Center commits verbally to Pitt men |

Center commits verbally to Pitt men

To the rest of the Big East Conference, Pitt men’s basketball recruit Austin Wallace says beware.

“Some of the Big East schools that didn’t recruit me as hard, I feel sorry for those schools,” the 6-foot-9 220-pound center from New York La Salle Academy said Monday, a day after revealing he gave a verbal commitment to Pitt for the 2006-07 season.

“Several years from now, they will be kicking themselves,” he said. “The coaches at Pitt gave me a chance. They saw something in me, and they were really dedicated to me. Now, it’s time for me to get to work.”

Wallace, 16, joins 6-6 Gilbert Brown, a Harrisburg native who plays at South Kent (Conn.) School, as early commitments to the Panthers. Wallace chose Pitt over Florida Atlantic, which he said had offered him a better chance at a starting spot as a freshman.

Big East schools Georgetown, Marquette and Seton Hall, as well as Georgia Tech and Purdue also showed interest in Wallace, who averaged 17.0 points, 14.0 rebounds and 6.0 blocks per game as a high school junior.

But it was Pitt that sparked Wallace’s interest the most. He credited Panthers associate head coach Barry Rohrssen for recognizing him.

“Coach Slice (Rohrssen) and coach (Jamie) Dixon saw something in me, and they were really dedicated to me,” said Wallace, who attended the Reebok ABCD Camp in Teaneck, N.J., this year, where he was a team member of No. 1 high school prospect Greg Oden, from Indianapolis Lawrence North High School.

At La Salle Academy, Wallace attends a school known for basketball excellence. Others notable former players from the school are Indiana Pacers forward Ron Artest, former Milwaukee Bucks guard Shamgod Wells and John Candelaria, the ex-Pirates pitcher who is the school’s all-time leading scorer.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using 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.