Iowa's Offensive Rebounding Noted by John Gasaway

storminspank

storminspank

Justin VanLaere
One of the best college basketball minds in the nation put this on Twitter this AM:

Twitter

McCaffery ball: In one year offensive boards have gone from prohibited to plentiful @ Iowa. Jarryd Cole approves.
 
We actually have one of the best rebounding teams in the conference. Surprising considering how undersized we are.
 
Rebounding is about the want to in a player. Under Lick (and I liked Lick) the players just couldn't get into a groove. Under Fran they are playing basketball, just reacting and not thinking.
 
My guess is the improvement is mostly due to Lickliter not sending many players to the glass very often on the offensive end so they could instead get back on defense and limit transition and slow the tempo.
 
Size is one thing, but effort and positioning is what makes rebounding...the best ever: Charles Barkley at a generous 6'4", I know he was listed at 6'6", but there is no way.
 
khaal53 said:
My guess is the improvement is mostly due to Lickliter not sending many players to the glass very often on the offensive end so they could instead get back on defense and limit transition and slow the tempo.
Click to expand...

That's definitely a large part of it. Lickliter's slow offense and focus on getting back on D rather than crashing the boards limited the number of possessions on both ends of the floor. Fewer possessions per game = fewer rebounding opportunities. Likewise, Fran's style of pushing the ball on both ends is going to create more possessions per game. So Lickliter's teams weren't as unskilled at rebounding as their rebounds per game would suggest, and Fran's teams probably won't be quite as good at rebounding as their rebounds per game would suggest. The only true measure of rebounding effort is rebounds per possession, and most people don't care enough about stats to break it down that much.

edit: actually the REAL stat should be rebounds per missed shot attempts. And if you want to break it down even further, break down offensive boards per missed shots (minus those that are blocked), and defensive boards per opponents' missed shots (minus blocks).
 
Last edited:
ddiction said:
That's definitely a large part of it. Lickliter's slow offense and focus on getting back on D rather than crashing the boards limited the number of possessions on both ends of the floor. Fewer possessions per game = fewer rebounding opportunities. Likewise, Fran's style of pushing the ball on both ends is going to create more possessions per game. So Lickliter's teams weren't as unskilled at rebounding as their rebounds per game would suggest, and Fran's teams probably won't be quite as good at rebounding as their rebounds per game would suggest. The only true measure of rebounding effort is rebounds per possession, and most people don't care enough about stats to break it down that much.

edit: actually the REAL stat should be rebounds per missed shot attempts. And if you want to break it down even further, break down offensive boards per missed shots (minus those that are blocked), and defensive boards per opponents' missed shots (minus blocks).
Click to expand...

Is there someone who calculates these stats and if so where?
 
ddiction said:
That's definitely a large part of it. Lickliter's slow offense and focus on getting back on D rather than crashing the boards limited the number of possessions on both ends of the floor. Fewer possessions per game = fewer rebounding opportunities. Likewise, Fran's style of pushing the ball on both ends is going to create more possessions per game. So Lickliter's teams weren't as unskilled at rebounding as their rebounds per game would suggest, and Fran's teams probably won't be quite as good at rebounding as their rebounds per game would suggest. The only true measure of rebounding effort is rebounds per possession, and most people don't care enough about stats to break it down that much.

edit: actually the REAL stat should be rebounds per missed shot attempts. And if you want to break it down even further, break down offensive boards per missed shots (minus those that are blocked), and defensive boards per opponents' missed shots (minus blocks).
Click to expand...

Great point ddiction. I always like to look at rebounding margin. It seems Tom Davis teams consistently were one of the top teams in the country at rebounding margin. If you have 60 total rebounds in a game and you get 35 to the opponents 25, that is what matters.
 
What you guys are getting at...

deanvogs said:
Great point ddiction. I always like to look at rebounding margin. It seems Tom Davis teams consistently were one of the top teams in the country at rebounding margin. If you have 60 total rebounds in a game and you get 35 to the opponents 25, that is what matters.
Click to expand...

is what Ken Pomeroy tracks. His website (2011 Pomeroy College Basketball Ratings) is a must for anyone who wants to understand what is going on with a team from a statistical standpoint.

Rebounding margin does not "matter" the most when it comes to rebounding. Yes, if you grab a bunch more rebounds (total) than your opponent, than you are probably doing a good job rebounding.

The only things that matter for rebounding is what percentage of your own team's misses you get, and what percentage of the other team's misses you rebound. and Pomeroy tracks both of those things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top