Reusse: Rick Pitino long ago set in motion Richard Pitino's demise

Donate To GopherHole
BleedGopher

BleedGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
60,768
Reaction score
16,165
Points
113
Pat rambles about a bunch of stuff in his column, not sure what the point of this was. He needs an editor:

www.startribune.com

Rick Pitino long ago set in motion Richard Pitino's demise

Rick did the math decades ago and led the way to basketball's three-point-happy present day. Richard's Gophers couldn't get with the times.
www.startribune.com www.startribune.com

Go Gophers!!
 

He fails to mention what Richard said when he was first hired and asked why his teams were going to shoot a lot of three-pointers: because there isn't a four-point field goal.
 

Pat's just saying that young Richard had a lot of bad luck.
 

Great column. Drawing the familial connection that sits at the heart of this story. Pitino crime family. More will come out on this, guaranteed.
 





builtbadgers said:
The defensive rankings reveal why he did so poorly. Most people just gloss over this but his one decent team was good defensively ranking 22nd. Just not a good teacher.
Click to expand...
Correct—we all loved the Musselman pre-game show but it was the attention to detail in teaching the fundamentals of the match-up zone (it didn’t hurt Jim Brewer was present upon arrival) which helped Minnesota win the first Big Ten championship in 35 years. The fans, too, who returned in droves in 1971-1972 bought into the excitement of playing great defense.
 

Married@SiebertField said:
Correct—we all loved the Musselman pre-game show but it was the attention to detail in teaching the fundamentals of the match-up zone (it didn’t hurt Jim Brewer was present upon arrival) which helped Minnesota win the first Big Ten championship in 35 years. The fans, too, who returned in droves in 1971-1972 bought into the excitement of playing great defense.
Click to expand...
The Musselman pre-game show is pretty much all fundamentals of ball handling.

I'm willing to bet turnovers were at a minimum with those Musselman teams.

Big men who can figure eight the ball through their legs while moving probably can handle a pass.
 



It seems to be lamenting the over reliance on the 3pt shot and then Richard's lack of shooters to do that.
 


builtbadgers said:
The defensive rankings reveal why he did so poorly. Most people just gloss over this but his one decent team was good defensively ranking 22nd. Just not a good teacher.
Click to expand...

Some people may gloss over this while others, like you, have a single minded obsession (to the point of being a broken record) about this. Neither dimension is a magic bullet. Both are important but the more important one is not the one you think.

I ran a simple correlation of Big Ten team winning percentages against Offensive and Defensive Team Ratings for a five year period. For Offensive Ratings, the higher the score the higher the offensive rating. For Defensive Ratings, the lower the score the better the defensive rating so you would expect Offensive Rating to be positively correlated and the Defensive Rating to be negatively correlated and they are.

2021: OR: .872; DR: -.452

2020: OR: .851; DR: -.765

2019: OR: .805; DR: -.538

2018: OR: .746; DR: -.738

2017: OR: .711; DR: -.606

Both are strongly correlated with winning percentage but the Offensive Rating is higher in every year although they are about the same in 2018.

A few day ago you posted that you never have a problem admitting you're wrong. So, can you admit, given the data above, it's ridiculous to harp on the defensive dimension as being the savior while largely ignoring the more important offensive side of the court?

What's particularly interesting in the data above is that 2021 is the year where there is the biggest difference between the two. This was the year with the highest concentration of games to date being within the conference.
 




The important thing in here is that we were sold a bill of goods that was never delivered: high-pressure full-court defense and an offense that makes (not just takes) a lot of threes. I wonder what he'll tell Lobo fans they're going to do.
 

Bad Gopher said:
The important thing in here is that we were sold a bill of goods that was never delivered: high-pressure full-court defense and an offense that makes (not just takes) a lot of threes. I wonder what he'll tell Lobo fans they're going to do.
Click to expand...

Probably the same thing since that combo always seems to sound great to most fans.
 


cjbfbp said:
Probably the same thing since that combo always seems to sound great to most fans.
Click to expand...
It's like when a new defensive coordinator in football is brought in.

"We're going to be more creative in our coverages, and find unique ways to pressure the quarterback / blitz more".

Fans eat that stuff up!
 

Otis said:
The Musselman pre-game show is pretty much all fundamentals of ball handling.

I'm willing to bet turnovers were at a minimum with those Musselman teams.

Big men who can figure eight the ball through their legs while moving probably can handle a pass.
Click to expand...
Gopher team entrance to the court happens 2 minutes into the video. The place was packed and jumpin long before their entrance
 
Last edited:

Face The Facts said:
It's like when a new defensive coordinator in football is brought in.

"We're going to be more creative in our coverages, and find unique ways to pressure the quarterback / blitz more".

Fans eat that stuff up!
Click to expand...
I prefer when coaches come in and say, we're going to have fun and run a happy ship (Bud Grant). That's much more realistic and attainable.
 


Ewert86PC said:
He's had a lot of bad luck and injuries. 😉
Click to expand...

