Well, Cameron Wright was elevated into the ESPNU Top-100 recruits.
Also joining the rankings are: No. 77 Allen Crabbe of Price (Los Angeles); No. 85 Stargell Love of Quality Education (Winston-Salem, N.C.); No. 86 Maurice Jones of Arthur Hill (Saginaw, Mich.); No. 90 Geron Johnson of Dunbar (Dayton, Ohio); No. 91 Cameron Wright of Benedictine (Cleveland); and No. 99 Joe Young of Yates (Houston).
Interestingly, one of the players that fell out of their top-100 was Jordan Sibert, an Ohio PG that Ohio State pursued and got — then lost interest in Wright. Sibert got hurt last spring and is still healing. He’s playing and the two actually ended up facing off in Columbus this past weekend.
In turn, Wright committed to Pittsburgh and gave Thad a glimpse of what he may be missing as his team defeated Sibert’s by a score of 55-48.
Sibert’s outside shooting was off Saturday as he shot just 2-7 from 3-point range, but the senior did score 19 points. Although it looked like he is not 100% recovered from a knee injury suffered last spring, Sibert did look strong and Buckeye fans should be excited to have him as part of this class. He did not have as good of a supporting cast as Wright did and despite not playing as well as he liked, he never quit and kept his team in the game.
Wright, on the other hand, must have felt good with his 19 point performance at the venue he once though he would be playing at for the next four years. Unlike Sibert, who likes to make it rain from the outside, Wright is kind of a high-glider who plays really well above the rim and can attack the basket with ease. He is going to be a really good player for Jamie Dixon…
Coach Dixon received a midterm grade of “A” from DeCourcy at the Sporting News.
Useless information that I never knew about college basketballs.
You may not have thought much about this, but there is not a standard ball in NCAA basketball. Each school can decide to use its own brand of basketball (as long as it conforms to specifications), and leagues like the Big East can use up to five or six different basketballs, depending upon the manufacturers each school has deals with. One game, you may be playing with a Nike ball, then a Wilson, then The Rock, then an Adidas ball, then a Molten ball.
Last week, Notre Dame played at Cincinnati and the Fighting Irish players felt that the ball used was smaller than they were used to. Notre Dame, like most teams, has several of every different brand of ball used by teams on its schedule so that the Irish can practice with the same ball they will be playing with next. Basketball is still very much a game of feel, and it is a game of attention to detail.
Weird. I have to believe that the NCAA has an official (read: heavily paid for the rights) basketball for the NCAA Tournament.
Someone tries to get Gary Parrish at CBSSportsline to go negative on Pitt for luck. Parrish won’t bite.
I really don’t see much in concrete info from Ray Fittipaldo’s weekly chats, but I am constantly bemused by certain fixations. (Really, someone still banging the drum for McGhee and Taylor to play at the same time? Have they seen the way Taylor has struggled lately? How well Robinson has been playing?) Still nothing inside information, though, Fittipaldo seems to be acknowledging that transfers could occur and that the most logical ones would be Dwight Miller and Travon Woodall. Of course there are always those that want to treat this as a fantasy/professional league.
NJ-Joe: Recruiting … if Jamie Dixon has some recruits better than some on the bench … he should cut those on the bench loose … ie. Zanna, Miller, Woodall.
Ray Fittipaldo: Jamie does not do that very often. Off the top of my head Ed Turner, Dante Milligan and Cassin Diggs are the only ones to leave the program when Dixon was the head coach. And I think Milligan left for family reasons moreso than how he fit in with Pitt. It could happen again, but you should be aware of Dixon’s track record with these types of things.
Transfers/forcing a kid out is a very uncomfortable thing to me. I understand the reasons, and I’m not naive about it. I just find it distasteful and a bit short-sighted.
Yes, scholarships are only one-year with the school/coach’s option to renew. Yet it is an inequitable deal, that in my view violates most implied (if not explicit) verbal promises (as opposed to what the scholarship agreement and NLI say in writing) from the coaches that recruit them. That said, there are only just a handful of coaches that aggressively turn over their roster with any frequency, and rarely is it more than just one player in a season. It happens, but mainly in a coaching change.
The shortsighted portion comes from a few things. First, the most obvious is if that player develops somewhere else. Not every player develops at the same rate or as fast as expected (or hoped). The next issue is that a coach is still gambling that the even newer player brought in will not only be able to contribute more overall, but develop faster. If they don’t, then you risk taking a step back or it all catching up to you if you do it too much. You find yourself having turned over too much roster and not enough players ready to contribute at key spot.
UConn serves as a great example, because few teams churn like UConn without major coaching upheaval. The Huskies struggle with their front court. They have Stanley Robinson and Gavin Edwards — a senior who is finally contributing — playing the most minutes. They are struggling to get much from Majok and Oriakhi. Meanwhile over the last few years they have forced out Marcus Johnson (USC, 10.6 ppg, 4.9 rpg) and Curtis Kelly (K-State, 11.5 ppg, 6.4 rpg). Both are playing more than 20 minutes a game and either would provide a far more productive option in the frontcourt rotation. Both were forced out because they didn’t contribute to UConn quickly enough
What is crazy talk is the suggestion on some of the boards is by putting Gil at the 4 and let him work unerneath on offense … his scoring comes from the perimeter and the dribble-drive … but using him for a low-post is insane.
