Figure this argument will just heat up further over the next week.
Forget on the national level, the Big East is tough enough. The debate seems to be between Jamie Dixon and Jim Boeheim, with some darkhorse momentum for Buzz Williams. All three have their teams significantly overachieving from expectations. All three saw talent departing for the NBA, NBDL or Europe.
Syracuse was picked to finish 6th and will finish with the Big East regular season title outright and untied unless they blow their final 2 and Nova recovers.
Pitt was picked for 9th and could finish tied for 3d or take it outright (it’s possible Pitt could end up in 2d, but that would take a Villanova collapse and Pitt sweeping).
For those who want to make it a simple math problem based on projections to finish and Pitt finishing 6 spots higher trumps finishing 5 spots higher by Syracuse. Don’t. Then you have to acknowledge that Marquette if they finish 5th beat their 12th place projection by 7.
Is it talent? I know we are used to presuming that Syracuse has the talent. If you look in their rotation, though, they don’t have a true blue-chipper. No 5-star players.
Player — Rivals.com — Scout.com
Syracuse
Jackson —-4 ————— 4
Jardine —- 4 ————— 4
Onuaku —-3 ————— 3
Joseph —- 3 ————— 4
Triche —– 3 ————– 3
Rautins —- NR ———– 1
Johnson — 2 ————– 2
Pitt
Brown ——- 4 ———– 4
Wanamaker — 4 ———- 4
McGhee —— 3 ———- 3
Gibbs ——— 3 ———- 3
Robinson —- 3 ———- 3
Woodall —— 3 ———- 3
Dixon ——— NR ——- 2
Taylor ——– 5 ———- 5
Obviously Rautins has developed and may have been overlooked in Canada. Wesley Johnson was another clear miss from being missed in Texas and transferring out of Iowa State. But it is still 3- and 4-star guys that make up their team. Just like Pitt. Heck if you just look at the “stars” without context, it looks like Pitt has the better overall squad.
Syracuse plays 2 seniors, 2 juniors 2 sophomores and 1 freshman.
Pitt plays 1 senior, 3 juniors, 2 sophomores and 2 freshman.
Pitt had to play early without senior Jermaine Dixon and even had him out for a game later in the Big East season. Plus, Pitt played the non-con without junior Gilbert Brown. Naturally Pitt had more struggles. Pitt had a spell of losing 4 of 5.
Syracuse hasn’t had significant injuries, but they have been excellent all season. Only 2 losses. They have big wins out of conference — to further buttress the argument of how good they have been from the start (LeMoyne may still be funny, but it was exhibition and doesn’t count).
Sean at Nunes has no answer to the issue, because he doesn’t know how to define the question.
Does Coach Dixon get the nod because he took a team that was going to be a bubble team and have them in contention for a #4 or #3 seed? Is it Boeheim with a squad expected to make the tournament, but maybe in the 6-8 seed range and instead has them locked for a #1 seed?
A tie almost seems like the right call, but I have to say the more I look at this, the more I won’t get too worked up if Boeheim or Dixon gets it.
It seems to me that either one has a legitimate claim to the honor. I really can’t that bent out of shape if Coach Dixon doesn’t get it this time.
If you feel strongly one way or another make the case. Just spare me the issue of whether Boeheim has underachieved with more talent in the past. That has nothing to do with a Coach of the Year award. It is a single season snapshot. Not rewards or penalties for the past.
I love how Jay Bilas said Pitt shot lights out against Syracuse and that is why they won the game. Jay you are a smart guy, but that is flat-out wrong. The offensive efficiency for Pitt in that game was 1.09 points per shot. That isn’t that impressive and is below the Pitt’s season average of 1.12 points per shot. Pitt has had plenty of games where the offense was more efficient.
Pitt won that game because of defense and rebounding. Pitt kept Syracuse from getting offensive rebounds, which is where Nova got killed on Saturday, and held the Orange to .95 points per shot. Syracuse averages 1.16 points per shot. Bilas is usually pretty solid, but in this case he was dead wrong.
I enjoyed the game in person as well, Silver…until the guy behind me poured a beer down my back.
Sitting close to the Johnnie’s radio color man, I asked him if he thought the refs were calling the game fairly. I thought it was a hoot that, before responding, he asked if I was a Pitt or SJU fan. He then responded, “yes.” He added that since Pitt was taking it to the hoop they were earning their free throws.
We lost to Indiana and to Seton Hall and South Florida and at Notre Dame without Harangody. I’m not too upset that we lost those games, but I do think it takes Dixon out of serious contention with Boeheim for the award.
By the way – being second best in that category is NOT something to be ashamed of.
My POY vote goes to Turner. He’s the whole package on both ends, he can play multiple positions, and like Pauly said, he returned after serious injury to lead his team to a likely conference title. Wall is great, but Turner means much more to his team’s success.
Boeheim or Dixon. I could make a case for either one. Both are deserving. It will be a tough call but I suspect that winning the season outright and in position for a #1 seed and possible being #1 in the country will give it to Boeheim.