pt., her
+/- would be the same and it
wouldn't reflect the scoreboard
since it was a loss.

I'm sure you're aware a player
can also light up the stat sheet,
but the team might do poorly
when she came in, and do well
after she leaves, and still show
a loss on the scoreboard.

One thing I think we both agree
is, +/- as a stat is not the best
way to judge a player's actual
performance in a game. THAT is
what I was referring to in my
above post. There are far better
and more useful stats that
coaches really use.

 

[Chescat]

They actually still have two games with Syracuse left, up there on Sunday and then back here two weeks later. Duke might be a possibility, but they are a ranked team and have been most of the season. Beating them would be a really good win. Beating Florida State would be a lot more likely than beating Duke (although we can hope they win them both!).

Yeah, beating Duke will
be a stretch, but they
are only 4-4 ( I know losses
to v. good teams). We do
have a chance against
VA, F.St., Cuse, and maybe
Miami.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

I pointed out a number
of "deficiencies" in her game.
Poor positioning on both
ends of the floor. Not fronting
down low, getting beat down
the floor, and as even you
mentioned a game or two ago,
throwing up an airball on a
putback.

But some of those probably aren't actually deficiencies (damn, I have a hard time spelling that word!). I mean she plays behind the player on defense almost certainly because that's what they want her to do, because if she fronts the post they can lob over her and negate her shot blocking while if she plays behind she can still "wall" the player up and block or alter shots. It might be your preference that she fronts the post, but there are lots of teams that do not play that way at all. Pitt happens to be one of them, at least with Igbokwe.

Most teams want to front with shorter defenders who are going to get shot over if the player they are guarding catches the ball in the post, knowing that they are giving up the lobs over the top. Most teams with taller posts want them to play behind to alter and block shots. And Igbokwe is as tall or taller than just about everyone she plays against.

And something like shooting an airball on a putback sort of does show up in the +/-, because it's a possession that you should have scored on that you didn't. You should have had another +2 but instead you got a 0.

The real problem with +/- is that you get pluses and minuses for things that you don't have anything to do with. My "favorite" example was from the men's game against Duke a few years ago, when in the span of about five possession a certain Pitt defender got beat off the dribble for a dunk, got beat off the dribble again for a dunk, got beat off the dribble and when help came the guy passed the ball to that defender's man for a wide open three, and then played so far off the guy on the next possession so that he wouldn't get beat off the dribble again that he gave up a wide open three to his man.

Four possessions, ten points against, all the fault of basically one guy, and yet all four other guys on the court got a -10 for their teammates ineptitude on the defensive end of the court.

 

[Chescat]

Ok, you're example of the
problem with +/- actually
had me laughing.....sad but
very true.

As for fronting down low.
Playing between your man
and the basket is usually
basic, but when the big is
as far low as what I watched
yesterday, you've got to
front. Rita is not going to
have a lob over her head
that low unless she's a
statue and doesn't raise her
arms. Oh Wait! .... sometimes
she is a statue.

BTW, teaching a "ball-you-man
D and learning how to defend
passing lanes is another way
to defend, not only the post,
but even out front. I wonder
if Coach White even knows what
these concepts are.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

I wonder
if Coach White even knows what
these concepts are.

It's amazing that you know so much more about coaching basketball than he does!

 

[MajorMajors]

Will be interesting to see if local Pitt recruit Aislin Malcolm will be able to step in and contribute as a good shooter next season. I noticed that Tess Myers, who is local, is shooting a high volume of 3s for Duquesne and making 40% of them. I think she’s just a freshman…

We could sure use a 40% three-point shooter…. Strother is at 33%; Hayford is at 35%, but doesn’t shot that many. Maybe Everett will find her shot for the stretch drive…

Go Pitt.

 

[Chescat]

It's amazing that you know so much more about coaching basketball than he does!

Some of the stuff I
mentioned in the above
post is pretty basic. I
don't see our women
doing those things.

It's amazing how when
a poster shows you a
different look on here,
you resort to a wise ass
comment. Admit it, you
have trouble with other
posters disagreeing with
you.

 

[Chescat]

Will be interesting to see if local Pitt recruit Aislin Malcolm will be able to step in and contribute as a good shooter next season. I noticed that Tess Myers, who is local, is shooting a high volume of 3s for Duquesne and making 40% of them. I think she’s just a freshman…

We could sure use a 40% three-point shooter…. Strother is at 33%; Hayford is at 35%, but doesn’t shot that many. Maybe Everett will find her shot for the stretch drive…

Go Pitt.

