Pitt's Patterson second-team All-ACC, Zanna honorable mention
Pitt star Lamar Patterson, a midseason candidate for ACC player of the year honors, was named second-team by the conference's coaches and media.
Patterson, a 6-foot-5 fifth-year senior swingman who averages 17.6 points and 4.5 assists a game, received 10 first-team votes and 158 points by the Atlantic Coast Sports Media Association and 31 votes from ACC coaches.
Pitt center Talib Zanna earned honorable mention on both All-ACC teams. The 6-9 fifth-year senior averages 12.5 points and 8.3 rebounds. He received 28 points from ACSMA, (which required at least 10) and the minimum of four votes from the league's coaches.
Duke freshman Jabari Parker, N.C. State sophomore T.J. Warren, Syracuse senior C.J. Fair and North Carolina sophomore Marcus Paige were first-team picks by both. Clemson junior C.J. McDaniels was named first team by ACSMA, while Virginia sophomore Malcolm Brogdon was voted first team by the coaches.
Paige was named Most Improved Player by both ACSMA and the coaches, but Virginia sophomore Justin Anderson won ACSMA's Sixth Man of the Year award, while the coaches selected Florida State's Ian Miller.
Virginia Tech freshman point guard Devin Wilson, a Montour graduate, was named to both All-ACC freshman teams. Wilson ranks third in the conference with 4.8 assists per game, averages 9.2 points.
Kevin Gorman is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. Reach him at firstname.lastname@example.org or via Twitter @KGorman_Trib.
TribLive commenting policy
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 â 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.