Some more items to pass along.
If you worry/wonder/never had it cross your mind that perhaps since Birch is a Pitt commit you might be viewing his performance last night through Blue and Gold glasses, the final note at ‘Cuse blog TNIAAM on the game should be reassuring.
And as for Pitt-bound Khem Birch…yikes, you guys. One-and-done that guy…
No.
Either it was shyness, or something else, but the difference between the Khem Birch during practices and the one that showed up during the game continues to be the thing that most observers noticed.
Khem Birch (Toronto, Ont./Notre Dame Prep) did not have a stellar week of practice. Truth be told, he sleep walked through the sessions. Not even an elbow to the eye was enough to light his fire during practice. Going into the game, expectations for him were not high. However, what he does exceptionally well — run, rebound and block shots — sets up perfect in an all-star game. Out of nowhere, the Pittsburgh signee had 15 points, 10 rebounds and six blocks. Only Birch and Gilchrist recorded double-doubles. We had him down for the count, but he rose up and gave us glimpses of the baby Derrick Favors that he is.
Favors had more bulk than Birch, but that’s a comparison I could live with having.
The NCAA mandated limited window to test the draft waters does not have the NBA happy. They are, however, taking steps to work within the restrictions.
With the way the rules are currently set up, players have a window of only 10 days to decide whether or not to withdraw – from the time the early-entry list is officially released to teams (typically four days after the deadline, April 28) to the date the NCAA has legislated underclassmen must declare their intentions in writing to the school’s Director of Athletics, May 8.
Since the NCAA also restricts student athletes from missing class to “try out for a professional team,” players are essentially relegated to the weekends of April 29 and May 6 (the same date as the Euroleague Final Four) to attend NBA workouts and get an accurate reflection of their draft stock – something that is virtually impossible due to the logistics involved.
NBA teams, many of whom are still competing in the playoffs, are still in the preliminary stage of their evaluation process at that time, and are in no position to tell an underclassman with any real accuracy where he will be drafted on June 23.
Not only do the players have a short window to show what they have. They have an even shorter window to get reports and evaluate them to make an informed decision. The best solution? One big get-together.
The solution, which is awaiting approval from the NBA League office, is a group workout for draft-eligible prospects conducted in the last weekend of April that will be open to all 30 NBA teams. The New Jersey Nets , in a joint-bid with the Houston Rockets and New York Knicks, are hoping to host this event at their practice facility in East Rutherford.
Ideally this workout will feature as many top draft prospects as are willing to attend — not just underclassmen who are “testing the waters,” but also seniors and international players. Measurements and athletic, combine-style testing will also likely be conducted.
The prospects may even be able to compete in five-on-five action, if the teams involved in the bid get their wish.
One could happen as quickly as the end of this April in New Jersey. Not sure why teams wouldn’t support this option, but there is always some gamesmanship involved. For guys like Ashton Gibbs, who are testing the waters, this would simplify things immeasurably.
One big workout and a chance to get feedback with time to spare. Plus, if a team seems taken with a player, they can set up their own workout in the following week to get more info.
Finally, Coach Dixon had an appearance on the Dan Patrick Show today.
There was talk about the Final Four. Dixon leaned towardss the teams he’s faced — Butler and UConn. He even admitted with the Butler choice it was mainly because he hasn’t seen enough games involoving VCU.
Going into next year, how much better would JJ Moore have been if he had played meaningful minutes in meaningful games?
Dixon had better not use that formula with Birch next year. He is a notch or two above Moore from a talent perspective. HE NEEDS TO PLAY IMMEDIATELY.
History tells us, the only way Dixon will play a more talented, but less experience freshman is if HE HAS NO CHOICE. With Birch there will be plenty of LESS TALENTED choices, most notably Nasir Robinson.
In my mind, the way Jamie handles Birch will be a referendum on his program. If Jamie won’t adjust and invest in the future and maybe even sacrifice a win or two, by playing a raw, but freakishly talented player, then I will join the group of nay-sayers who claim Dixon doesn’t have what it takes to win big in March. Pitt will be forever under Dixon a January/February team.