A true shooter or two
would really help this
group. You mentioned
Strother, she IMO is our
best "pure" shooter. The
rest of her floor game
isn't all that great. She's
basically a stand still
shooter. As I watch
Everett she can shoot,
but lately it's too early
on the shot clock, or she
rushes. She's good enough
to get an off balanced
shot, but that doesn't help
her % . She's also being
over defensed. Opposition
knows they need to stop
her and let our other players
try to stop her.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

It's amazing how when
a poster shows you a
different look on here,
you resort to a wise ass
comment. Admit it, you
have trouble with other
posters disagreeing with
you.

To be fair, I only make wise-ass comments when someone says something dumb.

I'm thinking you might be taking these discussions on this board way too seriously if you think that I care if someone that I don't know disagrees with me.

 

[Chescat]

If you want "dumb" go
back and re read your
description of low post
D.
Even if I read a "dumb"
post, I usually follow with
an IMO....... or I disagree.
I try and stay off the wise
ass comments.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

If you want "dumb" go
back and re read your
description of low post
D.

Yep, I agree, the description that is in line with the way that most teams play post defense most often is dumb, and the way that you are suggesting that Pitt should play, which basically no one does on a consistent basis, is clearly the correct way to play it.

Seriously, unless someone is at a size disadvantage who fronts the post all the time? Pretty much no one. And yet you think that Lance White (and apparently just about every other basketball coach) doesn't know how to coach because he defends the post pretty much the same way that everyone else does.

 

[Chescat]

Yep, I agree, the description that is in line with the way that most teams play post defense most often is dumb, and the way that you are suggesting that Pitt should play, which basically no one does on a consistent basis, is clearly the correct way to play it.

Seriously, unless someone is at a size disadvantage who fronts the post all the time? Pretty much no one. And yet you think that Lance White (and apparently just about every other basketball coach) doesn't know how to coach because he defends the post pretty much the same way that everyone else does

Why get personal? Last
comment. Post D at the
high post is basically
between your man and
the basket. That lessens
as the offense's center
goes lower in the lane
and also depending on
where the ball is. When
it's low, you front. What
do you think the struggle
for position is all about
when it's low?

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

When
it's low, you front. What
do you think the struggle
for position is all about
when it's low?

No, you don't. At least not most of the time. Most of the time the defender is playing slightly behind and towards the middle of the offensive player, not all the way out in front of them. Because if you play all the way out in front of them then you give up lobs over the top for layups all game long. The only people who are truely fronting in the low post are people who are generally shorter than the player they are guarding who know that if the post player gets the ball they are just going to shoot right over them anyway, so they are trying to make the initial pass more difficult to complete.

The struggle for position is to move the offensive player off the spot where they want the ball and to someplace where they are less likely to score from if they do get the ball, or from the offensive players perspective to move the defender so that you can get to the spot where you want to get the ball. And that happens whether the defender is playing off to the side or behind or in front of the offensive player.

 

[Chescat]

We not only disagree, you're
way off when you talk about
struggle for position is only
about "spot where you want
the ball or to move the
defender." Coaches are
not only teaching ball you
man in that situation, they
are also teaching getting in
the pasing lane, which calls
for fronting.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

We not only disagree, you're
way off when you talk about
struggle for position is only
about "spot where you want
the ball or to move the
defender." Coaches are
not only teaching ball you
man in that situation, they
are also teaching getting in
the pasing lane, which calls
for fronting.

If you are reading this when I post it, turn on the Louisville - Duke game that's going on right now on ESPN. When the game is in the half court neither one of these teams is fronting the post. Now Louisville is playing a lot with no one in the low post on offense, but when Williams goes there Duke is not fronting him. And Louisville isn't fronting any of the Duke players in the low post.

But maybe we can attribute that to the fact that Louisville fired/let their coach quit earlier this week and replaced him, I guess, with some fan randomly picked out of the stands who doesn't know what they are doing, and of course that guy who is coaching Duke, I forget his name, it's pretty well known that he has no tactical basketball knowledge at all.

Although to be fair there was one time that Lousville did try to front the post. It was when because of a switch a guard ended up on Banchero in the post. The guard fronted him, the Duke guard lobbed it over his head and Banchero caught the pass and turned and dunked the ball.

Hmm, maybe that's why they don't do it more often. Nah, probably just poor coaching.

 

[Chescat]

Actually I was watching the
TCU game. It was mostly a
defensive big playing behind
the Center, especially from
mid lane to the FT line, and
that's as it should be. There
were times when the big
fronted, but only down low.
Ok, you've made your point,
I made mine. I'm not going
to convince you, and you're
not going to convince me.
It's a message board, people
have different opinions. A lot
of tv Ball today, enjoy it.