Thread to Quiet Concerns About Rebounding

[Greenbean]

Starting a fast break instead of making sure the defensive rebound is securied is a terrible thing to see.


Why? 


It works great in the regular season. 


But come playoff time; bad, bad, bad.


How many time do we have to see teams the run at the expense of defense put up great regular season records only to flame out in the playoffs?



I don't care about the Celtics offensive rebounding numbers.  A lot of that came from Leon Powe chasing to many shots when better defensive big men like Perk and KG were busy making sure they could get down court in time to set up the defense. 


Defensive rebounding, that's a must. 

I 100% agree but I also think our team is capable of playing both ways. As Roy mentioned, an adjustment in game would have been nice in the 4th last night but for the most part we were getting easy shots on the Spurs.

We have a great rebounding sf (Pierce) and pg (Rondo) so come playoff time if the game dictates a slower pace, they have the tools to be a good defensive rebounding team unlike teams like the Suns and Warriors.

But teams just can't flip that switch come playoff time.

This is a practice that must be put into place in the regular season so that the players first instinct is to attack the defensive boards, not run down the court.

I disagree. It is an adjustment that can be made in game, and often does. It's like blitzing versus dropping back in football. It is not like defensive rotations or offensive flow which take the whole season to develop.

[Greenbean]

Starting a fast break instead of making sure the defensive rebound is securied is a terrible thing to see.


Why? 


It works great in the regular season. 


But come playoff time; bad, bad, bad.


How many time do we have to see teams the run at the expense of defense put up great regular season records only to flame out in the playoffs?



I don't care about the Celtics offensive rebounding numbers.  A lot of that came from Leon Powe chasing to many shots when better defensive big men like Perk and KG were busy making sure they could get down court in time to set up the defense. 


Defensive rebounding, that's a must. 

I 100% agree but I also think our team is capable of playing both ways. As Roy mentioned, an adjustment in game would have been nice in the 4th last night but for the most part we were getting easy shots on the Spurs.

We have a great rebounding sf (Pierce) and pg (Rondo) so come playoff time if the game dictates a slower pace, they have the tools to be a good defensive rebounding team unlike teams like the Suns and Warriors.

Pierce is not a great rebounding SF.

I think he is when we need him to be. Would you agree with just good?

He's solid, but rebounds always matter. You are what you are over the whole season. I don't believe you can rely on "turning it on".

For a big man whose primary responsibility is to rebound, I agree. For a small forward, it depends on what his coach is asking him to do. If he wants him to get out and run, then his rebounding numbers will suffer. For example, LeBron averages so many rebounds a game because his dumb coach holds him back from being the most dynamic transition player ever and has him on the boards instead.

[Fafnir]

I disagree. It is an adjustment that can be made in game, and often does. It's like blitzing versus dropping back in football. It is not like defensive rotations or offensive flow which take the whole season to develop.

Since when is boxing out a something that teams don't do as a tactic? I think the green colored glasses are hiding a rather serious concern with this team.

[Fafnir]

For a big man whose primary responsibility is to rebound, I agree. For a small forward, it depends on what his coach is asking him to do. If he wants him to get out and run, then his rebounding numbers will suffer. For example, LeBron averages so many rebounds a game because his dumb coach holds him back from being the most dynamic transition player ever and has him on the boards instead.

No LeBron gets so many rebounds because he has PF size and amazing athleticism.

Besides when was the last time you saw Pierce leading the break streaking for an outlet? He almost always floats to the three point line in transition unless he has the ball already.

[wdleehi]

Starting a fast break instead of making sure the defensive rebound is securied is a terrible thing to see.


Why? 


It works great in the regular season. 


But come playoff time; bad, bad, bad.


How many time do we have to see teams the run at the expense of defense put up great regular season records only to flame out in the playoffs?



I don't care about the Celtics offensive rebounding numbers.  A lot of that came from Leon Powe chasing to many shots when better defensive big men like Perk and KG were busy making sure they could get down court in time to set up the defense. 


Defensive rebounding, that's a must. 

