General20
Basketball Maven
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2011
- Messages
- 1,817
- Like
- 12,342
The short version of what you need to know about Pittsburgh is, as a team they move great without the ball and are one of the best interior passing teams in the country. They play mostly man to man defense, but sneak in a surprising amount of 2-3 zone. If you want a more detailed description of what they do, you can check out my Pre Pittsburgh Thoughts which I think was the most spot-on of any of my predictions so far – the only thing I go wrong was thinking SU would hang with Pitt on the boards, which I got very wrong.
How Pittsburgh attacked Syracuse's zone:
Pittsburgh moves a lot without the ball. Picture five Trevor Cooney's running around at the same time setting a lot of screes. This offense works very well for them against man to man defenses because everybody on their team is a good passer. Usually zone defenses are hell on motion offenses, but Pitt kept their motion up for most of the game. The motion was mostly subterfuge however, and it almost always resolved itself into the same play: Pitt with their two guards up top above the three point line, a center under the basket, and two wings on the baseline. Pretty much an offensive 2-3 formation to match Syracuse's defensive 2-3. If Robinson could penetrate, he would, otherwise he would feed the center in the high post. Once the center got the ball in the high post, both wings would sprint into the paint and make themselves available for a high-low pass.
Pitt's motion confused Syracuse for about three or four plays, but after that it became a war of wills with Pitt doing the same things over and over, and Syracuse mostly waiting in the right place to stop them. Pitt was extremely inefficient in this game, only shooting 38% from the field (when they average 48%), and only shooting 39% on two point shots (when they average 53%).
When Syracuse stretched the lead to ten Pitt got a little desperate and abandoned their offense, in favor of their best player, Patterson, jacking up three straight 25 foot shots. Unfortunately for Syracuse, he made all three. You have to give Patterson credit for that, because if he missed those shots, I think Syracuse runs away with the game.
As it was, Patterson's threes gave Pitt a new life, and while they were still not able to generate any offense, they were able to absolutely dominate the boards from that point on. Pitt's offense (which has both forwards establishing position in the low post) put them in really good position to rebound - to the point where their offensive players were actually boxing out our defensive players a good percentage of the time.
Christmas was almost always guarding the high post, so Fair and Grant needed to be the guys who got our boards. I thought Fair fought pretty hard, and did an okay job. Grant needs to change how he plays against a team like Pitt. There was a stark difference between Grant's effectiveness against Pitt, and his effectiveness against North Carolina who is also an excellent rebounding team. North Carolina is tall, and long, and gets their rebounds high, so Grant was able to out-jump them. Pitt is big and strong, and they don't rebound up, they rebound out. Pitt puts a body on you and tries to push you out of the way, then lets the ball fall to them. It seemed to be a good way to neutralize Grant's athletic advantages, and he is going to have to be a little smarter about how he goes up against Pitts physical strength the next time they play.
How Syracuse attacked Pitt's defense:
Its always interesting to see what Syracuse comes up with when they have a week between games to work on things. In this game Grant was being guarded by Pitt's freshman power forward, and Boeheim obviously identified that as a favorable match up. Syracuse pretty much abandoned its double screen that both Cooney and Fair run off of (which has been its bread and butter so far this season) in favor of getting Grant the ball at the top of the key. You can tell that Grant is far more comfortable at the top of the key than he is anywhere else, and I see it as a good thing that he is developing a go to move. Grant looks pretty comfortable shooting from there, and just as comfortable driving to the basket, which he did an excellent job of against Pitt.
It was really glaring to me how weak Pitt was defensively. They have always preferred having big strong centers as opposed to the long shot blockers that Syracuse prefers. Obviously those big strong centers help them get a ton of boards (it seemed like they got every offensive rebound, and they did get 44% of them which is excellent, but the crazy thing is they were pretty much on their season average which is 40%). What those centers give you in rebounding they take away in shot blocking. It wasn't much of a negative when Pitt's guards were able to hand check and grab to prevent penetration and Pitt's big strong centers could pound you . . . but now . . . Syracuse got anything they wanted under the basket.
