POLL: Rebounding

[SpiderHoops32]

Should Mooney change his approach on rebounding? I think if he does we will have a great rest of the season.

Rebound totals for the games we have lost *bold is UR*

ODU: 34-24
NC State: 34-22
UNI: 31-30
JMU: 38-26
Wake: 35-33
Northeastern: 31-23
Davidson: 31-21
GW: 38-21
Dayton: 24-22





This post was edited on 2/2 12:09 PM by SpiderHoops32

 

[SpiderTrap]

No - Mooney's teams and you can even throw in Beilein as well were never good rebounding teams because they all rely on the outside shot.

Winning the rebounding battle is not all that telling in my mind, but is being highlighted this season because we are not hitting enough outside shots - 3 pointers - to make up for it. Beilein was the same way. He would rather have a lesser rebounder out there, but a better shooter and go with the thought - they will get more rebounds, but if we make more 3's - it negates that and might even give us an advantage.

Problem is this year - our team is not shooting well. Outside of Anthony and Cline - our shooters are very streaky at best. We just have not hit enough outside shots. And to me its not overall rebounds that concerns me, but rather how many offensive rebounds we give up. If we get outrebounded, but keep the opposing team to under 10 offensive rebounds - chances are the rebound margin will be close, and so will the game.

 

[97spiderfan]

Big difference between offensive rebounding and defensive rebounding. Philosophically, we don't go after offensive rebounds because we are taught to get back to prevent transition buckets.

Defensive rebounding is not optional.

 

[sdspider]

Agreed it's the defensive rebounding where we've gotten killed with second chance points. Because we are known as a weak rebounding team, smart teams will plan to hit the boards hard against us. We've got to make it a priority on D to go after those boards. Will be interesting going up against the big guys of Lasalle, Cady of Umass, and the aggressive team of Rhody.

 

[SpiderK]

RPI game was absolutely won on the boards.

 

[Jwilk1]

Changing offensive rebounding means a radical change in your defensive philosophy and that isn't going to happen.

 

[SpiderK]

I'd settle for defensive rebounding like Saturday. One and done was nice to see for once.

 

[SouthJerseySpiderFan]

Preface my opinion by saying if had to choose between successful and not so with regards to CM's tenure as coach, no doubt successful wins out. All coaches though look for ways make their teams better.

Voted for a rebounding philosophy change on both ends but especially the defensive end. Yes UR can continue to be a better than average team in the A10 and beat the teams they supposed to. Getting past that level I think in being that top 50-60 team near every year becomes so much tougher with their rebounding deficiencies continuing year-in-year out.

I just look at the top 50 teams (UR #45 KP) and common trait is better than average off/def rebounding or at least very good at one. A few come close to UR's dismal numbers.

 

[PhillySpider]

This has come up before. I believe rebounding is cultural to your program - - or not. Izzo at Michigan state makes it culture, they rebound every year no matter the talent etc. They emphasize it, they recruit it, they preach it and if you don't join in, your butt gets a seat on the bench, You can't have that attitude and only apply it to defensive rebounding. I believe we are a poor defensive rebounding team because rebounding is not cultural to our team. You can't preach don't worry about rebounds when we shoot the ball, but go be a warrior on the defensive glass. I guarantee you teams that are consistently great rebounders have drills where there is all out warfare to get the rebounds. That means defensive rebounders are practicing their defensive rebounds against offensive rebounders who are warriors etc. Thus, when they see fierce rebounders, they are prepared. We don't have anyone going after offensive rebounds, so we are I am sure practicing "basic" rebounding - - find your man, Box out, go get the ball. But without the internal war that comes from full on commitment to rebounding by every player for every practice shot, every drill etc. they are just not prepared for the guys who ARE committed to that!

 

[PhiDeltaSpider]

Excellent points, Philly.

 

[SpiderTrap]

Exactly my point Philly - rebounding is not our "culture" or "philosohpy" as I may call it.

We were not a great rebounding team when Beilein was here, yet everyone thinks he was one of the greatest coaches at UR and produced a lot of winning teams and an NCAA berth. Wainwright on the other hand - he stressed rebounding, defense, and physical, tough play - and that too brought us to an NCAA bid. Mooney - more like Beilein, stresses passing and shooting over rebounding. He rather have athletic guys who can switch and guard everyone on defense in our switching zone/amoeba defense. Even when Anderson, Harper, Geriot, etc were here - we gave up a lot of offensive rebounds.

Just looked back - in 2011 season (sweet 16 run) we gave up an avg. of 12 offensive rebounds a game. But as a team shot 39% from three and had 4 main rotation guys - Anderson, Harper, Geriot, and Brothers - all above 40%. Year before - we gave up 13 offensive rebounds a night, but shot near 36% from 3, and had Butler at 39%, and Harper, Anderson, and Gonzo all around 35% - 4 of our main players. Our shooting made up for it.

This year - we are only giving up about 10 offensive rebounds a night, which might be due to our lesser competition in OOC play. BUT - we are only shooting 34% from 3% and that is really because of two lights out games we have had. Our only real shooters at this time are Anthony, Cline, and Jones - and all of them are streaky and inconsistent.

Mooney's system, culture, philosophy - whatever you want to call it is to have shooters on the floor and rebounding is secondary. Make enough outside shots and win games - no one talks about rebounding.

 

[fan2011]

Every shooter is streaky, that is the way the universe works. If someone is a 40% 3pt shooter they aren't going to shoot 40% every night, some nights they will go 1-5 and others they will go 3-5. Every once in a while they might even go 0-5 or 5-5. Streakiness is more a product of probability than something innate to the shooter themselves.

