• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Should we be concerned about the offensive rebounding %?

BobStackFan4Life

BobStackFan4Life

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 17, 2011
Messages
31,661
Reaction score
1,538
This was posted on the Tyler Lewis thread and I think it might be worthy of it's own discussion. Is the poor rebounding more a product of the players we have, the system Bz is running, a combination of the two, or... Should it be a concern?
ChrisL68 posted:
Since this is Bzzzz's 7th straight team that has ranked 300th or worse in oreb%, I will contend that a pattern has emerged.
Click to expand...

DeacsFan27 posted where we are in relation to other schools. I knew we were bad but I'm stunned at just how bad:
Offensive Rebounding % (335th in the country)- LOL there are no good teams behind us...here are the 10 (that are worse than us):

Nicholls St.
South Dakota
UC Davis
SIU Edwardsville
NJ Inst of Technology
Evansville
Southern
Brown
Denver
Nebraska Omaha


Defensive Rebounding % (180th in the country)- Good teams behind us include:

Alabama
Baylor
Dayton
Oregon St
Kansas St
FSU
Richmond
Middle Tennessee
Providence
Memphis
Connecticut
Marquette
VT
UCLA

All those are top 80 KenPom teams aside from Richmond (82).
Click to expand...
 
Rebounding in gener al. We don't have enough big folks to get it done yet against the Duke's or UNC-Ch's of the world. Several years away with that.

All of our big guys got kicked off the team the last 2 years for thuggery.
 
Other than Travis we have no one who is close to being a good rebounder. This is where the discussion starts.

Add to that we play a Princeton based offense. Teams that do rarely rebound on the offensive end well. You are inherently out of position to do so.

Even extremely good pro teams who play this style don't do so. The great Knicks team of 69-70 played a weave/Princeton type offense. They were next to last in the NBA in overall rebounding that year. The Pete Carril/Rick Adelman coached Kings never were much above middle of the pack in offensive rebounding in spite of start a front line that was 6'10, 6'9 and 7'.

You just aren't going to do it against good competition.

On the defensive end, we simply don't have the bodies to rebound. Woods was supposed to be our best rebounder over the past two years and he's gone. Tabb was supposed to be a very good rebounder and he basically never played.

I realize some here want to blame that on [Redacted], but they also blame the plague and the London Fire on him.
 
RJKarl said:
Other than Travis we have no one who is close to being a good rebounder. This is where the discussion starts.
Click to expand...

QFT.

RJ has stated a basic fact. Carson is slow to get off the floor and has a vertical of maybe a foot. He's skinny, weak, and can't rebound in traffic. Nikita isn't much better.

Ty may help a little but he'll spend the rest of the year fumbling the ball on every third board that comes his way. Daniel shows a nose for rebounding but is so limited in other ways, he can only play spot minutes.

I can't believe there's one college coach that doesn't emphasize the importance of rebounding. It's as fundamental to winning basketball as dribbling, passing, and catching. I have no idea how his Nugget teams ranked in rebounding, but I know buzz hasn't had any rebounding horses to this point as a college coach.

Give a coach good rebounders and you'll see good rebounding and I think we're on our way to having rebounders next year who should get better over time.

Note: This post addresses rebounding and offers no opinion on Buzz's suitability as a coach or buzzin/out.
 
It's a concern to the extent that if you're a terrible offensive rebounding team, you need to do all of the following well: shoot, limit turnovers, and get to the free throw line often (and convert attempts there). If we could get to even slightly below average on the O-boards, being a bit above average in the other three would make us a pretty good overall offensive team. But ranking 320+, we need to be exceptional in a couple of the other categories and above average in the remainder just to make up for it. It's tought to overcome.

As to why we perform that way, Buzz's history tells us its at least part systemic for his teams, while just watching this team, it's pretty clear we also lack the talent. In other words, it's both. I would expect Moto and Thomas at the least to be better than our current team on the boards, but we'll have to see if that translates into results or if the system they play in will preclude our progress in that area.
 
Deacsfan27 said:
By ACC standards yes.
Click to expand...

What other standard would we use?

FWIW, I don't really understand the obsession with offensive rebounding. On the offensive side of the court top concern should be getting the best shot possible so the offensive scheme should be designed around that, not designed around getting rebounds.

The bigger concern is rebounding on the defensive side.
 