UConn is the perfect example. Lamb and Napier, from what I saw of that team early in the year, often looked like lost puppies on the floor. But look at Lamb in particular now. He is a beast, a freshman who is doing everything we all hoped Gil Brown would have been doing as a 5th-year senior.
Generally, I’d like to see this team have a more offensive mindset. I love the extra pass and the assists numbers, but I feel like too many players in this system lose their sense of creativity and zeal for scoring. There has to be a happy medium between working the offense and approaching the offensive aspect of the game with the same confidence and style that you see at Greentree or in any playground game.
On Birch vs. Nas: Sure Birch has a big talent and ceiling advantage, and I think he should see major PT right from the start. But as SilverPanther pointed out several threads ago the 4 is the most difficult position to learn because it’s a key part of making the offense go. Nas plays that part of the position so well, it often goes unnoticed to people who simply watch the man with the ball. Birch will be adjusting to college life and academics, and you want to pile on the most difficult position to play in the offense as well? Good luck there.
So, if Moore starts over Patterson without improving what I noted above and Birch starts over Robinson simply because he’s taller and the newest shiney toy, then I’ll be reminding some of you of your posts when you’re bitching because we’re dropping non-con and BE games. I’m not saying it won’t pay off in the long run, but you’ll have to be willing to accept the bad with the good.
However, also remember that people were calling for Calhoun’s head at various points during the season because it looked like they would miss the tourney once again.
To my point above: Would Pitt fans, particularly some on this blog, remember that if it were happening to us next season? I seriously doubt it.
On Nas — I too am torn. Nas-supporters point to all the “intangibles” and how huge he comes up in games where the rest of the offense is stifled (especially against zone D’s). The flip-side is that Nas only appears to play well because he’ll often be the only option to score, his ‘intangibles’ are really only hustle and the fact that he’s in the mix when things go a little chaotic on plays, which is countervailed by the fact that he probably has more “non-recorded” turnovers than anyone in Pitt history (getting blocked, bad passing which would bounce of the Centers hands but count as the Center’s TO, etc), he’s not dynamic on offense (all he can do is score crafty lay-ups, but can’t draw a defender away from the basket, doesn’t move well away from the ball, his rebounding isn’t very strong so his ability to clean up misses with put-backs is limited) and hsi defense is unimpressive-to-weak because of his size. I think he does a lot for us, most importantly next year will be a leadership role, but there very well may be more effective options at the 4.
On Nas v Birch — some of Nas’ weaknesses it’s clear Birch does not/will not have, even as a raw freshman. He won’t get blocked as often, should be able to rebound better and get put-backs. It’ll be awhile before he can do the other intangibles like moving away from the ball, drawing defenders away, and passing — but these are things there is no better way to learn than real game experience. The degree of his impact, I think, will be directly correlated to his growth in understanding and executing these types of things. To me its worth it to have a riskier non-conf schedule for the sake of developing Birch in this way. Not throwing him in the fire right away, but steadily increasing his minutes regardless of obvious output in early games without relenting unless it looks like his confidence is getting broken.
The complication is also that its not Nas v Birch; its Nas v. Zanna v. Birch. There were many times last season that Zanna, despite his awkwardness at times, appeared to be better weapon (on both sides of the floor) than Nas.
Back to my first point, in light of the above (if any of it is accurate — I dunno), Nas may always be a better option to win the game (in the first half of the season at least), but is giving him more minutes than Birch in our best interest if we want to peak in March/April? I dunno, but I think not.
All that said — what goes on at the PF position may turn out to be a more minor sub-plot if Taylor and Moore have big seasons.
What I am suggesting: Pitt has under utilized talent sitting on the bench in March. The program would be better served to DEVELOP that talent better during the season.
In my opinion, Jamie’s clear bias towards experience has hindered that development. And Jamie wasn’t forced to develop those guys. If Zanna didn’t hustle in practice or Moore took a bad shot, sit ’em. Jamie had guys who were doing what he asked them to. He didn’t need them in order to win in January.
