Does UConn Have a Serious Rebounding Problem?

[Bigboote]

Geno is Rembrandt, not Jackson Pollock.

Oh, man, that's the quip of the day! I'd love to comment on "Jackson-Pollack-style" coaches, but that would be totally inappropriate and, to be perfectly honest, in poor taste since I'm hiding behind a keyboard. But it sure would be fun.

 

[Blond D.]

When you have 2 players who are 6'4" and 6'5", with the way UCONN plays and tries to feed the post, at least ONE of them should be getting double doubles in rebounding and scoring.
One problem both Jana and Serah have are they have bad hands. Neither can handle a pass with much efficiency and they seem to enjoy bring the ball down around their waists. They also don't carve out a place to work their "magic"
Sarah doesnt have that problem. She gets in the right place at the right time and can handle a pass like shes Spiderman.

 

[oldude]

A problem for what? To win the BE, to reach a FF, to win it all? Geno IMO strives for a sort of perfection. (Who else could spend 5 years critiquing Paige, one of the most fundamentally sound players ever. Most coaches would just sit back and enjoy it) That’s what I’m saying. How close did the team come last year come to that? I’m choosing to ignore the stats and go with my 20-100 vision. They need to improve their rebounding. (More recently) Do you notice Sarah’s numbers waning?
Strategic question: when Sarah is at a wing or on top, the team gains a lot, but the team might suffer in the rebounding.
Could we be staring at TX or LSU wondering about our rebounding? UCLA? SC?
I think UConn 2026 has another level in them. Rebounding could be the ingredient.

For the reasons I outline in post # 13 of this thread, I don’t believe UConn has a rebounding problem under any of the scenarios you list. Beyond that you are saying basically the same thing I just said in post #27, that UConn can get better with their rebounding and Geno will continue to push the team to do so.

 

[oldhusky]

Geno can put a more traditional lineup on the floor and be a very good rebounding team if he chooses to, but thus far he has gone completely in the other direction. Playing small ball, traditional, or going big can be debated forever with cases to be made on both sides, but clearly Geno is knowingly sacrificing some rebounds to achieve other things by the lineup choices he makes.

It doesn't seem like any big other than Sarah has gained his confidence. What is probably still a question is what lineups he will use against teams with very talented bigs that could dominate us on the boards, or have good enough ballhandlers to handle our press.

 

[FanSince17]

Geno can put a more traditional lineup on the floor and be a very good rebounding team if he chooses to, but thus far he has gone completely in the other direction. Playing small ball, traditional, or going big can be debated forever with cases to be made on both sides, but clearly Geno is knowingly sacrificing some rebounds to achieve other things by the lineup choices he makes.

It doesn't seem like any big other than Sarah has gained his confidence. What is probably still a question is what lineups he will use against teams with very talented bigs that could dominate us on the boards, or have good enough ballhandlers to handle our press.

What the heck, we rebound better small. KK, Ash, K9 rebound. So, we’re saying opponents are getting rebounds over top us? I’d argue that we’re not in there fighting. Gotta get in there every possession, like they do every thing else every possession.

 

[UConnCat]

There certainly have been years when rebounding has been a concern. I think back to Dee’s junior and senior years when 5-10 Barb Turner was the power forward. Those years we played Tennessee in the FF and, of course, the Vols were demons on the boards. An oft-used phrase back then was “it wasn’t Tennessee’s first shot you needed to be concerned about.” Somehow, those teams always managed to grab the rebounds they needed to grab.

Do I wish this year’s team was better on the boards? Yes, I’m often frustrated by the offensive rebounds they give up. The only thing I hope for is that they’ll step up when they need to.

 

[NycUcWbbFan]

I’m sorry, but this discussion is a little silly. The old line that, “There are lies, damned lies and statistics.” is relevant to this discussion. The relevant statistic is not rebounds. It’s shot differential and shooting percentage.

