masthead.jpg

switchconcepts.com, U3dpdGNo-a25, DIRECT rubiconproject.com, 14766, RESELLER pubmatic.com, 30666, RESELLER, 5d62403b186f2ace appnexus.com, 1117, RESELLER thetradedesk.com, switchconcepts, RESELLER taboola.com, switchconceptopenrtb, RESELLER bidswitch.com, switchconcepts, RESELLER contextweb.com, 560031, RESELLER amazon-adsystem.com, 3160, RESELLER crimtan.com, switch, RESELLER quantcast.com, switchconcepts , RESELLER rhythmone.com, 1934627955, RESELLER ssphwy.com, switchconcepts, RESELLER emxdgt.com, 59, RESELLER appnexus.com, 1356, RESELLER sovrn.com, 96786, RESELLER, fafdf38b16bf6b2b indexexchange.com, 180008, RESELLER nativeads.com, 52853, RESELLER theagency.com, 1058, RESELLER google.com, pub-3515913239267445, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0
February 1, 2006

It Just Doesn’t Add Up

Filed under: Uncategorized — Chas @ 7:26 am

Before the game, I said Pitt needed to knock down some 3s to loosen up the UConn defense and free-up Aaron Gray a little more. Not only didn’t that happen, but there was surprisingly little help for Gray on the boards. Part of that is attributable to the size and athleticism of UConn. Their guys are not only tall, but their jumping and control inside was something. The way they could go up for blocks and rebounds makes them that much tougher inside. If a team isn’t knocking down some outside shots against them, it allows them to further collapse inside. Limiting the penetration and clogging the passing lanes.

That’s what happened to Pitt. Gray with his sheer size was the only one who could be effective inside. Kendall, DeGroat and even Young had more trouble finding any space to get a clean shot over the UConn interior. Nine blocked shots. The only thing the players on the perimeter were able to do was some nice drives and penetration at times. Even then, however, the UConn defense often played it smart by refusing to be goaded into leaving their man free. Again, not letting the paint open up for Pitt.

Some numbers:

Pitt

Poss 75.6 Pace Fast
O-Rating 100.6 D-Rating 105.9 (Eff. Margin -5.3)
eFG% 45.5 PPWS 1.02
A/TO 1.3 TO Rate 15.9% A/B 51.7%
Floor Pct 51.3% FT Prod 24.2

UConn

Poss 75.3 Pace Fast
O-Rating 106.3 D-Rating 101.0 (Eff. Margin +5.3)
eFG% 50.0 PPWS 1.14
A/TO 0.8 TO Rate 21.3% A/B 48.1%
Floor Pct 52.8% FT Prod 42.9

One of the things that stands out is that UConn got Pitt to play at their pace. That was how Pitt ended up in so much foul trouble. Trying to grab a guy before he broke too far past. It isn’t often over the last few years that a team could get Pitt to play that quickly. That Pitt did as well as it did on the offense is encouraging. The problem, of course, was that it really hurt them on the defense. UConn got the ball upcourt so quickly and easily, that Pitt often seemed on its heels trying to get back on defense.

Pitt was also struggling to get the extra pass away for scoring. In both Pitt losses, the A/B % was in the 50s. No where close to the season average of around 68%.

Interestingly, while both teams went into the game with plenty of depth, it was Pitt — in part because of necessity — that really used its bench in this game. UConn had only 7 players go into double figures on minutes. Pitt went to 9 men.

To summarize, Pitt did not make 3s, were stifled on passing to find open looks, beaten soundly on the boards, had 2 players foul out of the game including Krauser, and played at UConn’s tempo. And yet the team, somehow, almost found a way to get the win.

I’m alternatively frustrated, amazed and impressed.





Powered by WordPress © PittBlather.com

Site Meter