The analogy is like how the chicken and pig are related to breakfast. The chicken was involved by laying the egg, the pig was committed supplying the bacon. That was Calhoun and Dixon this year. Calhoun was the pig, he had no choice but to play those guys.
Now I’m not saying that Moore is as good as Lamb, that would be stupid.
But I am saying, that Jamie needs to figure out a way to get those more talented players to be bigger contributers in March without volunteering to be the pig at breakfast.
He will be the back up center to start the season. And will mostly be competing with Taylor for minutes. He could win that battle if Taylor doesn’t step it up.
I will gladly make a friendly wager with anyone interested, Dinner @Morton’s, loser pays, barring injury or suspension, BIRCH WILL NOT BE THE STARTING PF to begin the season.
Won’t make the BlackMagic wager though, posting on this comment section is way too much fun, would rather lose a little money.
I don’t think Dixon does this. I think he does the opposite and that is what hurts him in March. He plans to win each game by sticking with his system and sets. He doesn’t adjust to the opponent and awards playing time to the kids who know how to run the sets the best. He feels like his sets and players are good enough to beat the opponent regardless of what they are doing.
Obviously this philosophy works very well during the balance of the season. Even if it leads to one or two losses, the season is a big enough sample that things usually revert to the mean and Pitt wins a lot of games. Unfortunately this philosophy is not ideal in March unless you have the best players 1-5 or most of the best players. Pitt doesn’t have that yet.
I feel like Dixon would have more success in March if he scouted the opponent and adjusted his offensive and defensive sets based on the opponent. This is not something we have seen from Pitt and maybe that is why we haven’t been able to get to the Final 4. Perhaps things will change because of better players or evolution of Dixon’s coaching style.
I won’t be one taking your bet because I think you’re correct. Birch will play at the 5 to start and challenge Taylor for PT. That can only be a good thing because it will force Taylor to mature and step up if he wants to be the starter. If he doesn’t, we’ll have a capable defensive player at the 5 in Birch which is really all we had with Gary this past season, so it’s a wash there. Plus, no one knows about Dante’s knees. He may only be a 20 minute guy because of them and that means Birch gets equal PT with him even though he doesn’t start.
Now, if Taylor becomes the next BE MIP for Pitt (my big wish), I see Birch spelling him at the 5 while easing into the 4 through the non-con schedule, so he’s getting a minimum of 25 minutes every game. That would still leave some PT for Zanna as well who will likely be Birch’s backup at the 4 in 2012, our real next run at the Final Four if all goes according to plan.
In essence, Birch screwed up the original plan by coming in a year earlier. Nas would have been gone and he would have eventually ousted Zanna as the starting 4 in 2012 anyway. Jamie just needs to adjust the plan accordingly.
Because of a talent gap, Jamie has always played the percentages such as seasoned players win more games than inexperienced players and a team or player will eventually shoot to their percentages (34% on avg from 3). So, you give a little on the perimeter to protect the inside, especially when you don’t have lock-down on ball defenders at the guard positions. It works well over the course of a season as we’ve seen year after year.
However, in a single-elimination tourney, percentages go out the window, because you only have one game and just like the playoffs in the NFL, NBA and NHL, talented players step up their games.
On the other hand, by March next year, Birch may be ready to step up to the big time
I think we are saying the same thing. Either Dixon recruits better overall talent 1-5 or he adjusts his philosophy in the tournament. Getting one or two top-50 talents isn’t enough to win with the current approach. You need four or five on the same team.
Pitt’s talent is good enough to get to the Final Four, but not with the current philosophy. I feel like Pitt needs to be more aggressive with the game-plan to advance in the tournament. Pitt needs to take away what the opponent wants to do or is most comfortable doing. Sitting back and letting the opponent do their thing with solid but passive defense hasn’t gotten it done. Pitt needs to surprise the defense with aggressive traps, etc. The best way to do this in March is to practice it during the season.
One way or another, something has to change for Pitt to advance in March. The current approach has been successful, but may have hit a ceiling. My take is either better players or a coaching adjustment.