On average, UConn takes over 12 shots per game more than their opponents this year while shooting a nation leading 53% from the floor to their opponents 33%. UConn also has a +12 advantage on turnovers, forcing their opponents into twice as many turnovers per game.

One final comment on rebounds. Long rebounds off of 3-pt misses are notoriously difficult to corral by the defense. UConn’s relentless defense forces opposing teams to launch shots from the perimeter.

While UConn has a significant advantage in the number of shots per game, from 3-pt range the Huskies are just about even around 630 each. UConn shoots a nation leading 40% from the arc while UConn’s opponents shoot 26%.

If you make significantly more shots than your opponents, you’re going to have far fewer opportunities for offensive rebounds. At the same time, if you significantly turn over your opponent far more than you turn it over, you’re going to have far fewer opportunities for defensive rebounds.

Unless and until UConn plays a game where the shot attempts and shooting percentage are relatively even and the Huskies also lose the rebounding battle, I’m not going to be particularly concerned.

OlDude is talking about UConn’s formula to win games. We can contextualize the formula, game by game (see the table below) using Dean Oliver’s “Four Factors of Basketball Success”:

• The Offense Four Factors are UConn’s keys to win;
• The Defense Four Factors are the opponent’s keys to win.
• Advanced Basketball Statistics Formula Sheet | From The Rumble Seat

UConn tends to focus heavier earlier training bandwidth to maximizing their EFG% &1 / minimizing their opponent’s EFG% and minimizing their TOV% / maximizing their opponent’s TOV% &2.

• Since UConn has always been proficient in these two factors (especially this year), UConn has not been in a close game (except for MI) when the other two factors (ORB% and FT/FGA) would have mattered.
• In the MI game, UConn’s and MI’s ORB% were similar.
• Rebounding training bandwidth was never an early season priority since UConn focuses first on its best shot offense &1 and worst and less frequent opponent shot defense &1 before finetuning to late season focus on how to win close games when shots are not falling.

Note that DRB% is not in Dean Oliver’s Four Factors since DRB% is derivative of opponent EFG%, TOV% and ORB%.

• UConn’s focus on minimizing opponent EFG% and maximizing opponent TOV% naturally limits when opponent ORB% becomes an issue.
• Consecutive opponent ORB’s by an opponent in less possessions where they are rendered inept in getting good shots, without UConn fouling, is a good outcome.

UConn’s points typically come from efficient threes and most efficient twos (points in the paint, fastbreak points/ points off turnovers) which the opponent will try to defend. The middle becomes a fertile ground to those who can exploit it. Geno and CD recruit the kind of players that potentially can become “plug-and-play” “basketball players” playing beautiful basketball.

&1 Best shot offense and worst and less frequent opponent shot defense requires offensive spacing and defensive spacing. These additionally help explain UConn’s rebounding history.

&2 Steals (Opponent TOV%) produces fastbreaks, contrary to a poster’s claim that only UConn DRBs produce those.

 

[oldude]

OlDude is talking about UConn’s formula to win games. We can contextualize the formula, game by game (see the table below) using Dean Oliver’s “Four Factors of Basketball Success”:

• The Offense Four Factors are UConn’s keys to win;
• The Defense Four Factors are the opponent’s keys to win.
• Advanced Basketball Statistics Formula Sheet | From The Rumble Seat

View attachment 117137

UConn tends to focus heavier earlier training bandwidth to maximizing their EFG% &1 / minimizing their opponent’s EFG% and minimizing their TOV% / maximizing their opponent’s TOV% &2.

• Since UConn has always been proficient in these two factors (especially this year), UConn has not been in a close game (except for MI) when the other two factors (ORB% and FT/FGA) would have mattered.
• In the MI game, UConn’s and MI’s ORB% were similar.
• Rebounding training bandwidth was never an early season priority since UConn focuses first on its best shot offense &1 and worst and less frequent opponent shot defense &1 before finetuning to late season focus on how to win close games when shots are not falling.

