Submit your Pitt basketball question

Q: What is the tiebreaker process in the Big East?

Dick Steponic, Ambridge

FITTIPALDO: I will go over some of the scenarios for you, Dick, but you can view the entire set of Big East tiebreakers at www.bigeast.org. Just click on men's basketball and then scroll down the right hand side and click on "Tiebreaker Formula."

Since you're likely looking for Pitt tiebreaker scenarios I will cover a few for you here. The first tiebreaker for two tied teams is head-to-head competition. Since Pitt and Georgetown split the season series, you move on to step two. Step two is comparative records against the next highest team in the standings. That is Louisville. Georgetown beat Louisville and Pitt lost to Louisville, so Pitt loses the tiebreaker to Georgetown.

If there is a three-way tie, let's say between Pitt, Georgetown and Louisville, you form a mini-conference with those three teams. Pitt falls all the way to the third seed in this scenario because the Panthers were 1-2 against those two teams. Louisville was 1-1 and gets the second seed. Georgetown was 2-1 and gets the top seed.

Big East officials will have some fun Saturday and Sunday. If Pitt beats Marquette there is a legitimate chance that five teams will tie for sixth place with 9-7 records.

Q: What do you think of the following claim: Pitt teams in the Howland-Dixon era have not improved throughout the season as much as other top 25 teams. True? If so, why? Perhaps it actually hurts to have a team of mostly upperclassmen. You look at a team like Kansas, starting mostly underclassmen and you see huge improvement throughout the year. Maybe Dixon gets all he can out of his "not top 100" recruits by midseason and that is the best they can get.

David Dutwin, Havertown, Pa.

FITTIPALDO: I don't buy that, David. For the most part, Pitt's teams always improve as the season goes forward. The Panthers are 25-5. You don't put up that kind of record without improving. The same goes for seasons past. The only team I thought that regressed was the one two years ago that lost to Pacific in the first round of the NCAA tournament. Every other team was playing well going into the tournament. Pitt might not always get hot at the right time and make a run in the NCAA tournament, but it's not because the Panthers regress as a team.

Dixon gets the absolute most out of his players. To win with the talent level he has at his disposal makes him one of the top coaches in the country. And it's not always about the talent. Look around at other schools falling off the NCAA bubble. Oklahoma State is playing its way out of the tournament. The Cowboys looked great against Pitt in December, but it might not matter because they'll probably be playing in the NIT. This Pitt team has its share of weaknesses and might not make it to the Sweet 16. That would be a shame with the number of veterans on this team and the high expectations it had from Day One. But things could be a lot worse. Just look around at the teams fighting to get in the NCAA tournament.

Q: In a few games this year Pitt fell behind by 10 or more points and Jamie Dixon changed to a 2-3 zone. It was very effective and allowed Pitt to get back in those games. Would it not make sense to throw different defensive schemes at the opponent? Or should we be content to trade baskets as we saw happen in Georgetown last Saturday?

Matthew Brodak, Gaithersburg, Md.

FITTIPALDO: You would have to point out specifically which games the 2-3 zone was effective and got Pitt back into games because I'm not remembering them. I know Dixon switched to a zone at Buffalo in the first half when the Panthers were getting blitzed by the Bulls, but it was not effective and Pitt went back to man-to-man in the second half when the Panthers made their comeback. Dixon always goes back to his man-to-man defense because that's what his program is built on. He'll go to the zone when the man-to-man is not working, but he's not the type of coach who is going to play zone for a changeup. He believes in his man-to-man principles too much to do that.

Q: I've watched many Pitt games on television. From what I've seen Gray is unathletic and is just a big body. Fields is the only guy who can handle the ball, and he is foul prone and not a great shooter. The only good shooter is Ronald Ramon, and he is not a great ball handler and can't play defense. The rest of the team is decent but not exceptional. Pitt isn't a bad team but doesn't look like a legitimate tournament threat. Simply on the basis of team skill, how far does Pitt get in the NCAAs?

Terry Hammer, Huntington Beach, Calif.

