|
Post by HoyaSinceBirth on Jan 21, 2010 11:02:24 GMT -5
ESPN( brennan specifically): No. 14 Georgetown 74, No. 11 Pittsburgh 66: Pitt is an awfully good team, but a Big East-leading one? Questionable. So after a 5-0 Big East start, the Panthers were probably due for some sort of natural, universal correction, some force bringing them back down to Earth, lest they go all Icarus on us and burn up Jamie Dixon's well-tailored suits. That force's name: Georgetown. The Hoyas waltzed into what the AP described as a home-court where students were "stomping their floor-level sets so passionately it caused the grandstands to ripple like a wave." If that's true, Pitt should probably get that fixed. But you get the idea. Georgetown didn't seem to mind: Chris Wright scored 27 points as Georgetown turned in a solid all-around performance. The Hoyas went to the line on 37 percent of their possessions; they rebounded 31.2 percent of their misses; they rarely committed turnovers; and they posted a 52.7 effective field goal percentage in a slow, 63-possession game. That is the statistical profile of a winner, folks, and no number of rippling bleachers and pounded seats could deny it.
Oh, and to continue with the streak-busting theme, this was Pitt's first Big East home loss in two years. Seriously, weird stuff happened last night.
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Jan 21, 2010 11:10:37 GMT -5
Was really good to get a win at Pitt and break their 31 game home streak. Lots of good things our guys did as have been pointed out by many on this thread. But--- -Our interior defense for most of the game was terrible. -We had incredible success with of our threes. Without it we might have lost. Kinda the Marquette game in reverse. -Pitt was terrible with their threes. So what I'm saying is that an awful lot of things went our way last night while we played only a so-so game. I think maybe we played just a little better than so-so. Granted we had some real problems letting them get inside for dunks, and we had our normal sloppy moments on offense where we tried to do too much and took bad shots. But I think our D overall was solid, especially on the perimeter. We actually got a hand on a couple of thier 3's early, which affected their shooters all night, and we closed out well enough to bother their guards, especially Gibbs. That said, we will need a cleaner effort on Monday if we want a chance to win.
|
|
GUJook97
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,445
|
Post by GUJook97 on Jan 21, 2010 11:19:30 GMT -5
The good thing about Pitt is that even though I still firmly believe we are a much better team, they will overachieve all season and that win will stick out as much as any we have this season. I wouldnt be surprised if they beat Nova and WV at home. Beating a top 15 team that has lost 11 times ever at home is monstrous.
|
|
|
Post by HoyaSinceBirth on Jan 21, 2010 11:30:16 GMT -5
I would love if Pitt would completely collapse like us last year and manage to miss the tournament. That would make me very very happy.
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Jan 21, 2010 12:29:20 GMT -5
Why the heck is that? I like this as a quality win, and want it to continue to be one. Of course I do want Pitt to lose more games than us, but that it up to us as much as them.
|
|
b52legend
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Posts: 453
|
Post by b52legend on Jan 21, 2010 12:47:47 GMT -5
Anaysts on our game: Goodman: - Pittsburgh was the biggest surprise for the first half of the season, but the Panthers aren’t a legitimate Top 10 team yet and that was clear over the last two games – an overtime win against Louisville at home and a loss to Georgetown at home last night. Don’t get me wrong, Pittsburgh is still a good team – but not an elite one. This is terrible analysis by Goodman. I don't know how beating Louisville and then losing to G'Town in a tight one shows you are not a "legitimate Top 10 team." By his logic, every time you lose you show you are not a "legitimate Top 10 team." Why not apply this insightful analysis to Duke, Kansas, Texas.... What his analysis should have said is that Pitt showed they were not a Top 10 team when they got thrashed by Indiana. They sure look like a quality team now, and I didn't see anything in the Louisville or G'Town games to convince me otherwise.
|
|
|
Post by RockawayHoya on Jan 21, 2010 12:54:10 GMT -5
Great win last night. It was clear that the team learned lessons from the Nova game, and hung in there despite the rough start in the opening minutes. We never deviated from the game plan, and in my opinion you've got to give Pitt a lot of credit for running their offense as efficiently as they did for the better part of the game. Just a great game with both teams executing, and it took a run late in the game keyed by our experienced players that helped win an extremely tough road game in one of the most hostile environments that we'll face all year.
Last night was maybe the best game of CW's career. Drove to the basket at will and stayed UNDER CONTROL while doing so. Shot the heck out of the ball. And played lockdown D on Gibbs.
