City League boys basketball championship preview
Boys basketball championship
No. 1 Obama Academy vs. No. 3 Allderdice
At Obama Academy
Scoring leaders: OA: D.J. Porter 23.5; A: James Jackson 14.0
How they got here: After a first-round bye, Obama Academy beat No. 4 Carrick, 62-41, in the semifinals. Allderdice toppled No. 6 Brashear, 71-38, in the quarterfinals and No. 2 Perry, 71-61, in the semifinals.
Notable: Obama Academy won both regular-season meetings: 68-65 at Allderdice on Jan. 14 and 61-49 at home Feb. 7. The Eagles are trying to become the first City League team to win a title undefeated since Fifth Avenue in 1976. Obama Academy has wins over five WPIAL playoff teams, three that are still playing. Allderdice held Porter, an NCAA Division I-caliber player, to just eight points in the previous meeting. This is a rematch of the 2012 City League final, which Allderdice won 56-49. Creighton scored 22 points and made four 3-pointers to lead all scorers in the last meeting. The winner faces the runner-up from the WPIAL in the first round of the PIAA Class AAAA playoffs March 8.
Predicted winner: Obama AcademyObama Academy (22-0)
Coach: Nate Lofton
No. Name Pos Ht. Yr.
1 Calique Jones G 6-1 Sr.
5 Chris Noel F 6-1 Sr.
14 Alan Hord G 6-3 Sr.
20 D.J. Porter G 6-5 Sr.
34 J. Taylor-Lane G 6-2 Jr.
Coach: Buddy Valinsky
No. Name Pos Ht. Yr.
20 D. Moultrie F 6-2 Sr.
22 James Jackson G 6-1 So.
23 Ramon Creighton G 6-2 Jr.
33 Timothy Jackson G 6-1 So.
34 Alex Bell F 6-4 Jr.
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.