Syracuse shot 65% from two for the game (27% better than Pitt). Even though Pitt had 17 more second-chance points than Syracuse, SU still outscored them in the paint, which is pretty much unheard of.
Fair had three lay ups, Ennis had two, and both Grant and Christmas dominated down low.
Of course, no stat is as telling as Ennis winning the game on two uncontested lay ups against Pittsburgh's set up half court defense. Definitely not the same Pitt defense we remember- which just might help them find some success in March.
The only negative I have for the Syracuse offense is the fact that they did close to nothing on the offensive boards. Syracuse has allowed a good amount of offensive boards at times this season, but up to this point they have always matched it with offensive boards of their own. Against Pitt they could not. Syracuse only grabbed 17% of the available offensive boards, and they average 40%.
Pitt used their zone defense sparingly – during only four possessions (In my Pre Pittsburgh Thoughts I predicted that Pitt would use man defense 90-100% and the actual number was just under 93%) - and Syracuse scored all four times Pitt played zone. Their zone is just not great. From what I saw in other games, they play it to pack the lane and stop teams from getting easy lay ups against them (like SU did). Unfortunately they are not long enough or skilled enough to cut off both drives to the basket, and threes. Since Pitt needed to extend their zone to stop Cooney, Syracuse put him on Christma's side, then fed the ball inside to him where he had acres of space to make two hook shots. Ennis also hit a three and a turn around against Pitt's zone.
This was the only ACC game where Syracuse shot over 50% from the floor. In my Pre Pitt Thoughts I mentioned that Syracuse would have to score consistently to win. They did, and they got a well deserved win from it.
Player Evaluations:
Ennis – Generated two easy lay ups against Pitt (which might be a first) in the last two minutes of a close game. The most impressive part? One lay up came going right, while the other came going left. He also hit some clutch free throws.
Cooney – He hit his easy threes and missed his hard threes, but early in the year he was hitting the kind of shots he missed in this one. I mentioned in my Pre Pittsburgh Thoughts that the game would come down to shooting, which actually ended up being pretty even overall, yet shooting still managed to play a major role. With Syracuse up by ten and the game in the balance, Patterson hit three straight deep threes and Cooney missed two. It would have been nice to see Cooney keep pace with Patterson at that crucial time.
Fair – He was not really featured in the offense until crunch time. Early he managed to score efficiently, but in the middle of the game he went through a little funk. It hurt to get zero points out of that technical against Dixon. Still, Fair did the best job of fighting Pitt on the boards, he blocked three shots, and scored 13 points in a low scoring game. I could not by any means call this a bad game.
Grant – He got pushed around on the boards. That was the bad. Hopefully he will learn to attack Pitt differently from now on. The good . . . everything else. In my opinion this was the best offensive game of his career. Syracuse ran more plays for Jerami than they ever have before and he came through. Before this game, Grant had a mid range jump shot in his arsenal, and an much more potent dribble drive. In order to stop his drives, everybody has been giving him room and daring him to shoot. This was the first game that Grant did something other than shoot with the room he was given. Instead of driving quickly to the basket, he was able to worm his way through the lane and get floaters around the basket, which he made with great success. If this keeps up, Grant might very well be our best player by the end of the season, which is an exciting thought.
Christmas – This was the first game of the year where Christmas got pushed around and lost the positioning battle. Fortunately he's not going to go up against anybody else as strong as Zanna (not counting the next time we play Pitt). Still, Chirstmas did a great job of making up for this by blocking three shots (he could have had more, if not for some ill timed foul calls) and scoring 10 points on 100% shooting. I said in my Pre Pittsburgh thoughts that Syracuse would be in good shape if Christmas played 30 minutes. He got 29, and would have had more if not for foul trouble. The key was that Christmas got to the right spots on defense even though Pitt makes it hard by loading the paint with players and passing wonderfully.
Gbinije – Got a steal and made two free throws. As always, played good defense. Gbinije gave us what he was suppose to give us.
Keita – This was not his kind of game. Pittsburgh was able to push him around too much, but you have to give credit where its due. Keita played hard while he was in the game, and bothered Pitt's big guys. Still the only guy on our team with a negative +/- in this one.
How Pittsburgh attacked Syracuse's zone:
Pittsburgh moves a lot without the ball. Picture five Trevor Cooney's running around at the same time setting a lot of screes. This offense works very well for them against man to man defenses because everybody on their team is a good passer. Usually zone defenses are hell on motion offenses, but Pitt kept their motion up for most of the game. The motion was mostly subterfuge however, and it almost always resolved itself into the same play: Pitt with their two guards up top above the three point line, a center under the basket, and two wings on the baseline. Pretty much an offensive 2-3 formation to match Syracuse's defensive 2-3. If Robinson could penetrate, he would, otherwise he would feed the center in the high post. Once the center got the ball in the high post, both wings would sprint into the paint and make themselves available for a high-low pass.
Pitt's motion confused Syracuse for about three or four plays, but after that it became a war of wills with Pitt doing the same things over and over, and Syracuse mostly waiting in the right place to stop them. Pitt was extremely inefficient in this game, only shooting 38% from the field (when they average 48%), and only shooting 39% on two point shots (when they average 53%).
When Syracuse stretched the lead to ten Pitt got a little desperate and abandoned their offense, in favor of their best player, Patterson, jacking up three straight 25 foot shots. Unfortunately for Syracuse, he made all three. You have to give Patterson credit for that, because if he missed those shots, I think Syracuse runs away with the game.
As it was, Patterson's threes gave Pitt a new life, and while they were still not able to generate any offense, they were able to absolutely dominate the boards from that point on. Pitt's offense (which has both forwards establishing position in the low post) put them in really good position to rebound - to the point where their offensive players were actually boxing out our defensive players a good percentage of the time.
Christmas was almost always guarding the high post, so Fair and Grant needed to be the guys who got our boards. I thought Fair fought pretty hard, and did an okay job. Grant needs to change how he plays against a team like Pitt. There was a stark difference between Grant's effectiveness against Pitt, and his effectiveness against North Carolina who is also an excellent rebounding team. North Carolina is tall, and long, and gets their rebounds high, so Grant was able to out-jump them. Pitt is big and strong, and they don't rebound up, they rebound out. Pitt puts a body on you and tries to push you out of the way, then lets the ball fall to them. It seemed to be a good way to neutralize Grant's athletic advantages, and he is going to have to be a little smarter about how he goes up against Pitts physical strength the next time they play.
How Syracuse attacked Pitt's defense:
Its always interesting to see what Syracuse comes up with when they have a week between games to work on things. In this game Grant was being guarded by Pitt's freshman power forward, and Boeheim obviously identified that as a favorable match up. Syracuse pretty much abandoned its double screen that both Cooney and Fair run off of (which has been its bread and butter so far this season) in favor of getting Grant the ball at the top of the key. You can tell that Grant is far more comfortable at the top of the key than he is anywhere else, and I see it as a good thing that he is developing a go to move. Grant looks pretty comfortable shooting from there, and just as comfortable driving to the basket, which he did an excellent job of against Pitt.
It was really glaring to me how weak Pitt was defensively. They have always preferred having big strong centers as opposed to the long shot blockers that Syracuse prefers. Obviously those big strong centers help them get a ton of boards (it seemed like they got every offensive rebound, and they did get 44% of them which is excellent, but the crazy thing is they were pretty much on their season average which is 40%). What those centers give you in rebounding they take away in shot blocking. It wasn't much of a negative when Pitt's guards were able to hand check and grab to prevent penetration and Pitt's big strong centers could pound you . . . but now . . . Syracuse got anything they wanted under the basket.
Syracuse shot 65% from two for the game (27% better than Pitt). Even though Pitt had 17 more second-chance points than Syracuse, SU still outscored them in the paint, which is pretty much unheard of.
Fair had three lay ups, Ennis had two, and both Grant and Christmas dominated down low.
Of course, no stat is as telling as Ennis winning the game on two uncontested lay ups against Pittsburgh's set up half court defense. Definitely not the same Pitt defense we remember- which just might help them find some success in March.
The only negative I have for the Syracuse offense is the fact that they did close to nothing on the offensive boards. Syracuse has allowed a good amount of offensive boards at times this season, but up to this point they have always matched it with offensive boards of their own. Against Pitt they could not. Syracuse only grabbed 17% of the available offensive boards, and they average 40%.
Pitt used their zone defense sparingly – during only four possessions (In my Pre Pittsburgh Thoughts I predicted that Pitt would use man defense 90-100% and the actual number was just under 93%) - and Syracuse scored all four times Pitt played zone. Their zone is just not great. From what I saw in other games, they play it to pack the lane and stop teams from getting easy lay ups against them (like SU did). Unfortunately they are not long enough or skilled enough to cut off both drives to the basket, and threes. Since Pitt needed to extend their zone to stop Cooney, Syracuse put him on Christma's side, then fed the ball inside to him where he had acres of space to make two hook shots. Ennis also hit a three and a turn around against Pitt's zone.
This was the only ACC game where Syracuse shot over 50% from the floor. In my Pre Pitt Thoughts I mentioned that Syracuse would have to score consistently to win. They did, and they got a well deserved win from it.
Player Evaluations:
Ennis – Generated two easy lay ups against Pitt (which might be a first) in the last two minutes of a close game. The most impressive part? One lay up came going right, while the other came going left. He also hit some clutch free throws.
Cooney – He hit his easy threes and missed his hard threes, but early in the year he was hitting the kind of shots he missed in this one. I mentioned in my Pre Pittsburgh Thoughts that the game would come down to shooting, which actually ended up being pretty even overall, yet shooting still managed to play a major role. With Syracuse up by ten and the game in the balance, Patterson hit three straight deep threes and Cooney missed two. It would have been nice to see Cooney keep pace with Patterson at that crucial time.
Fair – He was not really featured in the offense until crunch time. Early he managed to score efficiently, but in the middle of the game he went through a little funk. It hurt to get zero points out of that technical against Dixon. Still, Fair did the best job of fighting Pitt on the boards, he blocked three shots, and scored 13 points in a low scoring game. I could not by any means call this a bad game.
Grant – He got pushed around on the boards. That was the bad. Hopefully he will learn to attack Pitt differently from now on. The good . . . everything else. In my opinion this was the best offensive game of his career. Syracuse ran more plays for Jerami than they ever have before and he came through. Before this game, Grant had a mid range jump shot in his arsenal, and an much more potent dribble drive. In order to stop his drives, everybody has been giving him room and daring him to shoot. This was the first game that Grant did something other than shoot with the room he was given. Instead of driving quickly to the basket, he was able to worm his way through the lane and get floaters around the basket, which he made with great success. If this keeps up, Grant might very well be our best player by the end of the season, which is an exciting thought.
Christmas – This was the first game of the year where Christmas got pushed around and lost the positioning battle. Fortunately he's not going to go up against anybody else as strong as Zanna (not counting the next time we play Pitt). Still, Chirstmas did a great job of making up for this by blocking three shots (he could have had more, if not for some ill timed foul calls) and scoring 10 points on 100% shooting. I said in my Pre Pittsburgh thoughts that Syracuse would be in good shape if Christmas played 30 minutes. He got 29, and would have had more if not for foul trouble. The key was that Christmas got to the right spots on defense even though Pitt makes it hard by loading the paint with players and passing wonderfully.
Gbinije – Got a steal and made two free throws. As always, played good defense. Gbinije gave us what he was suppose to give us.
Keita – This was not his kind of game. Pittsburgh was able to push him around too much, but you have to give credit where its due. Keita played hard while he was in the game, and bothered Pitt's big guys. Still the only guy on our team with a negative +/- in this one.