Lastly, Sam is stronger than Gilbert plus Sam two years ago had a much more dominant center to work with.
The 4 is the most difficult position in JD’s system because it requires the threat of mid-range jumper or a on-ball offensive move, tremendous passing skills, and tremendous athleticism to play defense against NBA-caliber players. Taylor is poor at passing, has no on-ball offensive move, or even the remote threat of a mid-range jumper. Not saying he won’t over time, but not now.
Taylor should be thanking JD everyday that he is putting him in, arguably, the easiest position on the court to contribute while he matures–the 5. At the five, you focus on ball screens, hedging on D, rebounding, and garbage points (layups, putbacks, FTs). He just needs to continue to focus on this role and let his game come to him.
My big concern with DT moving forward is not transferring (please, are you f’in kidding me?) is that horrible hitch in his shot. It’s pretty hard to un-learn that at his age. You can get away with an ugly hitch or odd mechanics if the trajectory is faced up and the rotation is clean… Someone has to work on that for him.
I’m telling you, Sleepy looks like he doesn’t belong. But he’s shown enough flashes of brilliance that he belongs somewhere.
Jamie’s great but not perfect. Couldn’t we have used a Herb Pope last Sunday?
he has been disappointing. there is no other way to say it. levance was much more of an impact freshman at a more difficult position. it just shows you that the mcdonald’s all american label isn’t everything it is made out to be. i would argue that ronald ramon had a better freshman year than taylor. what can you do? the year isn’t over and i wouldn’t write him off from making an impact. i am positive that he will be an excellent player for Pitt eventually.
Steve players do factor in that decision and I never said they didn’t. I doubt Taylor wants to transfer, and I would say that any freshman who is 20 games into their career and would decide to transfer is a quitter that you don’t want in the program. He is a kid, he will develop, he may not be comfortable with his spot now, but I’m sure he knows that he eventually will get comfortable whether it be at 5 or 4. Deciding to transfer as a freshman before giving your career a chance is silly. Look how it worked for Young, who played out of position at the 4 early and struggled for a while in his career. I doubt he regrets it. Dixon knows what he is doing. As far as Pope goes, so what if the kid is doing well and had a good game. That isn’t why Pitt didn’t want him. It is his baggage, he has been shot, has a DUI, and has had trouble almost everywhere he went. I hope he does succeed and has no problems. But I don’t blame Dixon or anyone at Pitt for not wanting to take that chance.
I understand your point (and have from the beginning) and vehemently disagree. My point is simple: Dante Taylor, at this point in his career, DOES NOT have the skills necessary to play the 4 at Pitt. I don’t know what this means for him long-term at the 4, but presently he can’t play the position.
I also strongly agree with you second paragraph.
Re: Pope, ditto. It would’ve been nice to see Jamie involved in his development.
link to post-gazette.com
Fittipaldo maybe only half wrong. Maybe he wasn’t a face-up player in high school. He has demonstrated that he has no low post skills. If he isn’t a low-post or a face-up player, then Fittipaldo has an interesting if not a good point about what kind of coaching was he getting a the National Christian Academy which has a reputation of being a b-ball player farm. I mean who just tells a kid to run up and down the floor, dunk the ball and rebound for four years.
Sturdy power forward with ability to play with skill or athleticism. Has a chance to be a physically gifted player who gets numbers. Runs, rebounds and prefers to play facing the basket. Top 50 player nationally in his class.
i wouldn’t be surprised if NCA did tell him to simply run up and down the floor, dunk, and rebound.
From what I saw of him before he came to Pitt, he was NOT a face up player– although he played a C/F position that did not require true post moves because it simply was predicated on size/talent advantages. Like Omar said, it was kind of a “loosey/goosey” style that played to the clear height/talent disparity and less to strategy/true position skills. Let’s face it, DT was likely running against inferior talent for the most part of every game….do you think he really needed a MOVE?
Nobody said Dixon is an idiot, he’s just caught between a rock and a hard place, and we have the advantage of hind sight.
It is not the way we describe him, it is fact that he is having problems catching the ball and missing dunks.
Nobody is saying that he is a hidden gem at the 4. We’re just saying that we’ve see what he can do at the 5, don’t like it, and we would like to see what he can do at the 4 with the advantage of adding some height to the line up. And if as you say, Taylor has no bb position skills just athleticism and the 4 is so hard to learn wouldn’t it be better for both him and Pitt that he spend as much time as possible at the position that gives him the best chance of a future? Just asking, that’s all.
Maybe he’ll surprise us and somehow score 20 points or more as the backup center tonight or the next game or the next. I don’t think so but let’s hope that I’m wrong.
Go Pitt.
point taken. however, i believe his inexperience will be exploited more at the 4 than it has at the 5. dante taylor is going to be a great player at pitt. unfortunately, it isn’t going to be this year at the 4 or the 5.
Sleepy, in my mind, is a transfer candidate.