Mooney and offensive rebounding

[fan2011]

Mooney is listed by Kenpom as one of the ten worst coaches in terms of offensive rebounding percentage. There are some other interesting names on the list, including a previous Richmond coach.

http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/entry/offense_vs._defense_rebounding

 

[MrTbone]

It would be interesting to see the winning pctgs for the bottom ten, the data doesn't do much in the way of correlating the two.

I'd love to see us commit more to offensive rebounding, or at least do it selectively from time to time. I feel like this could change with the shot clock changes.

 

[fan2011]

It would be interesting to see the winning pctgs for the bottom ten, the data doesn't do much in the way of correlating the two.

I'd love to see us commit more to offensive rebounding, or at least do it selectively from time to time. I feel like this could change with the shot clock changes.

Well at least 3 of the 10 coaches in the 'worst offensive rebounding' list have had top 25 ranked teams...

 

[Ulla1]

Looks like those with the best offensive rebounding percentage comprise "Hall of Fame" or soon to be "Hall of Fame" coaches.

 

[Spider B]

I would like to see us get more offensive rebounds. However, its never going to be a top priority in CM's offense. That being the case I think we need to really focus on defensive rebounding and limiting our opponents second chance points. On paper, this year's roster has the size and experience to hold their own on the boards.

 

[WebSpinner]

one consistent on this board with fans, every year, rebounding. maybe instead of CM providing his offense, he can provide his philosophy and how rebounding fits in with it, that would be interesting to hear and explain a lot for all of us.

 

[64Spider]

He believes that defending against the fast break is more important than sending 5 to the board...period....end of discussion. He probably gets very tired of defending his philosophy.
I would love to see him at least send our two best rebounders every play but that just isn't going to happen. Maybe he could at least experiment with more aggressive rebounding and see how the stats compare against defensive stops but I don't see that happening either.
Any way....JUST WIN BABY!!....and no one will complain.

 

[SpiderTrap]

The college game and now the NBA game is built around the 3 point shot. Teams are more willing to shoot 3's than drive or pound it inside. As a result - you see lower offensive rebound numbers because most of your guys are on the perimeter looking to shoot, rather than under the basket looking to post up or crash the glass. Not to mention - your big guys who can shoot 3's are less likely to be the big bruising type of players who are usually the best rebounders.

I could care less about our ranking in the offensive rebound category. Get 0 offensive rebounds a game. Fine by me. The trade off is - you need to make shots. And that is just something we have not done well the past few years. We have not had enough "shooters" on the team. This year might be a little different with ShawnDre, Cline, Allen - all of whom are either capable shooters (ShawnDre and Cline) or have shown flashes of being able to shoot from deep (Allen). Throw in guys like Wood, Fore, and Josh Jones - we should be a better shooting team than in the past few non-ncaa teams.

 

[spiderman]

I'd like to see a correlation between offensive rebounding and points given up in transition. all the 3 point shooting now can lead to long rebounds and breakouts if you don't get back. many teams like VCU are very effective in transition, but not so much when you force them to play half court offense. that's CM's philosophy.

and like Trap said, we've been bringing in some very good shooters. still worry about the shooting from a couple seniors, but hopefully we shoot so well going forward that our offense rebounding numbers get even worse.

 

[keefusb]

I think our best chance of success this year is to play inside out with TA in the blocks and our proven shooters (SDJ an TJC) setting up for 3's. If we can get one or two other guys to step up as consistent 3 point shooters (Wood or perhaps JJ), we could be a very tough out.

I don't expect our offensive rebounding strategy or execution to be any different than it has been the past few years, other than we should probably shoot better as a team this coming season.

 

[Not-A-Homer]

The college game and now the NBA game is built around the 3 point shot. Teams are more willing to shoot 3's than drive or pound it inside. As a result - you see lower offensive rebound numbers because most of your guys are on the perimeter looking to shoot, rather than under the basket looking to post up or crash the glass. Not to mention - your big guys who can shoot 3's are less likely to be the big bruising type of players who are usually the best rebounders.

