ShareThis Page
Duquesne women lose in NIT 3rd round |

Duquesne women lose in NIT 3rd round

Staff Report
| Thursday, March 22, 2018 10:22 p.m

Junior Chassidy Omogrosso (Blackhawk) led the Duquesne women’s basketball team with 14 points, but the Dukes (25-8) lost to St. John’s, 65-52, in the third round of the NIT on Thursday in Queens.

Duquesne scored just 17 first-half points and shot 58.8 percent for the game. The Dukes were outrebounded 36-28 and had 18 turnovers.

Kadri-Ann Lass, a junior, had 10 points, five rebounds and two blocks, and sophomore Eniko Kuttor led Duquesne with six rebounds.

St. John’s (19-14) plays the winner of Friday’s West Virginia-James Madison game in the quarterfinals.

Categories: Duquesne
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.