JV had a monster effort. Funny how we got manhandled down low last year by them, and practically the exact opposite happened this year. JV was a major reason why. Throw Benimon into the mix here too; he probably also had his best game of the year, and that driving hoop and 1 to help us take the lead was a huge sequence in the game. BTW, that was definitely a block on that play; if you go back and review the tape, the defender is clearly dragging his right foot when Benimon initially makes contact with him.
It's really nice to see how confident JC and AF are with their perimeter shots now. No hesitation at all, and everything they put up they expected to go in. We are just flat out nasty when we're hitting from the outside, because it'll allow GM and JV more space to operate in the paint.
Thought our defense was a little better than some of the posters gave it credit for. Pitt is just a very disciplined team, and they ran their offense well to get good shots.
The foul trouble we saw at Nova I believe is a total aberration; the refs there wanted to turn that into a foul shooting contest. But we let them do that with several stupid fouls from key guys. Although the refs let a lot go last night, it also seemed as if our guys were much wiser in not committing stupid fouls when they could have.
If you somehow didn't believe before last night in this team, I think their performance against Pitt probably should have swayed you. We are going to be a force to be reckoned with for the rest of the year, no doubt.
|
|
CAHoya07
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,598
|
Post by CAHoya07 on Jan 21, 2010 14:07:36 GMT -5
This is probably already been said - I rarely have the time nor the desire to sift through 16 pages of game discussion - but I would just like to say it was great that we snapped Pitt's 31-game home win streak. They did it to us back in January last year (29 games), and we returned the favor. Awesome.
EDIT: Also, I'd like my Kool Aid with a little vodka in it, thank you. ;D
|
|
Big Dog
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,912
|
Post by Big Dog on Jan 21, 2010 14:22:17 GMT -5
This could be the first Hoyas season since 2006 in which they do not lose to Pitt.
|
|
Hoya50
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 805
|
Post by Hoya50 on Jan 21, 2010 14:41:26 GMT -5
The foul trouble we saw at Nova I believe is a total aberration; the refs there wanted to turn that into a foul shooting contest. But we let them do that with several stupid fouls from key guys. Although the refs let a lot go last night, it also seemed as if our guys were much wiser in not committing stupid fouls when they could have. i'm not willing to write off that foul trouble yet. nova plays at a breakneck pace and their guards look to drive at any opportunity which puts pressure on the perimeter d. many of the fouls in that game were just getting beat to a spot. pitt is much more methodical and doesn't have a guard who can break anyone down. the hoya guards were spared in the pitt game from a difficult matchup. fortunately, nova seems to be the only team in the league that hoyas play with multiple guards that can break down a defense and i'm looking forward to see how the hoyas adjust the d with the rematch.
|
|
hoyarooter
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,224
|
Post by hoyarooter on Jan 21, 2010 14:49:47 GMT -5
Was really good to get a win at Pitt and break their 31 game home streak. Lots of good things our guys did as have been pointed out by many on this thread. But--- -Our interior defense for most of the game was terrible. -We had incredible success with of our threes. Without it we might have lost. Kinda the Marquette game in reverse. -Pitt was terrible with their threes. So what I'm saying is that an awful lot of things went our way last night while we played only a so-so game. I'm writing this without the benefit of having seen the game, so I may be way off base. However, this seems to me to have clearly been our best performance of the year, because: We shut down Gibbs We cut way down on our turnovers We shot the 3 ball effectively, and judiciously We matched Pitt on the boards (they may not be big, but they can still rebound - 14 for Wanamaker? Wow). Chris was exceptional "Julius" Vaughn set a career high in assists. And, most compellingly, we went into a very hostile atmosphere, against a very good team that almost never loses at home, and outplayed them down the stretch to come away with the W. So while there may have been some flaws in our game, I think they can in large part be attributed to our opponent's performance, and I think they are clearly outweighed by all of the above. I actually thought we didn't play that well against Seton Hall - we just shot the ball exceptionally well. In this game, it appears that we did well in a lot of areas.
|
|
|
Post by HoyaSinceBirth on Jan 21, 2010 15:09:28 GMT -5
Why the heck is that? I like this as a quality win, and want it to continue to be one. Of course I do want Pitt to lose more games than us, but that it up to us as much as them. I hate pitt! We're going to have plenty of quality wins we don't need this one to be a quality win at the end of the season. Pitt is in that second tear category of big east teams I hate. Cuse is number 1 but number 2 is Nova and Pitt.
|
|
hoyaalf
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
I like what your doing very much. Why squirrel hate me?
Posts: 688
|
Post by hoyaalf on Jan 21, 2010 15:26:35 GMT -5
hate'm all you want; our rpi/seeding is con-joined at the schedule.
I'm for what is good for us no matter who else it benefits or disadvantages.
|
|
Nevada Hoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 18,485
|
Post by Nevada Hoya on Jan 21, 2010 15:44:13 GMT -5
It seems as if some of the paid commentators downgrade our opponents after a big win, thereby deflating the win a bit.
