For those of you who think Aaron Gray isn’t doing enough on the boards, Ken Pomeroy has an interesting bit of information:

Best Defensive Rebounder: Aaron Gray of Pitt is hauling in 31.9% of his opponents missed shots while he is on the court. He’s averaging double-digit rebounds in only 24.9 mpg. Granted, against weak competition.

Now, Pitt has crashed the Coaches’ Poll at #25 and sits (unofficially) at #28 in the AP. With Pitt officially in the top #25 of a poll, expect the cries regarding Pitt’s non-con to intensify.

The Big East Power Poll is out and Pitt is #3. Here is how my ballot looked.

1. UConn — Undefeated and unbowed
2. Villanova — Ditto
3. Louisville — I just don’t like to slam a team for losing a rivalry game. Especially on the rival’s home court. Besides, I couldn’t justify moving anyone ahead of them.
4. Pitt — that includes my team, when the only victory for the week came against Vermont
5. Syracuse — McNamara getting hisrhythmm and the schedule is soft
6. Georgetown — Easy game time for them
7. WVU — DNP
8. Marquette — This is a bit of a gut thing, but Marquette is going to be a tough team in the BE this season
9. ND — And I’m seeing the NIT for ND for a 3rd straight year.
10. Cinci — Probably a little low, but I cannot get a feel for this team from game-to-game, week-to-week
11. RU — I almost wanted to ding them for playing a Div. II team this past week
12. Providence — Best thing for them was not playing all week.
13. DePaul — So, they go on the road and beat Wake Forest, then lose at Old Dominion?
14. St. John’s — Marist? Lose to Marist at home? There are two reasons they are not at the bottom of the list:
15. Seton Hall — Someone do the merciful thing and pull the plug on Louis Orr now.
16. USF — Had to comeback to beat FAU. No depth and injuries killing.

Early surprises: Cinci and Marquette
Early disappointments: St. John’s and Georgetown

Show your prognostication superiority. The bowl games kick-off tomorrow night. Still time to enter the bowl challenge, and join the “Pitt Sports Blather” group.

A puff piece today on Krauser continuing his ascent on several of Pitt’s all-time lists.

In unbeaten Pitt’s 63-52 victory over Vermont on Saturday, Krauser scored 21 points to increase his career total to 1,289 and move past Chevon Troutman, Sean Miller and Bobby Martin.

Earlier, Krauser had passed John Riser, Bob Lazor, Curtis Aiken, Jerome Lane and Jaron Brown after starting the year at 1,148.

Next up is Jerry McCullough, who finished his college career in 1996 with 1,342 points, and Brandin Knight, whose 1,440 points ranks 13th.

Krauser played behind Knight to start his college career before Knight used up his eligibility in 2003.

With the schedule roughly one-fourth elapsed, Krauser appears to have time to finish among the top 10 scorers at Pitt. He needs 292 points — an average of 15.4 points per game — during the Panthers’ final 19 regular-season games to tie Vonteego Cummings (1,581) at No. 10.

You have to figure on passing Cummings, with at least 2 additional games. Assuming Pitt manages to finish #12 or higher in the Big East so Pitt will play at least one game in the Big East Tournament. And while the NCAA isn’t assured, I am willing to bet that at a minimum Pitt makes the NIT.

Krauser also looks to break 500 assists this season to be only the 5th Pitt player to have more than 1000 points and 500 assists (Brandin Knight, Sean Miller, Darrelle Porter and Jerry McCullough)

Concern over perimeter defense is the topic.

In the first 3 minutes and 25 seconds of the second half of Vermont’s game against Pitt Saturday, the Catamounts scored 12 points on four 3-point baskets, and that was eight more points than they scored in the final 11:22 in the first half.

The instant offense was an instant reminder of one of the biggest problems that plagued Pitt last season: perimeter defense.

Defense has been one of Pitt’s strengths through the first eight games of the season. Seven teams have failed to score more than 60 points against the undefeated Panthers. But defending the 3-point shot continues to be a headache for coach Jamie Dixon and his staff.

Pitt ranks 13th out of 16 Big East Conference teams in defending the 3-point shot. Opponents are shooting 37.6 percent from 3-point range. That has to be disconcerting given the level of competition to date. With better shooting teams due soon, it will be imperative for the Panthers to improve.

If Vermont can convert eight 3-pointers, what will a more accomplished 3-point shooting team such as West Virginia do against the Panthers? …

Sounds dire, except for one little fact. Vermont made 27 attempts to just have 8 3s fall. That’s a .296 average. Pitt actually held Vermont below their season average of .314 (including Saturday’s game).

It should be something of a concern, but not the way this article sets it out to be. It’s hard to be that upset about a team throwing up tons of 3s when they are under 30% shooting. Unfortunately, the piece was a little lazy.

There’s reason to worry about perimeter defense considering how much trouble Pitt had with it last season. This isn’t the way to make the case.

3-point shooting versus Pitt: 58 – 154, .377
Opps. avg. 3-point shooting: 428-1230, .348

Teams are shooting better against Pitt right now, but the difference is not that vast. Take out the games against Pitt and the teams are shooting .344 (370-1076). To take the opponent 3-point shooting average down to .344, is 5 made shots.

5 made 3s in 8 games is the difference. Should the defense be tighter? Yes. Yes it should. But then, we always want better. We want to see Pitt keeping teams shooting below the average. Not just average or just above average.

In 3 games, Pitt held teams below their 3-point shooting average: Vermont, Duquesne and Maine. In all 3 examples the difference was exactly one less 3-ball. If the team makes a 3 they are right around or perhaps slightly above the season average.

In 3 games, Pitt allowed teams to shoot just above their average: Penn State, St. Francis (NY) and St. Peter’s. Once again, the difference was one more 3 going down.

The difference really came in 2 games: Robert Morris (10-19, .526) and Auburn (6-12, .500).

The Auburn game can be somewhat excused because they got most of the 3s (5-8) in the second half when Pitt gave the bench a lot more time.

As for Robert Morris, well, simply put, Pitt was lazy on defense that game. RMU came out and hit 7-11 on 3s in the first half. It was a game where Pitt came out without giving much of an effort to begin the game. In fact, Pitt didn’t start turning the game on, until about 2 minutes into the second half.

What I would like to see in basketball, is much like hockey, the +/- ratings of players. That would be a better indicator of the kind of defense they play. I’m betting teams keep some sort of stat like that, but it isn’t a number available for general discussion. It’s a shame, because I think that would be a greater indication of a player’s defensive and offensive value.