Jimmy V Classic

[david aka the TYZ]

it may have been a bit one sided but I attribute most of it to the fact we were just so much more aggressive defensively. We were not gving up bunnies. One observation indictes we were a little short changed espescially in the first half. We scored all of our 20 points in paint and only shot one free throw.

The free throws were one sided, but honestly I think Pitt just didn't play aggressive D. The fact that we got 20 points in the paint in the first half just proves that. If there was contact or aggression on their part this team would not have been able to finish those shots. Especially JJ (taking nothing away form his effort). They played straight up defense and that allowed us to get shots up and over them. We go for every block, sometimes with two players. That leads to fouls as refs see you swatting at a player. Unless it's a clean block you will get a whistle.

 

[david aka the TYZ]

I know we all hate when Mick says his answer to offense is to play better defense. But food for thought, our last two games saw us score 47 and 44. We won when we played stifling defense. I know we need to find a way to score points and I'm quite sure Mick does as well. But at the same time I think Mick knows our offensive liabilities and knows we won't win many games when we give up 60 or 70 points. Unfortunately you won't win many fans with 44-43 games and the few die-hard fans you do have might die of a heart-attack watching them.

 

[waterhead]

I know we all hate when Mick says his answer to offense is to play better defense. But food for thought, our last two games saw us score 47 and 44. We won when we played stifling defense. I know we need to find a way to score points and I'm quite sure Mick does as well. But at the same time I think Mick knows our offensive liabilities and knows we won't win many games when we give up 60 or 70 points. Unfortunately you won't win many fans with 44-43 games and the few die-hard fans you do have might die of a heart-attack watching them.

The most important thing to putting fans in the stands is winning and rankings. Beyond that...they would rather see more offense than defense. I would be overjoyed if we could get both...but with this team I will be happy with the former rather than the latter.

If you can win a game against a tough opponent averaging 80+ points by holding them to 40 something...you are doing something right.

I was most impressed with the fact that we got it done when it mattered most on the road. It wasn't pretty by anyone's standards but we came up with more big plays than they did whichever side of the ball we were on.

Holding a team to no FG's for over half the minutes in the game is absolutley unheard of. The players bought in to the coaches philosophy of what types of things we can control and it paid off. We all hope for better offense...but when a coach can motivate his team to exert max effort...that is a coaching win and something many coaches aren't capable of.

 

[Patrick Bateman]

The most important thing to putting fans in the stands is winning and rankings. Beyond that...they would rather see more offense than defense. I would be overjoyed if we could get both...but with this team I will be happy with the former rather than the latter.

If you can win a game against a tough opponent averaging 80+ points by holding them to 40 something...you are doing something right.

I was most impressed with the fact that we got it done when it mattered most on the road. It wasn't pretty by anyone's standards but we came up with more big plays than they did whichever side of the ball we were on.

Holding a team to no FG's for over half the minutes in the game is absolutley unheard of. The players bought in to the coaches philosophy of what types of things we can control and it paid off. We all hope for better offense...but when a coach can motivate his team to exert max effort...that is a coaching win and something many coaches aren't capable of.

There were a lot of positives from the game. Our defense shut Pitt down, holding them to a 65 year low in field goals, that is damn impressive.

I thought that our rebounding was much improved. Our offensive rebounding was much better than the past two games.

I was really hoping that Shaq would be the third scorer that we need. He is so close yet light years away it seems. I have noticed that Jacksons free throws look much better form wise, hope they can work on Thomas' shot, he is going to be leaned on hard next season.

 

[waterhead]

There were a lot of positives from the game. Our defense shut Pitt down, holding them to a 65 year low in field goals, that is damn impressive.

I thought that our rebounding was much improved. Our offensive rebounding was much better than the past two games.

I was really hoping that Shaq would be the third scorer that we need. He is so close yet light years away it seems. I have noticed that Jacksons free throws look much better form wise, hope they can work on Thomas' shot, he is going to be leaned on hard next season.

Not so sure we will be leaning on Thomas next year but the stat about a 65 year low for Pitt is extraordinary. Thanks for that.

 

[waterhead]

Not so sure we will be leaning on Thomas next year but the stat about a 65 year low for Pitt is extraordinary. Thanks for that.

Think about this fans...6.5 DECADES of Pitt BB...and we rank #1 in our last game holding them in check.

Even though GG didn't do a lot offensively I really thought he played a big part on D. He was locking it down all night long...furious D. This is why GG will continue to see minutes even if TC get's a lion's share of minutes at the PG.

 

[Patrick Bateman]

Not so sure we will be leaning on Thomas next year but the stat about a 65 year low for Pitt is extraordinary. Thanks for that.

