Danny really missed out on them.
Even if Doc's philosophy is not rebounding, these 2 players are pretty good at it. They won't need to be told what to do, and they will probably learn defensive schemes faster than the china guys.
But what's done is done, I'm just hoping for a miracle now.
hah.
On that note, give me more Shavlik
and that right there tells us all we need to know. top coach my behind. what top coach does not believe in rebounding???
Its not that he doesn't believe in rebounding, he just doesn't think he has the personnel to actually pull down enough offensive boards to make it worth while committing guys to the glass instead of getting back and avoiding easy transition buckets. On the defensive end rebounding is still emphasized immensely.
I don't always agree with it, but its hard to argue given our roster that we could realistically be pulling down many more second chance opportunities if we committed more people to the boards. I'd like to see him try it more with guys who have the size/ability to bang a bit down low like Wilcox and Randolph on the floor.
But I guess Doc believes so much in his half court defense (and who can blame him given its production over the last few years and guys like Garnett, Bradley, Lee and Green) that he would rather force teams to run a set against us than give them the opportunity to get easy buckets.
are you kidding me?
all we do is shoot long jumpers and everyone just stands there, and as the ball is floating in the air EVERYONE runs back on defense. You're telling me you can't commit at least 2 guys to tracking down the rebound?
It may not be the rebound, but it may be forcing a turnover.
Especially games when we are sucking at shooting. Fricken rebound the ball, man.
No, I am not kidding you. That is the logic behind it and it makes sense. There are a lot of studies out there with some conflicting results about the effects of abandoning the offensive glass in favor of getting back on defense, but the results are largely useless because they aren't able to take into consideration major factors like player positioning, players on the floor and game situation.
But to your point, no we cannot commit at least 2 guys to tracking down the rebound. The reason is that the majority of our shots, as you pointed out, are long jumpers (even from our Bigs like Garnett) and as such our players are already out of position to be able to effectively box out and rebound. There is a small chance that crashing in will cause a turnover or help a Celtic to rip a rebound away, but its far more likely that the other team comes down with it and is able to, at the very least, attempt a fast break for easy points.
I think sending one guy to the glass consistently would help, but unfortunately most of the time our big is KG and he is usually out at 12-15 which puts him in poor position. We really don't have the personnel and other teams do. Thats the bottom line.
Its slightly different when we have Rondo on the floor because he can help mask some of our rebounding deficiencies because he is so good at flying in to contest for rebounds and often they don't get a body on him.
Too many people on this board want the Celtics to do things that they just aren't capable of. Its unrealistic. You have to work with the guys on the roster. So statements like why do we always play small ball? Why don't we commit to rebounding more? Why don't we have a low post game? aren't well thought out. The reason is because we don't have the personnel to do those things.