It doesn’t have to be a total system change but it needs to include some things others have been pointing out here – bring the young guys along faster, don’t be so predictable, play to the matchup versus your tried-and-true system, etc.
He’s not going to come out pressing or switch mid-game to a gimmick defense. It just isn’t going to happen.
We all know he’s a system coach. Offensively and defensively. He’s driving down the middle of the road.
That being said, I think he won way more games the last two years than just about anybody else would have with a project center, a leading scorer who shoots a set shot in college, a 6’4″ (maybe) power forward, no point guard and a Jekyll or Hyde swingman who might give you 24 points or 2 points on any given night.
On Birch: Wow, I love what I saw, even if it looked raw. He’s a gazelle. So fast and such a quick leaper. The potential boggles.
Even though I know it’s going to happen, I hate thinking about him playing center.
FWIW, I’m ok generally with Dixon being a ‘system’ guy, which has been how some up-thread charactrize him (i know its not in a pejoritive way). Its what makes for such consistency and it does work most of the time, except it hasn’t in March when the its not about total wins over a month, but adapting and winning every one-and-done game. But I think with the steady increase in talent, it may very well finally translate into the tourny season.
Pitt has the talent; they just need to figure out a way to use it better.
Please read the article below and then consider again whether or not talent matters.
link to bebballreportpitt.blogspot.com
Also, unless you weren’t watching ESPN or the tourney pregame shows on CBS, TNT, TBS or truTV, then you heard time and time again how this year’s field had no dominant teams, some good ones but no dominant. That’s why a lot of us thought this was Pitt’s year. There was more balance than ever before, and while we had no NBA first rounders (Taylor at his top potential, maybe someday), we had a group of good team players. That didn’t get us very far, did it.
Now look at who’s in the Final Four:
Kentucky – at least 3 if not 4 future NBA first rounders. Young, yes. But talented.
UConn – 3 solid future NBA guys and at least two of them first rounders.
Butler – a lottery pick last year who carried them to the final, thereby making them the most tourney-experienced team outside of Duke and a very disappointing MSU. And, Mack has improved his draft status a ton during this year’s run.
VCU – there’s a Cinderella every once in a while, and this one’s shooting 49% as a TEAM from beyond the arc during the tourney. That’s like having a team of Ashton Gibbs’s and would have led the nation in the regular season. I think they were pretty average during the season, so they’re pretty much playing out of their minds.
It’s all irrelevant anyway, because with the talent coming the next two years and the guys who were sophomores and freshmen this past year, Pitt should have the talent they need to be a factor in 2012-13. I guess we’ll see how that all develops.
Maybe if UConn wins it all, Calhoun will let Jamie borrow the trophy for a week or so, since Pitt was his big turning point. 🙂
Jamie has made some adjustments in the off season to his system. After Blair, Fields and Young left he retooled the offense to better suite Gibbs, Brown and Brad.
Will he do the same this off season? What should he tweak?
Is he perfect? No. But don’t point to a few moments in one game as some kind of indicator of his coaching ability. What about the close ones he won last year and this year? I guess he just got lucky there. He had a seasoned group of guys who on a consistent basis pulled out games. He played those percentages and came out on the wrong end this time. Give it up.
On offense: A little more low post options. That’s putting a lot of faith in Taylor’s development, but if next year is a setup for a 2012-13 run, the big guys need to become more involved in the offense because that’s where the strength will be. A nice inside-outside game also might help free up Gibbs and Moore/Patterson on the wings. Birch would get his chances too when he spells Taylor, which will help his development. Can you imagine having two guys with strong low post games? The wings would be getting open looks all day.
On defense: I’d like to see a little more zone – a 2-3 or 1-2-2 matchup. That might offset some of the individual deficiencies and get more pressure on the perimeter against good 3 pt shooting teams. I wouldn’t play the 1-2-2 unless you had Taylor and Birch in at the same time though.
That should get a conversation started.
It is an interesting article, but I still can’t believe Butler is anywhere near the talent of Pitt this year, yet they excelled in the tournament. Certainly, they don’t have one more point worth of talent than Pitt.