We lose, SK, JJ, Dave, Titus. Who are we going to rely on scoring next year? We are losing a lot after this year. One of those three leads the team in every category. GG and Sanders will be Sr's next year, they and Shaq/Sanders really need to step all their games up next season.

 

[Patrick Bateman]

UConn lost tonight only scoring 51 points.

 

[Patrick Bateman]

There were a lot of positives from the game. Our defense shut Pitt down, holding them to a 65 year low in field goals, that is damn impressive.

I thought that our rebounding was much improved. Our offensive rebounding was much better than the past two games.

I was really hoping that Shaq would be the third scorer that we need. He is so close yet light years away it seems. I have noticed that Jacksons free throws look much better form wise, hope they can work on Thomas' shot, he is going to be leaned on hard next season.

I mysteriously can't find the Koch article from earlier which said it was from the 30's. But I did find this:

The 11 field goals were the fewest by a Pitt team since Feb. 8, 2008 when the Panthers made six in a 41-22 loss against Penn State.

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/sports/...Cincinnati/stories/201312170155#ixzz2ntQ4ZPue

 

[L-T]

The most important thing to putting fans in the stands is winning and rankings. Beyond that...they would rather see more offense than defense. I would be overjoyed if we could get both...but with this team I will be happy with the former rather than the latter.

If you can win a game against a tough opponent averaging 80+ points by holding them to 40 something...you are doing something right.

I was most impressed with the fact that we got it done when it mattered most on the road. It wasn't pretty by anyone's standards but we came up with more big plays than they did whichever side of the ball we were on.

Holding a team to no FG's for over half the minutes in the game is absolutley unheard of. The players bought in to the coaches philosophy of what types of things we can control and it paid off. We all hope for better offense...but when a coach can motivate his team to exert max effort...that is a coaching win and something many coaches aren't capable of.

I'm ok with great defense, and a national ranking to go along with it. But, I would like to see at least some offensive pieces to the puzzel. SK is a decent offensive piece, but he can certainly disappear at times, especially in big games. Without him producing, the cupboard is pretty bare and we need amazing effort and defence like we got the other night to win. We don't always get that level of effort from this group. I didn't find that game boring though. I was pretty entertained and really enjoyed watching them play really hard.

 

[Robert]

I mysteriously can't find the Koch article from earlier which said it was from the 30's. But I did find this:

The 11 field goals were the fewest by a Pitt team since Feb. 8, 2008 when the Panthers made six in a 41-22 loss against Penn State.

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/sports/...Cincinnati/stories/201312170155#ixzz2ntQ4ZPue

That article has the date wrong. February 8, 1939 was the date of the 41-22 game. If Pitt had scored 22 points in a game in 2008, we would all remember it.

This link has it correct: http://www.post-gazette.com/sports/...ounding-stunned-Panthers/stories/201312190200

 

[Bearcat04]

Jamie Dixon is a damn good coach and yet Mick's teams have won 3 of the last 4, including the last two at the Pete, where they rarely lose. Mick continues to be one of the best in country at doing more with less. Only wayward UC fans would expect sustained greatness from the 42nd richest budget. Teams like TCU, Providence, Seton Hall, and DePaul continually make a greater commitment to basketball than UC. The lunatic fringe will continue to bury their heads in the sand and ignore these facts, however.

 

[ervins84]

Guys our defense was obv good vs Pitt, but it wasn't exactly record setting in terms of actual defense ( getting stops). Both teams scored around 0.9 pts per possession which is bad but not historically low.

The main reason the point total was so low was the ridiculously slow pace of that game. It only had 48 possessions. D1 avg is around 67 or 68.

 

[UCalum08]

Guys our defense was obv good vs Pitt, but it wasn't exactly record setting in terms of actual defense ( getting stops). Both teams scored around 0.9 pts per possession which is bad but not historically low.

The main reason the point total was so low was the ridiculously slow pace of that game. It only had 48 possessions. D1 avg is around 67 or 68.

Thanks for posting those numbers! While I am glad we got the win, we will not win many if any more games like that this year. We must develop some kind of identity. Too many years we never develop one and we just cater to the other teams. IMO it costs us 4-7 games the past three seasons.

 

[WAITE HOYT 2]

Guys our defense was obv good vs Pitt, but it wasn't exactly record setting in terms of actual defense ( getting stops). Both teams scored around 0.9 pts per possession which is bad but not historically low.

The main reason the point total was so low was the ridiculously slow pace of that game. It only had 48 possessions. D1 avg is around 67 or 68.

That was by design. If you know your team can't out score the opposition you try to limit his touches. Exactly what MC did. Trying to win a shoot out with Pitt would have ended up in a loss.MC took them out of there game and we outrebounded them. When we play Memphis I suspect we will try to slow the game down as well. They like to get up and down the floor. Was it a ugly win, Sure but that was by design. MC had a good plan and the kids carried it out. Nice Win!!!!