FITTIPALDO: I'll refute a few of your points before making an NCAA prediction. Gray might not be the best athlete in the world, but he is effective and is one heck of a college player. It's up for debate whether he'll make it in the NBA, but you should not discount his ability as a college player. Fields has proven to be a better than average shooter this season. He is shooting 37 percent from 3-point range and almost 45 percent from the field overall.

If you look at Pitt's players individually the Panthers are not all that impressive. But as I said before Dixon gets the most out of every player on the roster and gets them to play as a team. I don't know if people appreciate how difficult it is to get Sam Young or Ronald Ramon to buy into their roles as reserves. It's not easy juggling as those egos. But somehow Dixon has been able to make it work.

As for the NCAA tournament, it all depends on the bracket. I've said all season that it would be a disappointment for this team not to get to the Sweet 16 because of everything the number of veterans returning. I'll stick by that even though the outside shooting is starting to concern me a little bit.

Q: I watch almost every Pitt game and I am getting a little concerned. The shooting woes the guards have had recently are very disconcerting. You're supposed to play better as the season wears on, and our guys are playing worse. We should be blowing away teams like Providence and Seton Hall. All the talk that this team could get past the Sweet 16 is ridiculous. Do the guards just have to keep shooting to get out of their slump? I fear yet another early exit from the tournament this year.

Jared S., Baltimore, Md.

FITTIPALDO: The shooting is a concern, Jared. I think Ramon and Fields will be OK. The player I'm worried about is Antonio Graves. He is in a 7-for-35 shooting slump over the past six games. He has been way off with his 3-point shot. Graves needs to pick up his play or it could be hard for Pitt to go very far in the tournament. He is an important part of this team and he can't perform the way he has been if Pitt has designs on going to a Final Four. As Dixon pointed out earlier this week, all you can do is keep shooting and hope the slump ends.

Q: Why is it that Pitt teams cannot put opponents away? They constantly let opposing teams back into the game. Why can't the coaches do something about this?

Hal Steiner, Dubois

FITTIPALDO: That has been a problem in my eyes, Hal. Pitt let Seton Hall get back in that game after having a 12-point lead with about six minutes to go. The Panthers were not as lucky against Georgetown, when they blew an eight-point lead with 11:56 remaining. Levon Kendall and Levance Fields spoke about that problem after the Georgetown game. Fields said the Panthers have to do a better job of finishing games. Kendall said the team lost focus a bit against the Hoyas and celebrated too early. It's mystifying to me why it would be a problem with such a veteran team. After Ramon hit that 3-pointer against Georgetown to put Pitt up by eight and John Thompson III called a timeout, I would have liked to have seen the Panthers congratulate each other but then calmly sit down and realize that more than a half of basketball remained. They did not do that and it cost them. Perhaps they learned a valuable lesson and they can apply it to a more important game down the road.

Q: Is there any rhyme or reason behind who wins coach of the year awards? It seems that some years, coaches and pundits vote for coaches who have won more games than expected (winning when they're not expected to have winning seasons). Other years, they reward coaches for winning when it's expected. For example, Jay Wright won last year when he was supposed to have a successful season. Jamie Dixon won games last year when he was supposed to be rebuilding. Most importantly, he gets his players to play good defense and share the ball on offense, which is no easy tasks when all the players were stars in high school. So when in the world is Dixon going to be recognized for the great job he is doing?

Randy Bernot, Murray, Ky.

FITTIPALDO: Dixon won the Big East coach of the year award in 2004, after his first season. A lot of times after a coach wins his peers will wait a while before giving it to him again. It's really as simple as that. I agree that Dixon should have received more sentiment, but you can't expect him to win every year.

I don't think the coaches have a set way of picking coach of the year. Sometimes they'll go for the guy who does a great job of rebuilding while other times they'll vote for the guy who goes 14-2 and wins a conference title. This year, for example, I would say John Thompson III, Mike Brey, John Beilein and Rick Pitino would get a lot of support to win - each for different reasons. I don't get a vote, but if I did I'd vote for Pitino.