ShareThis Page

WPIAL girls basketball preseason rankings

| Thursday, Dec. 7, 2017, 3:42 p.m.
Penn Hills' Tayonna Robertson competes during practice Wednesday, Nov. 29, 2017, at Penn Hills.
Lillian DeDomenic | For The Tribune-Review
Penn Hills' Tayonna Robertson competes during practice Wednesday, Nov. 29, 2017, at Penn Hills.
Greensburg Salem's Megan Kallock brings the ball downcourt against Hampton during the WPIAL Girls Class 5A playoff game at Fox Chapel High School on Friday, Feb. 17, 2017. Greensburg lost the game, 75-34.
Sidney Davis | Tribune-Review
Greensburg Salem's Megan Kallock brings the ball downcourt against Hampton during the WPIAL Girls Class 5A playoff game at Fox Chapel High School on Friday, Feb. 17, 2017. Greensburg lost the game, 75-34.
Southmoreland's Cali Konek (25),  during practice at Southmoreland High School AlvertonMonday, Nov. 20, 2017.
Dan Speicher | Tribune-Review
Southmoreland's Cali Konek (25), during practice at Southmoreland High School AlvertonMonday, Nov. 20, 2017.

WPIAL girls basketball preseason rankings

Class 6A

1. North Allegheny (28-2)

2. Penn Hills (23-4)

3. Bethel Park (19-8)

4. Peters Township (14-9)

5. Mt. Lebanon (19-7)

Class 5A

1. Chartiers Valley (20-8)

2. Mars (18-8)

3. Oakland Catholic (24-5)

4. Hampton (23-4)

5. South Fayette (20-7)

Class 4A

1. CW North Catholic (25-3)

2. Blackhawk (17-10)

3. Beaver (17-7)

4. Keystone Oaks (20-4)

5. Freeport (14-11)

Class 3A

1. Bishop Canevin (23-6)

2. Neshannock (25-3)

3. East Allegheny (24-2)

4. Riverside (19-7)

5. Mohawk (16-6)

Class 2A

1. Chartiers-Houston (24-3)

2. Vincentian Acad. (21-6)

3. OLSH (20-7)

4. Leechburg (15-11)

5. Greensburg C.C. (19-6)

Class A

1. Winchester-Thurston (22-2)

2. West Greene (19-6)

3. St. Joseph (17-9)

4. Quigley Catholic (15-8)

5. Cornell (21-6)

* Records from 2016-17 season

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 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.