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Jan 21, 2010 17:37:14 GMT -5
It seems as if some of the paid commentators downgrade our opponents after a big win, thereby deflating the win a bit. I think there's also a competing impulse on HT to upgrade our opponents after a win. Consider the following examples for this and other reasons: 1. The UW win was pretty much a dominating performance and was put out there as a "quality win" on here, but the last few weeks show UW to be average, at best. At the time, it should have been relatively clear that UW's brand of clown ball played into our strengths. 2. Butler was an impressive win, I think, that may get lost in the shuffle depending on how the season ends up. HT was pretty much on point IIRC, but perhaps understated the impact of Butler missing some open shots. 3. The UCONN win was similar to #1 in my mind. Even after the first half, I thought UCONN stunk. I mean...they get their points off of made baskets on the other end and look for a quick, set piece leak out. That tells you something about how Calhoun feels about the team. Did I expect to win that game after the first half? Absolutely not, but I was prepared to be highly disappointed in the loss because of what I saw from UCONN (or didn't see). As such, I thought the comeback discussion was fun and enjoyable but missed the point slightly in the sense that it was a game we absolutely needed to win and should not have been in a position to lose. It turns out that UCONN objectively stinks right now. 4. The MU loss, I thought, was shrugged off a bit too much. Road games are tough in the league, and the Bradley is a tough place to play, but what about that MU team says it should beat a lineup of Wright-Freeman-Clark-Vaughn-Monroe? 5. I didn't see the Temple game so will reserve detailed comment, but I am not sure "quality" can be associated with a game where the first to 15 points wins. Still, a resume helper for the quality of the opponent if not the quality of the game. No argument from me on the Pitt game. Great win in the Zoo. Back and forth throughout with a need to saddle up for most of the game and avoid mistakes. For the most part, we did that. So, I place the Pitt game as our primary quality win to date (quality of win and quality of play) followed by Butler, Temple, and UCONN in that order. My $.02.
|
|
Big Dog
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,912
|
Post by Big Dog on Jan 21, 2010 18:47:34 GMT -5
Even after the first half, I thought UCONN stunk. Right. I'm sure that was the exact thought going through your head at halftime with the Hoyas down 15. "Man, UConn stinks!"
|
|
Filo
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,910
|
Post by Filo on Jan 21, 2010 21:43:54 GMT -5
It seems as if some of the paid commentators downgrade our opponents after a big win, thereby deflating the win a bit. No argument from me on the Pitt game. Great win in the Zoo. Back and forth throughout with a need to saddle up for most of the game and avoid mistakes. For the most part, we did that. So, I place the Pitt game as our primary quality win to date (quality of win and quality of play) followed by Butler, Temple, and UCONN in that order. My $.02. You should have just stayed consistent... the Pitt win was nothing special, either. They were over-rated and played a bad game, missing some wide open shots. In fact, I don't think we're going to have a quality win all year, because every team we beat is going to have some faults. I am thinking we need to bring in the Dream Team so we at least have a shot at a decent win this year.
|
|
tashoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 12,331
|
Post by tashoya on Jan 21, 2010 22:47:10 GMT -5
It seems as if some of the paid commentators downgrade our opponents after a big win, thereby deflating the win a bit. This is new? We continue to not get love on par with other elite programs. Same as in the 80s. It's why I love every win a little bit more... just cramming it down the throats of the non-believers. The comeback against UConn re-solidified it for me when I watched SC. It was maybe 10 to 15 seconds with the majority focused on Stanley's dunks and I don't think they even mentioned Austin. Eff em I say. Makes it better when we put a whupping on a favored program. Yes Duke. I'm lookinig at you.
|
|
tashoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 12,331
|
Post by tashoya on Jan 21, 2010 22:50:21 GMT -5
The foul trouble we saw at Nova I believe is a total aberration; the refs there wanted to turn that into a foul shooting contest. But we let them do that with several stupid fouls from key guys. Although the refs let a lot go last night, it also seemed as if our guys were much wiser in not committing stupid fouls when they could have. Many of those fouls were also complete crap. I don't worry about fouls in the BE season. Come tourney time, that's exactly the sort of thing we tend to run into... I'm not going to say the name of the school that we saw in the NCAA's with exactly this happening cuz it stilll pains me but a guy that used to play there has a brother that transferred to Duke and Duke doesn't play him cuz he sucks.
|
|
|
Post by HoyaSinceBirth on Jan 21, 2010 23:09:41 GMT -5
he's sitting out the year for the transfer that's why he's not playing.
|
|