I could care less about our ranking in the offensive rebound category. Get 0 offensive rebounds a game. Fine by me. The trade off is - you need to make shots. And that is just something we have not done well the past few years. We have not had enough "shooters" on the team. This year might be a little different with ShawnDre, Cline, Allen - all of whom are either capable shooters (ShawnDre and Cline) or have shown flashes of being able to shoot from deep (Allen). Throw in guys like Wood, Fore, and Josh Jones - we should be a better shooting team than in the past few non-ncaa teams.

Agree with most of this post SpiderTrap.

Poor shooting teams need offensive rebounds to improve their chance of success. Good shooting teams not as much.

If I had to bet, I would say that this team is not likely to shoot better than last season unless Johnson & Pistokache earn playing time and produce. Wood is an unknown to me so I have no idea how he will do. Have high hopes for Fore, and Jones, (and I think Fore adds value in other ways) but I think that they carry big question marks regarding shooting. Will be interesting to see how it plays out.

 

[ur2K]

I'm ok with giving up the offensive rebounding battle - Mooney and Beilein have shown that philosophy can work here. I hate seeing us get killed on the defensive boards.

 

[WebSpinner]

as 11 and pom would say, it is all about the numbers, you can give up offensive boards if you have low turnovers, get steals, thus having more offensive possessions.

 

[spiderman]

even the defensive rebounding deficiency has a philosophy. of course we want to defensively rebound, but it's very important to CM to defend the 3 point line. if you stay in tighter, you'll rebound better. but 3 pointers aren't difficult and are worth ... well, obviously 150% of a regular basket. CM makes sure we extend to limit 3's at the expense of a little rebounding.

 

[SpiderChaz]

I think a big thing is just better execution. When guys defend the 3 or are in a defensive area not specifically locked down on a guy, it's harder to box out effectively. But in the big wins down the stretch, guys like Terry and Deion and Trey were able to do that. Richmond won close games where they got defensive rebounds. I guarantee that Coach Mooney isn't telling them to worry more about closing out on shooters and just forget the rebound. They just have to execute the closeout, box out and rebound better. The philosophy certainly makes rebounding a little more difficult than a simple man, but sometimes the players just have to go out and make plays.

 

[TBSpyder]

I expect our rebounding margin to improve a little this year, just because, we are playing a bigger lineup of guards. Last year, we got little rebounding from our undersized guards..

I'd also like to see us, not take so many 3 point shots, when there are no potential rebounders in place. Making 3 pointers, is a rush, but the odds, are, that you simply turning the ball over, and giving up momentum. Terry and Trey are good rebounders, we need someone else to join the club, have the guards, corral some of the long rebounds. Look to feed the ball inside to Terry and TJ, and we have a great shot in every game this year. No question, that the 3 point shot can be the great equalizer. Hit them well enough, and it can offset the advantages of a 7 footer for the other side.

 

[SpiderTrap]

I have said it before and think it still rings true for Mooney's teams - we are never going to be a great rebounding team and outrebound teams on a consistent basis. But the one thing we can't do - is give up 10+ offensive rebounds, that is when we really get hurt. If we can keep the rebounding battle close most nights, and hold the other team under 10 offensive rebounds - then that is good for this team. I don't mind out limited number of offensive rebounds, but giving up 12-15 offensive rebounds a night, that can really turn a game we should have won into a game we lose.

 

[The Vault]

Turnovers. If you can't rebound you have to limit your turnovers and turnover the other team. Otherwise, you'll lose in the battle of # of possessions. Also, as mentioned if you don't give up easy transition buckets and sacrifice rebounds for doing so that can be a tradeoff. I don't know if the second can be net positive but the first can be.

 

[fan2011]

Turnovers. If you can't rebound you have to limit your turnovers and turnover the other team. Otherwise, you'll lose in the battle of # of possessions. Also, as mentioned if you don't give up easy transition buckets and sacrifice rebounds for doing so that can be a tradeoff. I don't know if the second can be net positive but the first can be.