 

[SpiderHoops32]

Looking at the highlights from the RPI game, our guys didn't retreat after a shot like they have been all year. I saw ANO crash the boards along with other Spiders. We totaled 6 offensive rebounds, don't know how many of those we scored on.

I'm more concerned with defensive rebounding. I feel like Mooney's philosophy on offensive rebounding makes our guys softer when it comes to rebounding as a whole. Personally I would like defensive rebounding to be emphasized, it looked like it was on Saturday. I'm fine with running back down the court to stop a fast-break if we can pull down the rebounds off the misses. Hopefully Mooney learned from the RPI game!

This post was edited on 2/3 10:14 AM by SpiderHoops32

 

[I-M-UR]

Erratic shooting is another reason we should have someone (or ones) crashing the O boards. (when you have a limited number of 'shooters' if they are cold you're in real trouble (ie long periods of no scoring)) We can still get enough people back on defense and go after offensive boards, it is not either or. Certainly trey, deion, Ano, etc are athletic enough to get some. An offensive rebound is as good as a turnover and often leads to a basket.

 

[keefusb]

Was watching Iowa State vs Kansas last night, and the announcers showed a slo-mo of how IS was sending two guys to the offensive glass on an IS shot, but the PG and two wings were dropping back to cover the fast break. It was very clear on replay what IS was trying to do.

I don't think we need to have all 5 guys get back to cover the fast break, three guys can do it. I think having two guys crashing the offensive glass will yield us some number of offensive rebounds, especially when we aren't shooting 60% from the field.

We did look a lot better on the defensive glass against the Lambs, not sure what the reason was for that, but I liked it, and I think it was key to the win.

 

[SpiderTrap]

Problem is our lack of shooting usually results in long rebounds, which are tough to crash the boards.

I don't think our lack of offensive rebounding is an issue. We have never been a strong offensive rebounding team in any year. This year - we are getting 6 offensive rebounds a game.

How many did we get in our back to back NCAA years? About 9 in both years. So 3 more. Not a huge difference in my mind.
A bigger difference can be seen, and it makes sense, if you go back to our 2004 NCAA year (year we beat Kansas in the regular season) and we avg. 12 offensive rebounds a game then. But the philosophy and culture was different under Wainwright with a guy like Winiecki coaching the big guys and our post players were guys like Steenberge, Moliva, and you had Dobbins and Bucknor crashing the boards.

 

[keefusb]

Three more offensive rebounds per game could equal 6 more points. How many games have we lost this year by 6 points or less? At least making an effort to go for offensive rebounds (i.e. sending two guys to the glass) seems a better choice than having all 5 guys run back on defense when the shot goes up.

 

[SpiderTrap]

But then factor in the probably 2-3 extra fast breaks or easy shots we might give up by having more guys crash the boards, not to mention we might pick up additional fouls and we are not a deep team to begin with. We play 7 guys - so if 1-2 guys pick up 2 quick fouls, we are in trouble.

I just don't think offensive rebounding is all that important for this team. We saw the blueprint vs. VCU. It was almost St. Louis like. keep the game low scoring, grind it out, and play solid defense. This means control the defensive boards, which remains to be seen if we can do that on a nightly basis - we did against VCU, but can that continue? Can we keep opponents under 10 offensive rebounds a game?

I think the key for us is slow the game down, play good defense, and knock down key shots. We didn't shoot the ball well vs. VCU - but we made key shots. Down 11 with a 1 minute to play before halftime - and SDJ knocks down a big 3 to cut it to 8, and ANO gets a lay-up to cut it to 6 going into the locker room. Then to start 2nd half 3 straight 3's to not only take the lead, but it took the crowd out of the game. From their - we controlled the tempo, drove to the basket - and made free throws.

 

[spiderman]

it's such an oversimplification to say that all 5 always run back. they don't. it depends on where they are on the floor. I teach the same thing. shot goes up, you''re either crashing or getting back. just don't stand still. and if you're 20 feet from the basket there's no sense crashing. so yes, sometimes our bigs are going to run back instead of going to the boards. but if someone is in or near the lane, they do fight for offensive boards.

it's not simply a philosophy to not offensively board. our offense often has many players on the perimeter. when out there, you really aren't going to get boards.

we were awesome on the defensive glass against VCU, but some here seem to think that was some revelation by CM. not the case. he always wants to defensively board. it's just not always easy when you place a premium on getting out to shooters like we do, but he always wants to board.

 

[SpiderK]

Spider-Man, curious how coaches handle the game now that teams take 20-25 3 point shots a game. I am referring to the long rebounds, where you don't always have to be under the basket or crash the boards. You just need to have not run away. Since over 65% of 3 pointers are missed, how do you teach what to do on the long shot. In my opinion we stayed on the defensive end and turned around and got almost all of their 17 3 point misses. Also do you think this is a slight change in philosophy for us or was it just luck?

This post was edited on 2/3 2:17 PM by SpiderK

 

[spiderman]

not sure I understand. if you're saying we stayed on the defensive end, you always stay on the defensive end. it's the offensive end that I believe has been in question.
yes, long rebounds on long shots make it tough for bigs with good position to get defensive rebounds. attacking the offensive glass is much more dangerous now with all the long rebounds. if the defense gets a long rebound and your perimeter offensive players have crashed, it's a fast break.

 

[SpiderK]

I see what you are saying. I meant that it looked like on the defensive end all the guys were turning around on each shot and looking to rebound. We usually do not do that. I wish three guys would crash the offensive boards and the other two can take off instead of all 5 leaving as soon as ball is shot.