One other thing Pitt beat Stanford. Guess who they beat lastnight. UCONN. the 10th rated team in country.

 

[Cataclysmo]

Guys our defense was obv good vs Pitt, but it wasn't exactly record setting in terms of actual defense ( getting stops). Both teams scored around 0.9 pts per possession which is bad but not historically low.

The main reason the point total was so low was the ridiculously slow pace of that game. It only had 48 possessions. D1 avg is around 67 or 68.

The defense forced them into longer possesions also....

 

[Bcatfollower]

Jamie Dixon is a damn good coach and yet Mick's teams have won 3 of the last 4, including the last two at the Pete, where they rarely lose. Mick continues to be one of the best in country at doing more with less. Only wayward UC fans would expect sustained greatness from the 42nd richest budget. Teams like TCU, Providence, Seton Hall, and DePaul continually make a greater commitment to basketball than UC. The lunatic fringe will continue to bury their heads in the sand and ignore these fact.


I checked out the Pitt boards after our win to see what they were thinking and it seems that their fans who post don't feel that JD is such a great coach... They say he can't coach an efficient offens etc...

sounds familiar....

To the budget comment my question is why? Is depauls attendance blowing ours out of he water? is it the other sports U.C has to fund? Or just a lack of raising funds in general?

 

[Patrick Bateman]

That was by design. If you know your team can't out score the opposition you try to limit his touches. Exactly what MC did. Trying to win a shoot out with Pitt would have ended up in a loss.MC took them out of there game and we outrebounded them. When we play Memphis I suspect we will try to slow the game down as well. They like to get up and down the floor. Was it a ugly win, Sure but that was by design. MC had a good plan and the kids carried it out. Nice Win!!!!

One other thing Pitt beat Stanford. Guess who they beat lastnight. UCONN. the 10th rated team in country.

UConn scored only 51 points.

Mick stated on the post game that the reason he slowed the Pitt game down was because the team was tired from playing on Saturday night, even though they really didn't show up then.

 

[TheLongHaul]

Guyn has a nice touch from the outside?

I agree. It can't be any worse then Thomas,KJ or Sanders.

I was sarcastically asking the question. Nothing Guyn has ever done at UC suggests he has a nice touch from the outside. Not sure where people come up with this stuff. Reminds me of the argument I had where someone swore that Dion Dixon was a good oustide shooter.

 

[WAITE HOYT 2]

The defense forced them into longer possesions also....

Exactly! People need to realize we are not going to run people out of the GYM. If your opponent is better offensively why would you want to speed the game up and give him more touches. If the strength of my team is Defense that is what I want the game to come down to. Why would I want to get in a running game with a team that scores 80 a game when on my best night I ain't scoring a 80 a game. Most offensive teams don't like to play hardnosed in your face defense. If I can make them guard for 35 seconds it has to take away some off their offensive efficiency. That Is exactly what MC and the fellows did. Look the guy was mentored by two of the best coaches out there. Huggs and Pitino. Anyone that has played for them understands one thing. If you don't guard you don't play. As his talent base increase so will the offense. All this he needs a better scheme is laughable. His game plan is trying to limit the other teams touches.That is the scheme that has gotten us to 3 straight NCAA's. It is what his teams our capable of. He is not going to play a guy who MIGHT hit a few more buckets if he is given up points on the other end. Not only do bad defensive players give up points but there lack of defense causes others to help defensively and creates foul trouble which a team that isn't very deep can't afford. He coaches exactly like his mentors. Take a look at Huggs when he started. His teams trade mark style was tough in your face defense. If a player gave up the baseline or didn't close on a shooter he was being subbed for before the horn sounded. I can still see him running down the end of the bench screaming "get him the F##K out of there". As MC gains some noterity his talent level will increase. Hopefully that is happening. If not we can replace him but now is certainly not the time. He is trending up and should be commended.

Oh and by the way coming on all the different sites bashing the coach is not helping the coach gain a foot hole in recruiting. Creating a positive atmosphere is helpful. My son was a D-1 athlete. They read these sites. if your are truly a supporter of the program here is something to consider.

1. MC and staff understand the game ten times better then anybody posting on these boards. That is why they have the job and you do something else.

2. This Program is light years from where it was when MC took over.

3. The key role a fan plays in the success of a program is Buying tickets and donations not trying to tell the coach how to utilize his players.

4. The adminstation is tasked with determining if and when a coach should be replaced. That is part of their responsibility. If Whit felt MC should be replaced I would feel comfortable with the decision. Not some posters on a message board.

5. lets not forget its fun to converse on these sites that is why we all do it but lets not overstate our qualifications. For many they would have a hard time coaching a CYO team. ME INCLUDED!!!!!