I 100% agree but I also think our team is capable of playing both ways. As Roy mentioned, an adjustment in game would have been nice in the 4th last night but for the most part we were getting easy shots on the Spurs.

We have a great rebounding sf (Pierce) and pg (Rondo) so come playoff time if the game dictates a slower pace, they have the tools to be a good defensive rebounding team unlike teams like the Suns and Warriors.

But teams just can't flip that switch come playoff time.

This is a practice that must be put into place in the regular season so that the players first instinct is to attack the defensive boards, not run down the court.

I disagree. It is an adjustment that can be made in game, and often does. It's like blitzing versus dropping back in football. It is not like defensive rotations or offensive flow which take the whole season to develop.

No, that's not an in game adjustment.

That is a philosphical change in how you are playing the game.



I keep thinking about "Semi-Pro"

"We are going to run this play until you puke!"


Boxing out and attacking the defensive boards must be hammered into the players mind such that when a shot goes up, they do it without thinking.

[Atzar]

They're outboarded even more when Shelden is on the court because he just replaces Perk as the ONLY Celtic on the glass.  Somebody's going to have to realize that more than one player needs to crash the glass before this is going to get any better.

Crashing the glass isn't the biggest problem, its boxing out. I think the C's will be fine without improving too much on the offensive glass. But they have to be better on the defensive end!

That's kinda splitting hairs.  The point is, they need more than one player after the rebounds - one player can't very well box out four.

[Greenbean]

I disagree. It is an adjustment that can be made in game, and often does. It's like blitzing versus dropping back in football. It is not like defensive rotations or offensive flow which take the whole season to develop.

Since when is boxing out a something that teams don't do as a tactic? I think the green colored glasses are hiding a rather serious concern with this team.

Im not talking about boxing out, which obviously has to get better I am not ignoring that fact. Effort on the glass has to increase. What I am comparing to blitzing is the simple basketball question, carsh the defensive glass or release for a fast break.

Edit: You're right Pierce doesn't streak for outlets. It's mostly Rondo receiving the outlet with Pierce trailing for the jumpshot. I'm glad we are having this conversatino. im definitely going to spend alot more time studying how Pierce attacks the glass versus how he runs the floor. I hope this convo isn't annoying you

[RAcker]

Starting a fast break instead of making sure the defensive rebound is securied is a terrible thing to see.


Why? 


It works great in the regular season. 


But come playoff time; bad, bad, bad.


How many time do we have to see teams the run at the expense of defense put up great regular season records only to flame out in the playoffs?



I don't care about the Celtics offensive rebounding numbers.  A lot of that came from Leon Powe chasing to many shots when better defensive big men like Perk and KG were busy making sure they could get down court in time to set up the defense. 


Defensive rebounding, that's a must. 

I 100% agree but I also think our team is capable of playing both ways. As Roy mentioned, an adjustment in game would have been nice in the 4th last night but for the most part we were getting easy shots on the Spurs.

We have a great rebounding sf (Pierce) and pg (Rondo) so come playoff time if the game dictates a slower pace, they have the tools to be a good defensive rebounding team unlike teams like the Suns and Warriors.

But teams just can't flip that switch come playoff time.

This is a practice that must be put into place in the regular season so that the players first instinct is to attack the defensive boards, not run down the court.

I disagree. It is an adjustment that can be made in game, and often does. It's like blitzing versus dropping back in football. It is not like defensive rotations or offensive flow which take the whole season to develop.

No, that's not an in game adjustment.

That is a philosphical change in how you are playing the game.



I keep thinking about "Semi-Pro"

"We are going to run this play until you puke!"


Boxing out and attacking the defensive boards must be hammered into the players mind such that when a shot goes up, they do it without thinking.

Ditto that.  It is a mindset.

[Brickowski]

I found it simply amazing that Rivers did not use Shelden Williams against DeJuan Blair.

[moiso]

Yeah, its a mindset, but some players are natural rebounders and some never will be good at it.  Right now, as far as our bigs, Perk and KG are pretty good, Wallace is horrible, and Williams doesn't get any PT.  I don't think extra special attention to boxing out would drastically help them.  With the exception of Wallace, the others have good rebounding fundamentals.