Note that DRB% is not in Dean Oliver’s Four Factors since DRB% is derivative of opponent EFG%, TOV% and ORB%.

• UConn’s focus on minimizing opponent EFG% and maximizing opponent TOV% naturally limits when opponent ORB% becomes an issue.
• Consecutive opponent ORB’s by an opponent in less possessions where they are rendered inept in getting good shots, without UConn fouling, is a good outcome.

UConn’s points typically come from efficient threes and most efficient twos (points in the paint, fastbreak points/ points off turnovers) which the opponent will try to defend. The middle becomes a fertile ground to those who can exploit it. Geno and CD recruit the kind of players that potentially can become “plug-and-play” “basketball players” playing beautiful basketball.

&1 Best shot offense and worst and less frequent opponent shot defense requires offensive spacing and defensive spacing. These additionally help explain UConn’s rebounding history.

&2 Steals (Opponent TOV%) produces fastbreaks, contrary to a poster’s claim that only UConn DRBs produce those.

You said it so much better than I could. 🤫

 

[BobbyJ]

OlDude is talking about UConn’s formula to win games. We can contextualize the formula, game by game (see the table below) using Dean Oliver’s “Four Factors of Basketball Success”:

• The Offense Four Factors are UConn’s keys to win;
• The Defense Four Factors are the opponent’s keys to win.
• Advanced Basketball Statistics Formula Sheet | From The Rumble Seat

View attachment 117137

UConn tends to focus heavier earlier training bandwidth to maximizing their EFG% &1 / minimizing their opponent’s EFG% and minimizing their TOV% / maximizing their opponent’s TOV% &2.

• Since UConn has always been proficient in these two factors (especially this year), UConn has not been in a close game (except for MI) when the other two factors (ORB% and FT/FGA) would have mattered.
• In the MI game, UConn’s and MI’s ORB% were similar.
• Rebounding training bandwidth was never an early season priority since UConn focuses first on its best shot offense &1 and worst and less frequent opponent shot defense &1 before finetuning to late season focus on how to win close games when shots are not falling.

Note that DRB% is not in Dean Oliver’s Four Factors since DRB% is derivative of opponent EFG%, TOV% and ORB%.

• UConn’s focus on minimizing opponent EFG% and maximizing opponent TOV% naturally limits when opponent ORB% becomes an issue.
• Consecutive opponent ORB’s by an opponent in less possessions where they are rendered inept in getting good shots, without UConn fouling, is a good outcome.

UConn’s points typically come from efficient threes and most efficient twos (points in the paint, fastbreak points/ points off turnovers) which the opponent will try to defend. The middle becomes a fertile ground to those who can exploit it. Geno and CD recruit the kind of players that potentially can become “plug-and-play” “basketball players” playing beautiful basketball.

&1 Best shot offense and worst and less frequent opponent shot defense requires offensive spacing and defensive spacing. These additionally help explain UConn’s rebounding history.

&2 Steals (Opponent TOV%) produces fastbreaks, contrary to a poster’s claim that only UConn DRBs produce those.

In all your stats and charts, do you have anything that just shows what percentage of UConn's shot attempts come from inside or the paint area?

 

[NycUcWbbFan]

In all your stats and charts, do you have anything that just shows what percentage of UConn's shot attempts come from inside or the paint area?

CBB Analytics (free tier) has something similar. Live stats has something similar too, by game.

Example below from LiveStats. The list of LiveStat links are here.

• To get this page in LiveStats, choose “Change View” => “Team Comparison” => “Specialty”.

 

[Duncan Idaho]

There is a difference between it being a problem and an area of improvement that would take the team to the next level per coach. Can you win it with current level of play? Yes.

 

[huskeynut]

I notice when they rebound the ball they tap it to the opposite team instead of grabbing it.

This tapping the ball is nothing new. Many of UConn's opponents to it. Watch other teams besides UConn and it is done quite often.