By definition the teams in a basketball game will either have the same number of possessions or one team will have 1 more possession than the other. Offensive rebounds don't create new possessions, they extend the existing possession. If this wasn't the case then possession based statistics would not be very useful. It is literally impossible to lose the 'battle of # of possessions.'

 

[UR Fan 2]

Our timing of pointing out we are not a good rebounding team while trying to recruit new big men is a little surprising. Recruits spend quite a bit of time on these boards. We should get the key new guys locked up before we return to complaining about our program imo.

Or maybe just change the thread name....

 

[fan2011]

Our timing of pointing out we are not a good rebounding team while trying to recruit new big men is a little surprising. Recruits spend quite a bit of time on these boards. We should get the key new guys locked up before we return to complaining about our program imo.

Or maybe just change the thread name....

Basketball is a game of strategy. There is nothing inherently wrong with being low on the list of offensive rebounding percentage. We sacrifice offensive rebounding opportunities to take away fast break opportunities from our opponents. We are #6 in the country in terms of allowing fewest shots in transition. This is one of the reasons we have had a top 50 defense under Mooney many times. Another reason is our 3pt defense, which has been top 20 under Mooney many times as well, but brings us away from the basket and lowers our defensive rebounding numbers.

At least 3 people on the 'bottom 10' offensive rebounding list have had top 25 teams. Beilein made the championship game a few years ago and he is on the list. The list says more about your strategy than the quality of your basketball team.

 

[spiderman]

2011, replace possessions with shot differential. I think that's the point. whether it takes offensive rebounds, or steals, or less turnovers ... you either need to get more shot attempts than your opponent (shots plus 50% of FT attempts) shooting at the same rate, or you need a better shooting percentage to win with less shots.

 

[SpiderK]

My take on abandoning the offensive rebound is that it seems to bleed over to defensive rebounding aggressiveness. Which we are also terrible at. I can tell our bigs are not taught to rebound properly. No boxing out and they use one hand instead of two, also they fail to wrap the ball up until the opposing guards have left them so they don't get stripped.

 

[UR Fan 2]

Basketball is a game of strategy. There is nothing inherently wrong with being low on the list of offensive rebounding percentage. We sacrifice offensive rebounding opportunities to take away fast break opportunities from our opponents. We are #6 in the country in terms of allowing fewest shots in transition. This is one of the reasons we have had a top 50 defense under Mooney many times. Another reason is our 3pt defense, which has been top 20 under Mooney many times as well, but brings us away from the basket and lowers our defensive rebounding numbers.

At least 3 people on the 'bottom 10' offensive rebounding list have had top 25 teams. Beilein made the championship game a few years ago and he is on the list. The list says more about your strategy than the quality of your basketball team.

Then I would change thread title to Mooney's Effective Off Rebound Strategy

 

[spiderman]

top 10 offensive rebounding teams last year:
1 West Virginia 16.43
2 Quinnipiac 16.37
3 Morgan St. 15.00
4 St. Francis Brooklyn 14.89
5 Wagner 14.83
6 Nevada 14.74
7 Towson 14.63
8 Baylor 14.62
9 VMI 14.47
10 Jackson St. 14.38

 

[UR Fan 2]

Mooney's Genius Approach forgoes Offensive Rebounding to Help Win Games....

 

[The Vault]

By definition the teams in a basketball game will either have the same number of possessions or one team will have 1 more possession than the other. Offensive rebounds don't create new possessions, they extend the existing possession. If this wasn't the case then possession based statistics would not be very useful. It is literally impossible to lose the 'battle of # of possessions.'

I'm a bit pedantic too, so I don't mind your explanation of the semantics. That said, if that's all you took from my post you are missing the point.

 

[The Vault]

I'm a bit pedantic too, so I don't mind your explanation of the semantics. That said, if that's all you took from my post you are missing the point.

Also, your "definition" is probably incorrect as they jump ball at the beginning of over time periods.

 

[The Vault]

And just to prove how pedantic I can be fan2011. You can "literally" win the battle of possessions anytime you can have one more than your opponent. Regardless of how many extra you can tack on in overtimes.

That said, maybe I should have just focused on the intent of your post.