As to your other examples, last year, Gordon Hayward rode the wave of Butler’s success, and was drafted by the Utah Jazz in the first round–a pick that surprised many, even here in Indianapolis. I think Hayward fits the Jazz mold, but it remains to be seen as to whether or not he can or will be successful in the NBA long haul.
Whether or not UConn or Kentucky players make it to the NBA is also speculative, but it’s clear that despite the convincing loss in December, Calhoun has taken his Huskies to a much higher level of play. Walker has had a big hand in that, but one player does not a team make.
I still can’t get over this year’s Butler and VCU teams. By your examples–even picking Mack and Matt Howard, maybe Nored–it’s pure speculation that any of them would be looked at by NBA scouts. VCU shut down Kansas by playing out of their mind defense, and being aggressive on the inside. Surely, Kansas “out-talented” player by player.
Given the “High Talent = National Championship” theory, Pitt is clearly years away from consideration. But even Doskish alludes to the possibility of luck playing a part–something that perhaps Pitt fans will have to hope for, because the relative talent that we’ve seen hasn’t cut it in the past decade.
I’m still a fan of Pitt, but much more skeptical now. It could change between now and next November, but I’ll try my best not to argue for a top ranking in December and January. I won’t press for a Big East championship, and I won’t care if we get a good seeding or bracket…I’ll be content to be a 7-seed, playing in Seattle or Tuscon, and hope for some lightning in a bottle.
Jamie gets us there every year. If this keeps up, our luck will change. This was our 2nd 1 seed, even then it was never a dominant team and blew no one away. Not made for a one and done tourney. Still a great team and a great year. Jamie will get it done, its only a matter of time and luck at the right time.
But, look at our best-ever performance in the tourney. We had two guys who were under-drafted early in the 2nd round for stupid reasons – age and “suspect” knees – and both are now starters on their respective teams. Both were projected as late first-rounders in mock drafts. There’s only 1 guy on this year’s team showing up consistently in mock drafts, Gibbs in 2012, and he’s listed at the bottom of the 2nd round. Those facts are just hard to overlook or excuse.
As for your and Tony’s points on regular season vs. tourney performance, I honestly don’t think that’s the way Jamie or the Pitt administration sees it. I think it’s just the opposite. Regular season success and high rankings are what get you on TV and sells season tickets. Look at how many times this year Pitt was featured on ESPN games. That had everything to do with being a BE contender and little to do with tourney performance. Plus, you want your season-ticket holders and corporate sponsors seeing wins not losses when they come to games. For those reasons, I think you’ll continue to see the emphasis on winning in the BE with the icing on the cake being that if Pitt keeps knocking on the door, a Final Four and NC will eventually happen.
Again, look at UConn this year. Their fans were up in arms because even though they were pretty sure of making the NCAA tourney, they were becoming a BE also-ran after being a dominator for so many years. Winning the BE tourney bailed Calhoun out to some degree. He’s a Hall of Famer, so what would Pitt fans be saying if Jamie had the same kind of drop off? I think it would get uglier than what we saw after the Butler game.
Had they invested that money in the football program, I’d be willing to bet, that it too would have performed better. Pitt hoops is almost unbeatable at our campus home of the Pete, not so much for Pitt football at the off campus home of Heinz Field.
What, they installed some magical rims at the Pete that allow only Pitt’s players to make shots? The fact that Pitt is almost unbeatable at home has nothing to do with coaching? You make no sense.
And, I think Kentucky did end up beating Princeton, didn’t they? I also think it was their most talented player who made the game-winning shot.
But, the talent argument is not about individual matchups or occasional exceptions to the rule. It’s about the rule, the rule of what it takes to get to the Final Four and win a championship. You obviously didn’t take the time to read Dokish’s post. It lays it out pretty clearly.
You keep questioning Dixon’s in-game coaching because of a few close losses – all to teams who made it to the Final Four BTW. What about his in-game coaching in the 214 wins – many of them close games? What’s your rationale there? Oh, yeah. It’s those magical rims at the Pete.
