ShareThis Page

Pitt notebook: Free-throw woes Panthers' problem

Kevin Gorman
| Saturday, Jan. 18, 2014, 9:06 p.m.
Pitt's Lamar Patterson (21) and Talib Zanna walk back to the bench after Syracuse's Tyler Ennis put the Orange in the lead late in the second half Saturday, Jan. 18, 2014, in Syracuse, N.Y.
Chaz Palla | Tribune-Review
Pitt's Lamar Patterson (21) and Talib Zanna walk back to the bench after Syracuse's Tyler Ennis put the Orange in the lead late in the second half Saturday, Jan. 18, 2014, in Syracuse, N.Y.

SYRACUSE, N.Y. — With a three-point lead and 4.8 seconds remaining, Syracuse coach Jim Boeheim instructed his Orange to foul Pitt on the inbounds.

“We've seen too many guys make shots in that situation,” Boeheim said. “I think that fouling is the best way. I hesitate a little bit because we're not a good rebounding team but, fortunately, he missed and we got it back.”

Here's another rationale: Why give the Panthers a chance to tie the game from beyond the arc when they couldn't win it at the free-throw line?

No. 22 Pitt made only 13 of 23 free throws in its 59-54 loss to No. 2 Syracuse on Saturday at Carrier Dome. Syracuse was 13 of 18 (72.2).

“It hurt us today,” Pitt senior swingman Lamar Patterson said. “It came down to it at the end.”

The 56.5 free-throw percentage was Pitt's second worst of the season, behind the game versus Albany (56.3).

The Panthers came into the game shooting 73.2 percent from the free-throw line. Perhaps redshirt freshman Chris Jones was most symbolic, a 93.2 percent shooter going 1 for 4.

“That's tough,” Pitt point guard James Robinson said. “We've been a pretty good free-throw shooting team. I hate to come here and let that be one of the factors that play into us losing, but there were other aspects of the game that we didn't execute or do as well as we should have.

“When you start letting all of those different categories add up — and not in your favor — that's when you tend to lose.”

Spoiler alert

Pitt came just short of snapping a Syracuse perfect season for the third time in five seasons.

The Orange were 13-0 before an 82-72 loss to the unranked Panthers Jan. 2, 2010, at Carrier Dome, and 18-0 and ranked No. 3 before a 74-66 loss to No. 5 Pitt on Jan. 17, 2011, at Petersen Events Center.

Pitt also had won six of eight against Syracuse at Carrier Dome, including a streak of five consecutive from January 2004 to January 2012.

Pitt coach Jamie Dixon is 10-5 against Syracuse, including 5-2 at the Dome.

Ready to rebound

In an unusual twist, Pitt dominated the boards but lost the game.

The Panthers finished with a plus-12 rebounding edge over Syracuse, including 16-4 on the offensive end. But Syracuse made 21 of 41 shots, including 32 points in the paint to Pitt's 24.

“Offensively, we played as well as we could play. You don't shoot 50 percent against Pittsburgh. Not many teams do,” Boeheim said. “Unfortunately, we stopped rebounding. This is the first game this year where the boards really would have been the determining factor in the game if it wasn't for Tyler (Ennis) making the plays he made down the stretch.”

Talib Zanna led all rebounders with 11, including four offensive. It was the 12th career double-double and sixth of the season for Zanna, who made 4 of 8 shots from the field and 4 of 6 free throws for 12 points.

Kevin Gorman is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at or via Twitter @KGorman_Trib.

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.