In the 4 Factors that matter (eFG%/OR%/TO%/(FTA/FGA)) these are our percentages and ranks:

eFG%: 51.2% (85th)
OR%: 23.1% (335th)
TO%: 18.1% (48th)
FTA/FGA/: 47.3% (33rd)

Compared to last year:

eFG%: 47.6% (236th)
OR%: 26.4% (322nd)
TO%: 22.0% (272nd)
FTA/FGA: 38.4% (147th)

Pretty substantial improvement. No doubt those numbers will fall as we enter ACC play, but they should only get better over the next 4 games, which will be fantastic improvement from the shitshow that was last year in the non-conference season.
 
Last edited:
TBR said:
What other standard would we use?

FWIW, I don't really understand the obsession with offensive rebounding. On the offensive side of the court top concern should be getting the best shot possible so the offensive scheme should be designed around that, not designed around getting rebounds.

The bigger concern is rebounding on the defensive side.
Click to expand...

Well it's really semantics, but we aren't a horrible team compared to say Towson or Nebraska-Omaha. We are within the top 50% of all D1 teams. That's terrible by Wake Forest and ACC standards and we need to improve in drastic fashion, but to say that we are a "terrible basketball team" is not quite correct.
 
Deacsfan27 said:
Well it's really semantics, but we aren't a horrible team compared to say Towson or Nebraska-Omaha. We are within the top 50% of all D1 teams. That's terrible by Wake Forest and ACC standards and we need to improve in drastic fashion, but to say that we are a "terrible basketball team" is not quite correct.
Click to expand...

Yes, we're pretty much an average team if you look at all 345 D1 schools. Of course, as an ACC program with ACC resources, it's kind of silly (as you noted) to consider how we measure up to the likes of Towson and Nebraska-Omaha.
 
Yes, turnovers are down from 22% of our possessions last year (272nd) to 18.1% so far this year (48th). We're also shooting better (51.2% EFG% is 85th) and getting to the line more (47.3 FTA/100FGA, 33rd). The improvement in those three areas to a top 100 team in each is the reason we're better this year than last in spite of being worse on the offensive glass at 335th.

Our overall offensive efficiency is 135th, up from 235th last year. With the four components of it coming in at 33rd, 48th, 85th, and 335th in the country, it's pretty clear what's holding us back from being a good offensive team. While I agree that talent is a big part of it, I also acknolwedge that it will be very hard to become a top 50 offensive team (and tournament contender) in the future if we don't improve to at least average in that area as our talent improves. Thus, [Redacted] will have to make adjustments to his Princeton offensive system to better future talent in order to improve enough, if the system is largely to blame as.
 
deacfreke2 said:
I have no idea how his Nugget teams ranked in rebounding, but I know buzz hasn't had any rebounding horses to this point as a college coach.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how relevant his NBA stats are because I don't know how similar of a system we will ever run to his super up tempo Nugget teams (5th and 2nd in pace respectively). I do know he has said repeatedly his ideal Wake team would push the pace. Also, he had pros on that team who were obviously gifted rebounders... giving him a somewhat even playing field. Here it is a much larger part of his job to bring in those players. Regardless, here are his NBA rebounding numbers:

In 2002-2003 the Nuggets were 4th on OR% and 3rd in DR%.

In 2003-2004 the Nuggets were 8th in OR% and 26th in DR%.
 
TBR said:
Yes, we're pretty much an average team if you look at all 345 D1 schools. Of course, as an ACC program with ACC resources, it's kind of silly (as you noted) to consider how we measure up to the likes of Towson and Nebraska-Omaha.
Click to expand...

Correct.
 
Right now our offense is 135th nationally, despite the fact that our oreb% pretty much can't get any worse. We're 48th nationally in TO%, even though we don't have a quality PG. We're shooting well from the field (85th nationally) and getting to the line a ton (33rd nationally) even though we have absolutely no inside game whatsoever.

In short, no, I'm not that worried about offensive rebounding. Obviously I'd like for it to be better, but Buzz has consistently built excellent offensive teams without any proficiency in offensive rebounding. Examples:

2006 Air Force: 330th in offensive rebounding...27th nationally in offensive efficiency
2007 Air Force: 332nd in offensive rebounding...24th nationally in offensive efficiency
2010 Air Force: 341st in offensive rebounding...34th nationally in offensive efficiency

The #1 concern, by far, should be defense.
 
Last edited:
TBR said:
What other standard would we use?

FWIW, I don't really understand the obsession with offensive rebounding. On the offensive side of the court top concern should be getting the best shot possible so the offensive scheme should be designed around that, not designed around getting rebounds.

The bigger concern is rebounding on the defensive side.
Click to expand...

Well sometimes, the offensive rebound is the best shot possible in that the ball is close to the basket on a rebound. Also an offensive rebound gives the offense an additional chance to get the best shot possible without first giving up a shot to the opposing team.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top