We out rebounded a team...

[mu_eyeballs]

39-35

I didn't think we had it in us?!?  Let's go and get some Ws in NYC!!

[Daniel]

Kur was pretty active - good to see us win a rebound war

[mileskishnish72]

Is that a first for this squad? I know, but I'm as lazy as VBMG.

[rocky_warrior]

Is that a first for this squad? I know, but I'm as lazy as VBMG.

Also, how often is SJU out-rebounded?  Also lazy. 

[DoctorV]

Yea I was looking for a rebounding thread to comment on this.

I asked in the game thread if StJ is statistically a poor rebounding team or if MU just rebounded well?

7 for JLew and Kur, 6 for Darryl and Greg, 4 for Oso and Kolek.
Guards doing it was nice, and bigs being active on the glass.

That said, johnnies play fast and loose, not slow and tight. The slow and tight big bodied fundamentally sound teams are the ones that give Marquette fits on the glass

[Spaniel with a Short Tail]

Greg is an underrated rebounder. Best hands on the team. Worst legs though.

[Newsdreams]

Greg is an underrated rebounder. Best hands on the team. Worst legs though.

Plus gives me high blood pressure when he dribbles or is inbounding the ball.

[Jay Bee]

Sorry, but St John's rebounded better than we did last night

[brewcity77]

Sorry, but St John's rebounded better than we did last night

+1

Rebounding margin is not a thing. Johnnies rebounded better offensively and defensively.

[BM1090]

Agreed, but it was one of our better defensive rebounding performances. Allowed SJU to grab 22.2% of their misses, much better than our season average of 31.3%

[We R Final Four]

I still see JLew/DM/GE/OMP miss a block out.....opposing team gets the off reb and puts pressure on Kur/Oso.....who then commit a foul......yesterday for several and ones.
When JLew wants to he can be the beat def rebounder on the floor.
Nice to see a few off rebounds and put backs by our guys yesterday. It seems like a rare feat.

[withoutbias]

"Tell me you never played basketball without telling me you never played basketball ."

Nothing better than the "but actually" guys. What does "rebounding margin is not a thing" even mean? We had more rebounds than our opponent did. Thus, we outrebounded them. They had a better rebounding percentage. Cool. We still competed on the glass and pulled down more rebounds than our opponent.

The computer metrics and efficiency analytics are great. But they've also gone too far. Providence is the outright Big East champion, 24-4, and 13-3 in the conference. Their actual results in the numbers that actually matter (see: winning games) say they deserve a one seed. But because we have nerds who can crunch numbers in an algorithm we're going to give them a 4 seed because their "predictive metrics" say they are the 16th best team. We've played the entire schedule. Who the eff cares about "predictive." They won 24 games and lost 4 in a top 5 conference. That has to mean more than an algorithm.

[Jay Bee]

It's not about computer metrics or analytics. Rebounding is common sense. Offensive & defensive rebounding are completely different animals; combining them makes no sense. It's idiotic.

[IrwinFletcher]

"Tell me you never played basketball without telling me you never played basketball ."

Nothing better than the "but actually" guys. What does "rebounding margin is not a thing" even mean? We had more rebounds than our opponent did. Thus, we outrebounded them. They had a better rebounding percentage. Cool. We still competed on the glass and pulled down more rebounds than our opponent.

I'll explain it with an example

Team A Shoots 30-60 from the field and has 10 offensive rebounds
Team B Shoots 25-65 from the field and has 12 offensive rebounds

Who rebounded better?

You might think that Team B rebounded better because they had 12 and Team A had 10.

But that is incorrect.  Team A missed 30 shots so only had 30 opportunities to get an offensive rebound, which they did 10 times.  Or, you could say they got an offensive rebound 33% of the time on missed shots.

Team B missed 40 shots and so had 40 opportunities for an offensive board, which they did 12 times.  Or you could say that they got an offensive rebound 30% of the time on missed shots.

So the raw numbers are somewhat meaningless because you can't get an offensive rebound on a made shot.  So the rate of which you rebound is more indicative of your rebounding prowess that they actual number.

[panda]

"Tell me you never played basketball without telling me you never played basketball ."

Nothing better than the "but actually" guys. What does "rebounding margin is not a thing" even mean? We had more rebounds than our opponent did. Thus, we outrebounded them. They had a better rebounding percentage. Cool. We still competed on the glass and pulled down more rebounds than our opponent.

The computer metrics and efficiency analytics are great. But they've also gone too far. Providence is the outright Big East champion, 24-4, and 13-3 in the conference. Their actual results in the numbers that actually matter (see: winning games) say they deserve a one seed. But because we have nerds who can crunch numbers in an algorithm we're going to give them a 4 seed because their "predictive metrics" say they are the 16th best team. We've played the entire schedule. Who the eff cares about "predictive." They won 24 games and lost 4 in a top 5 conference. That has to mean more than an algorithm.

But actually - PC didn't play a full schedule.

[PointWarrior]

We should just stop playing the tourney and let predictive analytics crown a championship.    And use the "value add" metric and you don't even have to play the regular season.

