ShareThis Page
Pitt-Pacific scouting report |

Pitt-Pacific scouting report

| Thursday, March 17, 2005 12:00 a.m

Pitt (20-8) vs. Pacific (26-3))

Game info: 12:40 p.m., Taco Bell Arena, Boise, Idaho

On air: TV: CBS, Radio: Fox Sports 970-AM; NewsTalk 104.7-FM

Probable starters


Pos. Name Ht. PPG
F Troutman 6-7 15.1
F McCarroll 6-10 1.9
F Taft 6-10 13.3
G Graves 6-3 7.6
G Krauser 6-2 15.6


Pos. Name Ht. PPG
F Maraker 6-9 13.0
F Korajkic 6-7 8.2
C Yango 6-9 13.1
G Doubley 6-1 12.2
G Mihailovic 6-5 5.9

Key matchup

Pitt center Chris Taft vs. Gillaume Yango

If the inconsistent Taft plays like he did against Notre Dame (26 points, 11 rebounds) and not against Connecticut (seven, three), he could do some damage today and beyond. However, Yango, a native of France, is a potent inside force who was dominant last year in two NCAA Tournament games. He had 18 points and five rebounds in the Tigers’ upset of No. 5 seed Providence in the first round, and 22 points and six boards in a second-round loss to Kansas. The winner of this battle could lead his team to the round of 32.


3 Consecutive years Pitt has won in the first round of the NCAA Tournament

4 Times out of five that Pitt has defeated a team from the Big West Conference, from which Pacific hails

4 Times out of five that Pacific has won at Taco Bell Arena

Categories: News
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.