Gorman: Pitt shows promise in deflating defeat
Kevin Stallings let out a deep, deflating breath when asked about his first taste of ACC basketball.
A 78-77 overtime loss to No. 24 Notre Dame Saturday at Petersen Events Center wasn't the way the Pitt coach envisioned ending 2016, let alone his ACC debut.
“Not as good as the first taste of SEC play,” Stallings said of Vanderbilt's 87-77 victory over No. 6 Florida in January 2000. “I wish we could have repeated that but, unfortunately, we didn't.”
There is nothing but disappointment in defeat, and this loss was very disappointing.
But Pitt showed promise and hope for progress.
Panthers fans showed how spoiled they have become by Pitt's success, heading for the exits after Steve Vasturia sank a 3-pointer with 2.5 seconds remaining in overtime for the Fighting Irish.
It was a great college basketball game — both coaches said so, unprovoked — but the memorable moment belonged to Notre Dame.
Despite his success, fans had grown tired of Jamie Dixon's stifling style of coaching. They wanted something more entertaining, something less focused on defense and rebounding.
They got that with Stallings, who loosened the reins. The Panthers have been given the green light to shoot 3s, the freedom to play at a fast tempo and have scored 80 points or more seven times.
That was wild to watch in the first half as 3-pointers accounted for 19 of Pitt's 34 shots and seven of its 13 field goals and the Panthers took a 36-34 lead.
Problem is, Pitt's top five players are essentially all small forwards, and no one seemed willing to do the dirty work. The Panthers don't have a true point guard or a post, and Notre Dame took advantage by outscoring Pitt, 40-18, in the paint, with 15 points off nine turnovers.
“We play different. We get up (court) faster, shoot the ball faster within the shot clock, try to get more possessions than the other team,” said Pitt senior Jamel Artis, who had 25 points and nine rebounds. “We don't have that much size, but we try to beat teams down with our quickness. We've got a lot of talent on this team, so…”
So that's what made this loss hurt so much. Pitt believed it could have won, that it should have won.
Now is a good time to remind Pitt fans, no longer satisfied with Sweet 16s, that the Panthers were picked to finish 12th in the ACC.
Their flaws — the lack of a tertiary scorer and bench production — were exposed as Notre Dame used a 16-3 run to take a 60-52 lead in the second half. But Pitt clawed back, answering with a 15-2 run.
“That's the hardest we fought and competed all year,” said senior Mike Young, who had 25 points, seven rebounds and seven assists. “It wasn't the skill or talent. It was just the competitiveness to play harder than them, and that's what I'm most proud of. That's the one thing we definitely can take from this game to the next game: how hard we competed and how hard we played.”
Notre Dame coach Mike Brey believes the Irish had a “psychological advantage” in overtime, having won six straight. To Stallings, Pitt just needed one more winning play.
Stallings hoped Pitt would have a “mature, motivated response” when Virginia visits Wednesday.
“I don't think that you have any time to wallow in your boo boos,” Stallings said. “You have to get up and be a man and say, ‘What can I do better?' And get ready for the next one, because there's 17 more just like that one that are going to come flying at us — and none of them are going to be easy.”
As Stallings learned in his ACC debut, nothing is going to come easy for Pitt. But the Panthers showed promise that, with progress, they could be fun to follow.
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.