"Tell me you never played basketball without telling me you never played basketball ."

Nothing better than the "but actually" guys. What does "rebounding margin is not a thing" even mean? We had more rebounds than our opponent did. Thus, we outrebounded them. They had a better rebounding percentage. Cool. We still competed on the glass and pulled down more rebounds than our opponent.

The computer metrics and efficiency analytics are great. But they've also gone too far. Providence is the outright Big East champion, 24-4, and 13-3 in the conference. Their actual results in the numbers that actually matter (see: winning games) say they deserve a one seed. But because we have nerds who can crunch numbers in an algorithm we're going to give them a 4 seed because their "predictive metrics" say they are the 16th best team. We've played the entire schedule. Who the eff cares about "predictive." They won 24 games and lost 4 in a top 5 conference. That has to mean more than an algorithm.

[withoutbias]

I'll explain it with an example

Team A Shoots 30-60 from the field and has 10 offensive rebounds
Team B Shoots 25-65 from the field and has 12 offensive rebounds

Who rebounded better?

You might think that Team B rebounded better because they had 12 and Team A had 10.

But that is incorrect.  Team A missed 30 shots so only had 30 opportunities to get an offensive rebound, which they did 10 times.  Or, you could say they got an offensive rebound 33% of the time on missed shots.

Team B missed 40 shots and so had 40 opportunities for an offensive board, which they did 12 times.  Or you could say that they got an offensive rebound 30% of the time on missed shots.

So the raw numbers are somewhat meaningless because you can't get an offensive rebound on a made shot.  So the rate of which you rebound is more indicative of your rebounding prowess that they actual number.

Right. I get it. Nobody even said we rebounded better. But we did our rebound a team.

But actually - PC didn't play a full schedule.

And?

[brewcity77]

Right. I get it. Nobody even said we rebounded better. But we did our rebound a team.

And?

That only matters if opportunities are equal. But they weren't. On Marquette's offensive end of the court, there were 37 total rebounds available. On St John's end, it was 45. That's why percentages matter and "rebounding margin" is a bad measuring stick that shouldn't be used.

[withoutbias]

That only matters if opportunities are equal. But they weren't. On Marquette's offensive end of the court, there were 37 total rebounds available. On St John's end, it was 45. That's why percentages matter and "rebounding margin" is a bad measuring stick that shouldn't be used.

Man. I sound like a broken record.

I understand this. Nobody said we rebounded better than St. John's. The poster said we outrebounded them. Which we did. He even gave the numbers.

The reciting KenPom.com percentages crowd gets really annoying. Why everything has to be "but actually'd" is wild.

If people wanted KenPom to tell them who did what better by percentages and analytics they can subscribe there.

[mu_eyeballs]

My point really was in the big east I have no idea what our rebound percentage has been...but I guess crappie!  I do know when I look at the box score we are usually completely crushed in raw numbers and when I watch the games I feel frustrated with how many offensive boards we give up and how few we get. 
Last night I didn't feel completely frustrated and the raw numbers were in our favor for once.

[panda]

Right. I get it. Nobody even said we rebounded better. But we did our rebound a team.

And?

They didn't make up q1 road games against Creighton and seton hall as well as UConn at home.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Man. I sound like a broken record.

I understand this. Nobody said we rebounded better than St. John's. The poster said we outrebounded them. Which we did. He even gave the numbers.

The reciting KenPom.com percentages crowd gets really annoying. Why everything has to be "but actually'd" is wild.

If people wanted KenPom to tell them who did what better by percentages and analytics they can subscribe there.

Let me guess,  you still think Wins is the best measure of a good starting pitcher

[withoutbias]

Let me guess,  you still think Wins is the best measure of a good starting pitcher

I never did. So no.

I didn't even make this thread. Maybe the OP did.

I do think wins is the best measure of a basketball team though.

And I can subscribe to KenPom if I want to know assist percentage or rebound percentage. Posters here seem to think they're super smart basketball minds because they can copy and paste a number they got off of KenPom.com. It's not overly impressive.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

It's not overly impressive.

Neither is what you're doing right now

[MU82]

I still see JLew/DM/GE/OMP miss a block out.....opposing team gets the off reb and puts pressure on Kur/Oso.....who then commit a foul......yesterday for several and ones.

This.

There were two straight possessions in the second half where we didn't get a defensive board because one of our guys just watched the ball while a StJ player swooped past him for the rebound. Once was Morsell, the other I think was O-Max. Ugh!

Several of our guys have bad hands -- they get both hands on the ball but just don't grab it. We also have skinny bigs who often get outmuscled. And sometimes we have bad luck on long rebounds. But those things don't explain why we so often have such poor rebounding fundamentals.

Everybody on the team has been playing basketball for years. Plus, they've now been playing together, under this coaching staff, for an entire season. And yet all too often our guys still do not find a man, put a body on him, seal him off, and go get the basketball -- or as the high school coach I used to work for would say: "Hit, and git!"

It's been a crazy season, with lots of surprises (most of them positive), but I think my biggest surprise is that we're still a fundamentally poor rebounding team after all this time. Frustrating.