There's a famous old saying: "I'd rather be lucky than good." Unfortunately, Pitino has been neither. As I said in a post a few weeks ago, I've sometimes contemplated that his history unfolded here like a man who was destined to fail.
 

cjbfbp said:
Some people may gloss over this while others, like you, have a single minded obsession (to the point of being a broken record) about this. Neither dimension is a magic bullet. Both are important but the more important one is not the one you think.

I ran a simple correlation of Big Ten team winning percentages against Offensive and Defensive Team Ratings for a five year period. For Offensive Ratings, the higher the score the higher the offensive rating. For Defensive Ratings, the lower the score the better the defensive rating so you would expect Offensive Rating to be positively correlated and the Defensive Rating to be negatively correlated and they are.

2021: OR: .872; DR: -.452

2020: OR: .851; DR: -.765

2019: OR: .805; DR: -.538

2018: OR: .746; DR: -.738

2017: OR: .711; DR: -.606

Both are strongly correlated with winning percentage but the Offensive Rating is higher in every year although they are about the same in 2018.

A few day ago you posted that you never have a problem admitting you're wrong. So, can you admit, given the data above, it's ridiculous to harp on the defensive dimension as being the savior while largely ignoring the more important offensive side of the court?

What's particularly interesting in the data above is that 2021 is the year where there is the biggest difference between the two. This was the year with the highest concentration of games to date being within the conference.
Click to expand...
I was not ignoring it, we have just not been good enough defensively. Believe me, other programs i support are great at both so i am well aware. These programs use a ton of time on defense at practice because they devised a way to maximize offense on players individual skill development on independent time.
 

BleedGopher said:
Pat rambles about a bunch of stuff in his column, not sure what the point of this was. He needs an editor:

www.startribune.com

Rick Pitino long ago set in motion Richard Pitino's demise

Rick did the math decades ago and led the way to basketball's three-point-happy present day. Richard's Gophers couldn't get with the times.
www.startribune.com www.startribune.com

Go Gophers!!
Click to expand...
Big point: Old man rant that teams shooting too many 3's is ruining basketball like shifting in baseball. Then tangential tie to Pitino Sr./Jr.
 

Bad Gopher said:
The important thing in here is that we were sold a bill of goods that was never delivered: high-pressure full-court defense and an offense that makes (not just takes) a lot of threes. I wonder what he'll tell Lobo fans they're going to do.
Click to expand...

Basically his dad's approach. Pitino had some good players here, but he never had quite the right mix and I don't know if he would have succeeded even if that had been the case. I think Nate Mason came closest to the type of guard we had that works best in that system. Guys like Dorsey and Washington just didn't pan out here (for different reasons) but Louisville's teams under Pitino the Elder always seemed to do best when they had that slashing type guard.
 


50PoundHead said:
Basically his dad's approach. Pitino had some good players here, but he never had quite the right mix and I don't know if he would have succeeded even if that had been the case. I think Nate Mason came closest to the type of guard we had that works best in that system. Guys like Dorsey and Washington just didn't pan out here (for different reasons) but Louisville's teams under Pitino the Elder always seemed to do best when they had that slashing type guard.
Click to expand...
I guess the other part of this is, if you're promising something that's infeasible or that you're unable to implement, then you don't know what you're doing.
 

Bad Gopher said:
I guess the other part of this is, if you're promising something that's infeasible or that you're unable to implement, then you don't know what you're doing.
Click to expand...

Agree. The object in coaching is to make the whole exceed the sum of the parts. Pitino the Elder always recruited great parts for his Louisville machine, but he seemed to have the ability to put them together in a way where performance was maximized. Pitino the Younger has had some good players (Mason, Coffey, Murphy, Oturu, Carr), but the product always seemed to be thrown together haphazardly and thus generally underperformed.
 

50PoundHead said:
Agree. The object in coaching is to make the whole exceed the sum of the parts. Pitino the Elder always recruited great parts for his Louisville machine, but he seemed to have the ability to put them together in a way where performance was maximized. Pitino the Younger has had some good players (Mason, Coffey, Murphy, Oturu, Carr), but the product always seemed to be thrown together haphazardly and thus generally underperformed.
Click to expand...
I’ll never be convinced that his teams underperformed the talent. Talent level was much lower than Tubby other than top two players. Always a big drop off after that. Recruiting was first and most important failure.
 

Sure- Reusse is trolling to a degree. But, it's a fair point that Rick Pitino helped steer basketball in its current direction where the 3-point shot is the preferred choice - and Ricks's son wound up losing his job in large part because his team was one of the worst in the country at 3-point shooting.

So, the point is that the son did not learn the lesson his Dad was giving. Or, he simply could not recruit the players needed to make Dad's strategy work.
 

Holy Man said:
I’ll never be convinced that his teams underperformed the talent. Talent level was much lower than Tubby other than top two players. Always a big drop off after that. Recruiting was first and most important failure.
Click to expand...

I almost quoted you twice. I agree to a great extent. He clearly didn't have teams that were overflowing with talent top-to-bottom (and he didn't really develop guys that well so that contributed). My point is that I don't think he got everything out of the talent that he had. Team played like a lot of mismatched parts a lot of the time. Ironically, I thought when everyone was healthy this season things looked better.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom