Thread to Quiet Concerns About Rebounding

[Greenbean]

Here's the deal. Rondo could average about 6-7 rebounds a game but the coaching staff is not having the PG crash the boards but rather release for the outlet, wich is why Rondo is at around 4 rpg. We are sacrificing some rebounding in order to start primary and secondary breaks and I love the pace that the strategy has been producing. Rondo has been dictating the game with his push. Tonight was a wild case of what could happen with this approach, but guess what? We still dictated the pace of the game and WON.

[KJ33]

The Celtics won!  Are you sure?  Didn't they get out rebounded?  Don't the stats of one game automatically carry over to the next game?  Aren't there real problems exposed tonight that are bound to happen against every team every night?

[Atzar]

I think the OP got it right - it seems like the team is making a concerted effort to run in transition off of misses.  They leave Perk to collect the rebound and to outlet to Rondo or Pierce, who then run a 4-on-whatever break.  It looks great when it works. 

When the other team throws four jerseys at the glass, however, it's tough to get the boards.  Perk is a decent rebounder and takes up a lot of space, but he's still one man against four.  KG or Pierce should stay back on the boards as well, in my opinion - KG is a better rebounder, but Pierce is quite good as well and can be dangerous coming up behind the play for a 3. 

[EatSleepBreatheGreen]

KG or Pierce should stay back on the boards as well, in my opinion - KG is a better rebounder, but Pierce is quite good as well and can be dangerous coming up behind the play for a 3. 

TP.

My thoughts exactly.

[Greenbean]

I started this thread in anticipation of complaining and frustration over rebounding numbers of one game...but no one is complaining! Awesome job CB!

[Redz]

I started this thread in anticipation of complaining and frustration over rebounding numbers of one game...but no one is complaining! Awesome job CB!

There was a fair amount going on in the game thread last night, but I suppose that was because it was frustrating to watch the lead slip away because they couldn't get a board!

[Roy Hobbs]

I started this thread in anticipation of complaining and frustration over rebounding numbers of one game...but no one is complaining! Awesome job CB!

I will say, the rebounding numbers aren't a product of one game.  We're fourth from last in offensive rebounding percentage, and are below the league average in defensive rebounding percentage.

For the sake of comparison, last year we were 8th in offensive rebounding percentage, and third in defensive rebounding percentage.  In the championship season, we were mediocre in terms of ORB% (18th), but 8th in defensive rebounding percentage.

It concerns me, the number of offensive boards we give up.  Yes, last night's game was an extreme, but it was still completely unacceptable to give up 20 offensive boards.

Some of the lack of rebounding is due to strategy, sure, but a lot of it was effort.  Matt Bonner, of all people, was beating our guys to rebounds last night, because he was hustling. 

Also, of course, if the strategy is to get out on the break, and the other team's rebounding is killing you late in the game, wouldn't it be time to change strategies?

[wiley]

I think the Celtics should keep up their current strategy for a while even if the rebounding numbers remain low. 

It is hard on Perk, or at least it was last night, as a number of rebounds were just out of his grasp due to a gang of Spurs who were not blocked out.  But it also seemed to me like a bad luck rebounding night for the Celtics (sometimes shots don't fall and sometimes the boards come off in the wrong spot).

 In other words, even if they maintain their current strategy going forward and have poor rebounding numbers,  I'll bet it will be a while before they have as bad a night on the boards as last night...

[Michael Anthony]

Missed threes lead to a lot of offensive rebounds because they often result in long or akward bounces.

The C's are near the top of the league in opponent 3PT%. That does not obsolve them from the problem, but it helps explain it.

Another issue is that KG is no longer an out-of-area rebounder.

[Roy Hobbs]

Missed threes lead to a lot of offensive rebounds because they often result in long or akward bounces.

The C's are near the top of the league in opponent 3PT%. That does not obsolve them from the problem, but it helps explain it.

Another issue is that KG is no longer an out-of-area rebounder.

I'm not sure if this is particularly true.  The Spurs are third in 3PT% allowed, and 4th in defensive rebound percentage.  The Bobcats are 5th in 3PT% allowed, and 3rd in defensive rebound percentage.

Also, our 3PT% allowed is okay, but not spectacular; it ranks 9th in the league.  Last year, we were 5th in that category, and 3rd in defensive rebounding.

[Michael Anthony]

Missed threes lead to a lot of offensive rebounds because they often result in long or akward bounces.

The C's are near the top of the league in opponent 3PT%. That does not obsolve them from the problem, but it helps explain it.

Another issue is that KG is no longer an out-of-area rebounder.

I'm not sure if this is particularly true.  The Spurs are third in 3PT% allowed, and 4th in defensive rebound percentage.  The Bobcats are 5th in 3PT% allowed, and 3rd in defensive rebound percentage.

Also, our 3PT% allowed is okay, but not spectacular; it ranks 9th in the league.  Last year, we were 5th in that category, and 3rd in defensive rebounding.

Good stuff, thanks for adding color with the stats. Are the Spurs and Bobcats anomolies, or are they the norm? Do the number of 3PT attempts/misses correlate to offensive rebounds?

I stand by my last point about KG.

[kozlodoev]

Missed threes lead to a lot of offensive rebounds because they often result in long or akward bounces.

The C's are near the top of the league in opponent 3PT%. That does not obsolve them from the problem, but it helps explain it.

Another issue is that KG is no longer an out-of-area rebounder.

I'm not sure if this is particularly true.

It's a common allegation, though there hasn't been any empirical evidence that it is true.

[scoop]

Missed threes lead to a lot of offensive rebounds because they often result in long or akward bounces.

The C's are near the top of the league in opponent 3PT%. That does not obsolve them from the problem, but it helps explain it.

Another issue is that KG is no longer an out-of-area rebounder.

I'm not sure if this is particularly true.  The Spurs are third in 3PT% allowed, and 4th in defensive rebound percentage.  The Bobcats are 5th in 3PT% allowed, and 3rd in defensive rebound percentage.

Also, our 3PT% allowed is okay, but not spectacular; it ranks 9th in the league.  Last year, we were 5th in that category, and 3rd in defensive rebounding.

Good stuff, thanks for adding color with the stats. Are the Spurs and Bobcats anomolies, or are they the norm? Do the number of 3PT attempts/misses correlate to offensive rebounds?

I stand by my last point about KG.

Close shots produce more offensive rebounds than 3pt shots but 3pt shots produce more offensive rebounds than 2pt jump-shots.


Check this study:
http://www.82games.com/rebounds.htm

Here's the deal. Rondo could average about 6-7 rebounds a game but the coaching staff is not having the PG crash the boards but rather release for the outlet, wich is why Rondo is at around 4 rpg. We are sacrificing some rebounding in order to start primary and secondary breaks and I love the pace that the strategy has been producing. Rondo has been dictating the game with his push. Tonight was a wild case of what could happen with this approach, but guess what? We still dictated the pace of the game and WON.

Unfortunately, this interesting theory has very little to do with reality.

The Celtics are one of the slowest teams in the league in terms of tempo. Bottom 5 in pace.

Generally, a point-guard grabbing the rebound helps you to increase the tempo, not the opposite. The idea that the point-guard should rebound less to facilitate the break goes against what every basketball coach or book tells.

More importantly, the main factor to get opportunities to score in a full-court offence is precisely to rebound as much as you can. Saying that we're sacrificing rebounding in order to propel the break is nonsensical. In fact it's the inability to rebound that is taking away from the team the transition offence.

Plus, even if by some reason Rondo started getting 6 or 7 rebounds in his current minutes (I'm not sure why is this scenario likely), the C's would still be far from being a good rebounding team.

-----------

Last night wasn't some kind of oddity as some seem to think. I'm not even sure if it was the C's worst rebounding game this season.

[The Bill]

The lack of offensive boards isn't a big deal to me. The poor defensive rebounding is concerning though. I think it is partly due to the defensive philosophy - Perkins and Garnett both frequently try to block shots from the weak side which leaves their man open for easy offensive boards.

But the wings don't box out particularly well either (Pierce does sometimes I guess) which means that there are frequently multiple guys crashing the basket untouched.

No run for Shelden last night also hurt the rebounding. I guess Doc wanted Scal to guard Bonner.

[scoop]

There are two problems with the "if Williams had played things would be diffferent" theory:

- I doubt he'll break the play-off rotation, so the problem remains.

- so far this season, the Celtics are outrebounded even more severely when Williams is on the court.