You have your right to criticize Dixon. I certainly think he has room for improvement. But how about being a little fair and balanced. Comments like ‘congratulations on being named Coach of the Year, now act like one’ are totally uncalled for.
To answer your questions. Chris Dokish has written for CollegeHoopsNet, Scout, Rivals and NBE Basketball Report. He also has his own blog focusing on Pitt basketball. His area of expertise is recruiting, and many on this blog respect his opinions.
He did a pretty eye-opening breakdown of the talent on the teams that have won the National Championship and appeared in Final Fours over the span of Dixon’s tenure. You argue that talent doesn’t matter. I think his analysis may be of interest to you, unless you think your opinion is always right regardless of facts.
But you’re correct, Old School Panther. The victory over Pitt certainly did jumpstart UConn’s run, and Calhoun has been gracious in letting everyone know that. He even mentioned Pitt as one of the best teams in the country last night and saying that he respected Butler because they beat us.
I for one wanted to see Pitt make a run in the BE tourney for a number of reasons. One was the hope of facing Notre Dame in the final and crushing them. The other was to go into the NCAA tourney with some momentum. I think that often gets underrated versus the “extra rest time” factor.
While Dokish is top notch as you say, his viewpoints on some issues are not as keen as on recruiting and talent evaluation. What he’s said there usually pans out over the long haul. The one exception may be McGhee, and he admitted he never saw McGhee’s remarkable progress coming. But who did?
What’s interesting is you don’t consider ridicule a form of ‘attack’. I do.
“What, they installed some magical rims at the Pete that allow only Pitt’s players to make shots? The fact that Pitt is almost unbeatable at home has nothing to do with coaching? You make no sense. ”
And then this:
“You keep questioning Dixon’s in-game coaching because of a few close losses – all to teams who made it to the Final Four BTW. What about his in-game coaching in the 214 wins – many of them close games? What’s your rationale there? Oh, yeah. It’s those magical rims at the Pete.”
I don’t mind people who don’t agree with my viewpoints. That’s life. But please don’t try some juvenile attempt at ridiculing me. After all you went to college and I’m assuming you’re an alumnus of Pitt. So act like it.
Oh and by the way, the close losses were also to St. John’s and Louisville in the final 8-10 games. Those two didn’t sniff the Final 4. In fact both got beat in the First Round.
But when someone makes “juvenile” statements like: ‘Congratulation on being named coach of the year, now act like one.’
And: “I think some on this board could have coached the 2008 team to the Elite Eight.”
…I tend to respond to them in the same manner. As I said, you have your right to criticize Dixon. He’s not perfect. But practice what you’re preaching and keep it civil.
And my “attack” was not at you as a person. It was at the illogic of your continued insistence that Dixon is a poor in-game coach. You yourself say that Pitt’s nearly unbeatable at the Pete, but refuse to give Dixon any credit for that, instead implying it’s only because Pitt spent money on the basketball program. There are plenty of programs with nice facilities who get their asses kicked at home on a regular basis. USF is spending millions renovating their place. Do you think that will suddenly turn them into a Big East power?
Finally, you again use individual exceptions to attempt to diminish the whole body of work.
St. John’s was the hottest team in the BE when Pitt played them. They had crushed Duke and UConn on that same floor prior to playing Pitt. And, we all know how that game ended with the missed OOB call. How did Jamie’s in-game coaching blow that? And SJU lost to a pretty good Gonzaga team (who was on a 9-game win streak) without their most-seasoned player (Kennedy).
Louisville was undefeated at home. Their pressing defense always bothers Pitt – and everyone else – and they forced a lot of turnovers to take an 8 pt. halftime lead. Pitt came back in the second half to take it to overtime, but I guess that had nothing to do with coaching adjustments at halftime. Then, Pitt basically blew it in OT by turning the ball over and missing open shots, which I guess you think had something to do with Jamie’s in-game coaching.
Again, give some real evidence to show it’s all “coaching gaffes” as you insist instead of player execution which is my contention. But again, please keep it civil.
