Rebounding

[mileskishnish72]

They need to work harder.

[MuggsyB]

They need to work harder.

I think it's mostly about fundamentals and being more proactive than reactive.  Our 5's had a rough game on the glass today and both guys are quite capable.  Box out and grab and secure the rock with two hands.  Refuse to get bullied. 

[brewcity77]

We have a number of rebounding issues. I think it can be improved, but probably not fixed.

First, defensively, Kur and Oso both pursue shot blocks. This often takes our bigs out of position to get rebounds. In addition, neither are thick, so they can be moved off their position (see Nate Watson two-hand shoving Kur out of the way on the winning and-one).

Also defensively, we switch everything, which can lead to mismatches. Generally, we have good one-on-one defenders with the ability to rebound, but when it ends with a 6'3" guard isolated on a 6'8" forward, that is a rebounding disadvantage.

On offense, it seems to be de-emphasized. Justin and O-Max are both far less aggressive on the offensive glass than last year. Morsell and Kuath have career-worst offensive rebounding numbers. We're more focused on getting back and limiting transition.

I think the offensive end is more fixable than the defensive end. No matter what we do, Kur and Oso aren't gaining 20 pounds of muscle each in the next month, and their shot blocking threat is what fuels our (more important) eFG% defense, which is top-25 nationally and #1 in the Big East. And the switching is the crux of the defense. We've had plenty of possessions where we give up 2-3 offensive rebounds and still get the stop, so I think the staff is willing to live with that as long as our defenders are holding up.

Offensively, however, if you just send 1-2 guys to the glass it could make a difference, and we have the players to do it. We haven't been killed in transition in awhile, and it usually happens against slower-paced teams (Bonnies and Wisconsin are good examples). I'd like to see them have one guard and forward focused on crashing the offensive glass. Kolek and Stevie have both proven able in that regard, as have Justin and O-Max. If you want Morsell and the big getting back, fine, but at least use a couple guys to try to get second chance points. Even cutting that 22-1 margin down to 22-5 would've meant the difference in the game yesterday, and while I understand the logic behind getting back to set the defense, there's no statistical correlation between poor offensive rebounding teams and teams that are good at limiting transition points.

[MU82]

We have a number of rebounding issues. I think it can be improved, but probably not fixed.

First, defensively, Kur and Oso both pursue shot blocks. This often takes our bigs out of position to get rebounds. In addition, neither are thick, so they can be moved off their position (see Nate Watson two-hand shoving Kur out of the way on the winning and-one).

Also defensively, we switch everything, which can lead to mismatches. Generally, we have good one-on-one defenders with the ability to rebound, but when it ends with a 6'3" guard isolated on a 6'8" forward, that is a rebounding disadvantage.

On offense, it seems to be de-emphasized. Justin and O-Max are both far less aggressive on the offensive glass than last year. Morsell and Kuath have career-worst offensive rebounding numbers. We're more focused on getting back and limiting transition.

I think the offensive end is more fixable than the defensive end. No matter what we do, Kur and Oso aren't gaining 20 pounds of muscle each in the next month, and their shot blocking threat is what fuels our (more important) eFG% defense, which is top-25 nationally and #1 in the Big East. And the switching is the crux of the defense. We've had plenty of possessions where we give up 2-3 offensive rebounds and still get the stop, so I think the staff is willing to live with that as long as our defenders are holding up.

Offensively, however, if you just send 1-2 guys to the glass it could make a difference, and we have the players to do it. We haven't been killed in transition in awhile, and it usually happens against slower-paced teams (Bonnies and Wisconsin are good examples). I'd like to see them have one guard and forward focused on crashing the offensive glass. Kolek and Stevie have both proven able in that regard, as have Justin and O-Max. If you want Morsell and the big getting back, fine, but at least use a couple guys to try to get second chance points. Even cutting that 22-1 margin down to 22-5 would've meant the difference in the game yesterday, and while I understand the logic behind getting back to set the defense, there's no statistical correlation between poor offensive rebounding teams and teams that are good at limiting transition points.

Great points, brew, and I like your suggestion on how to pick up a few offensive boards, and you're right that it could be the difference in a game. For example, Greg had a very timely offensive rebound yesterday, and it could have been a 3-point play that would have helped us win. O-Max, especially, could be an effective offensive rebounder.

On the defensive boards, I'll keep saying exactly what Shaka did during the mic'd up game: "All 5 guys have to rebound." A lot of the boards we don't get go off players' hands and ricochet into the mid-lane or mid-wing areas, but our guards are just standing outside the arc, or breaking out on offense assuming one of our bigs will get the ball.

[MuggsyB]

We have a number of rebounding issues. I think it can be improved, but probably not fixed.

First, defensively, Kur and Oso both pursue shot blocks. This often takes our bigs out of position to get rebounds. In addition, neither are thick, so they can be moved off their position (see Nate Watson two-hand shoving Kur out of the way on the winning and-one).

Also defensively, we switch everything, which can lead to mismatches. Generally, we have good one-on-one defenders with the ability to rebound, but when it ends with a 6'3" guard isolated on a 6'8" forward, that is a rebounding disadvantage.

On offense, it seems to be de-emphasized. Justin and O-Max are both far less aggressive on the offensive glass than last year. Morsell and Kuath have career-worst offensive rebounding numbers. We're more focused on getting back and limiting transition.

I think the offensive end is more fixable than the defensive end. No matter what we do, Kur and Oso aren't gaining 20 pounds of muscle each in the next month, and their shot blocking threat is what fuels our (more important) eFG% defense, which is top-25 nationally and #1 in the Big East. And the switching is the crux of the defense. We've had plenty of possessions where we give up 2-3 offensive rebounds and still get the stop, so I think the staff is willing to live with that as long as our defenders are holding up.

Offensively, however, if you just send 1-2 guys to the glass it could make a difference, and we have the players to do it. We haven't been killed in transition in awhile, and it usually happens against slower-paced teams (Bonnies and Wisconsin are good examples). I'd like to see them have one guard and forward focused on crashing the offensive glass. Kolek and Stevie have both proven able in that regard, as have Justin and O-Max. If you want Morsell and the big getting back, fine, but at least use a couple guys to try to get second chance points. Even cutting that 22-1 margin down to 22-5 would've meant the difference in the game yesterday, and while I understand the logic behind getting back to set the defense, there's no statistical correlation between poor offensive rebounding teams and teams that are good at limiting transition points.

Fair enough Brew but O-Max and Morsell in particular have to find a way to rebound the basketball.  I certainly understand it's difficult for Kur and Oso when they are helping and trying to block shots but there are also many possessions when they aren't blocking shots and they are without question strong enough to screen out and get the ball.   More importantly, and this is a recurring problem imo, we simply do not catch the ball far too often when we are in position.  CATCH THE BALl!  WiTH TWO HANDS, TWO HANDS!!  I would imagine every scooper has screamed this during our games on a regular basis.  How many freaking times have we had a hand or hands on the rock and we still cannot secure the basketball??? 

We kick the crap out of Providence if we grab the basketball.  23 second chance points??!!!  Can't happen.  I really think this team can make some noise if we find a way to improve on the glass.  The fact is Brew we kicked a comfortable road win away yesterday because we more times than not could not snag rebounds.  Ergo we continually have a small margin for error.  Grab the ball, rebound the freaking rock like your hair is on fire, celebrate W's, and everyone is happy.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Wouldn't only losing by 2 despite a 22 point disadvantage on second chance points mean we actually have a large margin for error?

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

We have a number of rebounding issues. I think it can be improved, but probably not fixed.

First, defensively, Kur and Oso both pursue shot blocks. This often takes our bigs out of position to get rebounds. In addition, neither are thick, so they can be moved off their position (see Nate Watson two-hand shoving Kur out of the way on the winning and-one).

Also defensively, we switch everything, which can lead to mismatches. Generally, we have good one-on-one defenders with the ability to rebound, but when it ends with a 6'3" guard isolated on a 6'8" forward, that is a rebounding disadvantage.

On offense, it seems to be de-emphasized. Justin and O-Max are both far less aggressive on the offensive glass than last year. Morsell and Kuath have career-worst offensive rebounding numbers. We're more focused on getting back and limiting transition.

I think the offensive end is more fixable than the defensive end. No matter what we do, Kur and Oso aren't gaining 20 pounds of muscle each in the next month, and their shot blocking threat is what fuels our (more important) eFG% defense, which is top-25 nationally and #1 in the Big East. And the switching is the crux of the defense. We've had plenty of possessions where we give up 2-3 offensive rebounds and still get the stop, so I think the staff is willing to live with that as long as our defenders are holding up.

Offensively, however, if you just send 1-2 guys to the glass it could make a difference, and we have the players to do it. We haven't been killed in transition in awhile, and it usually happens against slower-paced teams (Bonnies and Wisconsin are good examples). I'd like to see them have one guard and forward focused on crashing the offensive glass. Kolek and Stevie have both proven able in that regard, as have Justin and O-Max. If you want Morsell and the big getting back, fine, but at least use a couple guys to try to get second chance points. Even cutting that 22-1 margin down to 22-5 would've meant the difference in the game yesterday, and while I understand the logic behind getting back to set the defense, there's no statistical correlation between poor offensive rebounding teams and teams that are good at limiting transition points.

Excellent summary Brew. Only thing I would add is that we also help on every drive to the bucket. So even if Kur/Oso isn't going for a block, they are still moving over to wall up and try to alter the shot. That means someone isn't being boxed out on the weak side.

I also can't think of the last time one of our rebounders successfully tipped the ball to a teammate. I'm sure it actually happens at least once a game but it feels like all of our attempted tip outs go straight to an opponent whereas the opposite is true when the opponent gets the tip. At some point, that's not just dumb luck.

[MuggsyB]

Wouldn't only losing by 2 despite a 22 point disadvantage on second chance points mean we actually have a large margin for error?


We couldn't put the game away because they constantly got multiple shots per possession.  That's what happened.   So if you allow points constantly on possessions,  because you literally cannot get a rebound, you make it much more difficult to win despite a few anomalies.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Wouldn't only losing by 2 despite a 22 point disadvantage on second chance points mean we actually have a large margin for error?


We couldn't put the game away because they constantly got multiple shots per possession.  That's what happened.   So if you allow points constantly on possessions,  because you literally cannot get a rebound, you make it much more difficult to win despite a few anomalies.

So we can allow a 22 point disparity (which I think is our worst of the season) in second chance points and only lose by 2 on the road to a ranked team. That seems like a pretty big margin of error. A 20 point margin of error.

I'm mostly gigging you Muggsy. The rebounding is an issue, but our team has been good enough in other areas to more than make up for it on most nights.

[brewcity77]

The fact is Brew we kicked a comfortable road win away yesterday because we more times than not could not snag rebounds.

I get it. But here's the reality. Our general expectation this year ranged from bottom of the league to bubble team. Even if we only beat Butler and Georgetown from here on out, we're likely dancing, so while the recalibration makes Sunday disappointing, on the whole it's fine.

Second, while our rebounding sucks, it's the third most important of the four factors. We are #1/#1 in offensive/defensive eFG% in league play, which is most important. We are #4/#2 in turnover rate, which is second most important. The staff understands what they need to do to win and have worked to get this team good at the most important things.

This isn't a one-year sprint, it's a multi-year process. I don't need Shaka to cut down nets in Chicago or New Orleans to convince me we're headed in the right direction. I look at Oso and O-Max and Keeyan and Joplin and think those are guys that will be here for years and will grow into good rebounders, even if they aren't yet. My expectations have been exceeded, the staff has proven they know what results they want and know how to get them, and whether this year ends in a first weekend loss or a dream NCAA run, I'm already pleased at the place we're in.

[Uncle Rico]

I get it. But here's the reality. Our general expectation this year ranged from bottom of the league to bubble team. Even if we only beat Butler and Georgetown from here on out, we're likely dancing, so while the recalibration makes Sunday disappointing, on the whole it's fine.

Second, while our rebounding sucks, it's the third most important of the four factors. We are #1/#1 in offensive/defensive eFG% in league play, which is most important. We are #4/#2 in turnover rate, which is second most important. The staff understands what they need to do to win and have worked to get this team good at the most important things.

This isn't a one-year sprint, it's a multi-year process. I don't need Shaka to cut down nets in Chicago or New Orleans to convince me we're headed in the right direction. I look at Oso and O-Max and Keeyan and Joplin and think those are guys that will be here for years and will grow into good rebounders, even if they aren't yet. My expectations have been exceeded, the staff has proven they know what results they want and know how to get them, and whether this year ends in a first weekend loss or a dream NCAA run, I'm already pleased at the place we're in.

All of this.  It's entirely possible the Quette loses a game in March because of rebounding but it's also true Marq may not have had that opportunity without what they've become quite good at.

It stinks the rebounding is so bad.  At this point, the hope is they get to bad from very bad.

[MU82]

This isn't a one-year sprint, it's a multi-year process. I don't need Shaka to cut down nets in Chicago or New Orleans to convince me we're headed in the right direction.

Totally agree with this, though some don't like hearing those words ... especially "process."

This year's been a blast already. Hoping it gets even better, of course, but I'm sure liking what I'm seeing for long-term success.

[Jockey]

The rebounding problem could be fixed fairly easily.

It would mean more bigs on the floor more often, less shot blocking and intimidation in the lane, less ball flow on offense, plus a few other things.

I am as frustrated as anyone, but am not willing to make the trade-off.

[tower912]

Oso and Kuath really can't play together except in end game defensive combinations.   To get more size would mean to nearly always have two out of three of Joplin, OMP, and Lewis on the floor with very few 3 guard looks.    I don't see that making MU a better team.

[Nukem2]

Oso and Kuath really can't play together except in end game defensive combinations.   To get more size would mean to nearly always have two out of three of Joplin, OMP, and Lewis on the floor with very few 3 guard looks.    I don't see that making MU a better team.

Yep, playing together is totally situational for a few seconds.

[MuggsyB]

I get it. But here's the reality. Our general expectation this year ranged from bottom of the league to bubble team. Even if we only beat Butler and Georgetown from here on out, we're likely dancing, so while the recalibration makes Sunday disappointing, on the whole it's fine.

Second, while our rebounding sucks, it's the third most important of the four factors. We are #1/#1 in offensive/defensive eFG% in league play, which is most important. We are #4/#2 in turnover rate, which is second most important. The staff understands what they need to do to win and have worked to get this team good at the most important things.

This isn't a one-year sprint, it's a multi-year process. I don't need Shaka to cut down nets in Chicago or New Orleans to convince me we're headed in the right direction. I look at Oso and O-Max and Keeyan and Joplin and think those are guys that will be here for years and will grow into good rebounders, even if they aren't yet. My expectations have been exceeded, the staff has proven they know what results they want and know how to get them, and whether this year ends in a first weekend loss or a dream NCAA run, I'm already pleased at the place we're in.

All very solid points Brew and I greatly respect your knowledge and opinions.    As far as expectations I felt we would be better than people think although I generally believe this every year.  At the same time I don't think most people (myself included) knew what we really had roster wise. 

What I did say, and have said for many years, is that you're not automatically in rebuilding mode when there's a coaching change.  Things can move at warp speed with a certain coach or a couple of players even at non blueblood schools.

Now that we have seen our guys for 20+ games I think we all know this is a formidable group with solid potential.  Expectations have changed imo and they should.  I think you would agree that MU is right there in the top tier in the BEast from a roster and talent perspective Brew.  I've watched the other teams very closely and Marquette can take all of them.  This has nothing to do with my bias, it's just a cold hard fact.  So when we lose a game, when it's quite obvious we were in control and have better overall pieces, I get a bit upset.   Bouncing back Wednesday night is imperative.

[wadesworld]

I get that both personnel and scheme cause us to be a bad rebounding team. But this is VERY concerning for what I would love to be a very fun March. You cannot be doubled up on the boards and expect to win games. You can make up possessions in other ways, but you have to at least compete on the boards. Get position, fight to hold position, and grab the dang ball. Goal should be remain within 8 or so boards. That's a very bad rebounding margin, but if we just do that we are extremely dangerous.

[wadesworld]

Absolutely embarrassed.

[Boone]

SUCKS!

[withoutbias]

Sanogo and ugly ass Martin alone outrebounded Marquette by more than a couple.

[Vander Blue Man Group]

It's the reality.  Have to win in spite of it and realize it can and probably will cost us.  Shaka and the team cleary realize it's an issue. 

[Fred Garvin]

Maybe they will play with a smaller lineup more

[mileskishnish72]

Deficiency in rebounding will end our season is my read at this stage.

I'm not saying Shaka hasn't done a great job (beyond my wildest expectations), but our poor rebounding will kill us, somewhere, at some level.

He's done such a good job on so many levels, can he figure this out?

[MarquetteDano]

Said this in another thread but starting to notice teams are crashing 4+ players on the offensive boards against us.  We need to make them pay with some transition buckets.

I understand most of the time we need 5 players to defensive rebound,  but it would be nice to release a player or two when the other team over-commits.

[Elonsmusk]

Said this in another thread but starting to notice teams are crashing 4+ players on the offensive boards against us.  We need to make them pay with some transition buckets.

I understand most of the time we need 5 players to defensive rebound,  but it would be nice to release a player or two when the other team over-commits.

Yes...but you have to be able to get the rebound to start the transition, so there's the rub.  I think MU should actually abandon the transition game in order to address the glaring weakness on defensive rebounding.