An amusing mailbag thread has been going through SI.com’s Grant Wahl column. He wrote a piece lauding Ben Howland for bringing East Coast toughness to the West Coast and UCLA. Someone countered that Howland is from Cali and got his fundamentals at UC-Santa Barbara. Wahl, conceded the point and then went further to point out that in the early ’90s the great defense came out of the West with UNLV and Jerry Tarkanian. This led to yet another point.

I find it interesting that in your answer about Ben Howland and “East Coast” basketball that you mention as the best defensive team of the last two decades Jerry Tarkanian’s UNLV running the “amoeba” defense in the early ’90s. To close the loop the whole way, the assistant coach that brought the amoeba to UNLV was Tim Grgurich. Grgurich learned the amoeba defense while a young assistant (he was also later the head coach) at, you guessed it, Pitt in the early 70s. The head coach at Pitt then was a classy gentleman by the name of Buzz Ridl. I don’t know if the amoeba defense was Ridl’s invention, but his teams used it extensively.
— Joe Smith, North Huntingdon, Pa.

Great stuff, Joe, and thanks for the amplification. The man known affectionately as Timgurg is another highly regarded hoops mind among the cognoscenti who deserves more widespread attention. Strange thing: when you do a Google search of “amoeba defense grgurich ridl” you get one result, which happens to be in … Italian. We aren’t the greatest Italian reader, but there’s some useful stuff in here if you’re curious, including an origin citation to a 1971-72 Pitt game that will serve as our Hoops Lingo item of the week.

I keep hoping that Pitt will make a better effort to reach Grgurich, to come back and talk to the basketball team. Maybe even give some advice and some tips. Grgurich is a great basketball mind and one of the best career assistants — he was never one for the rubber chicken circuit and gladhanding portion.
Luke Winn was looking at the Pomeroy stats and sees concern for Pitt because of the defense.

Pitt is both highest-ranked team on the list and the most surprising inclusion. Just a year ago the Panthers finished 12th in the nation in defensive efficiency with a rating of 89.8 — and despite losing only one major player, Carl Krauser, have slipped to 115th. Pitt coach Jamie Dixon is a disciple of UCLA’s Ben Howland (their teams were Nos. 1 and 2 in the country earlier this month) but the Panthers have turned very un-Howland-like in 2006-07, riskily relying on an elite offense to make up for an average D. It’s easy to blame the lapse on Krauser’s absence, but Pitt is also giving up more offensive boards: The Panthers ranked sixth in the nation in 2005-06 in percentage of offensive rebounds allowed (26.3), while in ’06-07 they’re 69th (30.7 percent).

I honestly think the defense and rebounding will be tightening up soon. It’s not going to reach last year’s numbers, but it will improve.

The bad news, OK State is also looking to rebound from a tough loss and their first of the year. They are also without freshman guard Obi Muonelo. The kid had been giving them 20+ minutes a night and 11 points/game. He broke his leg in practice over the weekend. This reduces their depth a little, but unless their guards get in foul trouble every game (they did against Tennessee) it won’t be that great of a loss. It’s not like losing a junior and senior who knows the system and provides leadership. He was a freshman, admittedly, a sparkplug type player with a lot of energy, but I’m not going to put that as a major loss for the Cowboys — especially going against Pitt. Yes, they’ve had 7 players foul out in 12 games, but they still can go 7 or 8 deep. It’s not like they are down to 6 bodies.
Both teams have their press releases and game notes — Pitt & OSU (PDF). Obviously, this is the first time the teams have met since the 2004 Sweet 16 meeting that Pitt lost 63-51. I must be a bit out of it, but it just hit me that Pitt will have played Wisconsin and OSU in consecutive games just like in the 2004 NCAA. I mean, I knew that they were two teams that Pitt had faced that year, but it somehow was lost on me until now that it was in the same order.

Vital statistics for Pitt from Pomeroy, Mid-Majority, and traditional.

Vital statistics for OSU from Pomeroy, Mid-Majority, and traditional.

Here’s some of what I get from all the numbers: Oklahoma State likes to play at a faster pace than Pitt, and plays a more aggressive defense. As such, they cause but also have a lot of turnovers. 234 turnovers by opponents, but 210 by OK State. Pitt of course is the opposite. Not a lot of turnovers by the team nor forced by the opponent — 133 coming and going.
They are a decent rebounding team (34.6), but they only outrebound their opponents by an average of 1.8/game. In fact, they tend to be outrebounded on the offensive glass. Pitt rebounding differential against opponents is +7.4.

A lot of that is because they are not particularly tall inside — they leap, are aggressive and get up there; but are not tall — Boggan is 6’7″ playing Forward-Center, Forwards Monds and Dove are 6’8″ and 6’9″. Back-up Center Kenny Cooper is 6’10” but only plays about 13 minutes. Boggan is their leading rebounder with 7/game. Their guards, though, are good at grabbing a lot of rebounds as well, in part because the defense has helped hold opposing teams to only 30% shooting from the 3-point line — lots of long rebounds.

The big danger for Pitt is that this is a team that can go inside and out. Both the forwards and the guards are willing to do that. They like to drive to the basket, and Pitt has struggled so far this year against teams that like to penetrate. They are also an excellent free throw shooting team at 73.4%.

The Pitt players didn’t like it, but it was clear to them upon watching the video evidence that Wisconsin simply outworked and outhustled them throughout the game.

“I think we got outworked,” said Kendall, a senior power forward. “That’s really what it came down to. We were making shots. A couple of our guys played really well. But really, we just got outhustled. They had more energy. They were more ready to play.

“That’s disappointing. I don’t think we got out-skilled or anything. It was just the little things. They were hustling, getting loose balls, things like that. That’s what we’ve been addressing the last few days, having that work ethic and being ready to go.”

Two telling statistics demonstrate Pitt’s sluggish play against the Badgers. Wisconsin outrebounded Pitt, 41-31, and Pitt had 28 personal fouls, which sent the Badgers to the free-throw line 44 times.

“It usually goes that the team that hustles more gets most of the calls,” junior guard Ronald Ramon said. “That sums it up right there. We didn’t play with the same intensity that they did. That’s why every call went their way. We didn’t play as hard as we should have.

“I’m pretty sure I’m speaking for my entire team when I say we were disappointed in that. We’re the ones playing. We didn’t execute and we didn’t play hard. They were better than us that day. We have to make sure we get back to playing the way we play.”

Both Kendall and Ramon added that the team in general had gotten a little complacent. Coach Dixon, as is his style defended the players from charges of being outworked, but at the same time conceded that the team needed to do a lot more in light of the game.

Players getting physical in practices seemed to have resumed after the loss with Sam Young and Levance Fields ending up with bloody lips.