I love KO, I think we lucky to have him, I was one of the 1st ones calling for him to be our next HC

[CTBasketball]

I think our rebounding will pick up once we get DeAndre out of the 4 spot. He can't rebound and doesn't really want to anyways. He plays like a 2 or 3 because that is what he would be playing in the NBA.

Once we get like a 6'8" 240lb Jeff Adrien-banger down there they will pick up. Whether we get that guy or not is up to Ollie. We haven't had any success recruiting really good bigs. Maybe Lubin can fix that. But we need more. That's why 2015 will be a pivotal recruiting class.

 

[tykurez]

Rakim Lubin

 

[Gurleyman]

A better word might be a consolation for failure, and no I am not kidding. Why would I be? Every field goal does not have a corresponding assist. Why does every shot, including blocked shots, require a rebound?

What does not being afraid of a blocked shot have to do with getting awarded a rebound for collecting the loose ball? Nothing. You missed the point about posterization. Don't say you didn't, because you did. Accept it and move on.

All the great shot blockers go straight up in the air and many have the instinct to not fall for a ball fake and don't leave their feet until the very last possible moment. They also get enough of the ball to deflect its path allowing them to gain possession or give a teammate a better chance. Therefore they are still in position for a rebound. Brimah is a good, not great, shot blocker. Those that go "flying at someone" are liable to be called for a foul, thereby making position to rebound a moot point.

Loyola had 20 offensive rebounds and UConn had 11 blocks, obviously all of those Off. Rebs. did not come from blocks, but far too many times in this young season, UConn has blocked the ball out of bounds (resulting in a team offensive rebound for the opposition) or did it in such a way to allow an offensive player (not necessarily the shooter) to regained possession. As I said, I expect that stat to get better.

That's the way stats have been kept in basketball since they started keeping them - every missed shot must be accounted for. Other sports have similar "balancing" mechanisms for stats. Someone has to get a putout in baseball so you have three outs in an inning, even if they were merely closest to the play when a base runner interfered or something. Passing yards have to equal receiving yards, no matter how far the QB threw it. Every attack in volleyball that goes over the net has to be either a dig or kill, even if the dig was the easiest play in the history of the world.

Not every basket comes off a pass (put back, steal and breakaway, etc.), so logically every basket can't have an assist even if you decided to be absurdly generous. But every time a shot is missed, the ball ends up with somebody.

 

[Husky25]

That's the way stats have been kept in basketball since they started keeping them - every missed shot must be accounted for. Other sports have similar "balancing" mechanisms for stats. Someone has to get a putout in baseball so you have three outs in an inning, even if they were merely closest to the play when a base runner interfered or something. Passing yards have to equal receiving yards, no matter how far the QB threw it. Every attack in volleyball that goes over the net has to be either a dig or kill, even if the dig was the easiest play in the history of the world.

Not every basket comes off a pass (put back, steal and breakaway, etc.), so logically every basket can't have an assist even if you decided to be absurdly generous. But every time a shot is missed, the ball ends up with somebody.

Such as in life, should it be true in sports. "Because that is the way we've always done it," 1) isn't a reason to keep doing it that way, and 2) doesn't mean it is the best way.

Secondly, if a blocked shot goes out of bounds, it does not end up with somebody. It is counted as a team rebound and is not awarded to a specific player. So there goes that. And I don't want to be absurdly generous and give an assist on every basket, I want the stats to create a more accurate picture of what occurred. Loyola did not dominate the offensive glass to the tune that 20 offensive rebounds indicates. Period.

 

[mauconnfan]

A better word might be a consolation for failure, and no I am not kidding. Why would I be? Every field goal does not have a corresponding assist. Why does every shot, including blocked shots, require a rebound?


What does not being afraid of a blocked shot have to do with getting awarded a rebound for collecting the loose ball? Nothing. You missed the point about posterization. Don't say you didn't, because you did. Accept it and move on.



All the great shot blockers go straight up in the air and many have the instinct to not fall for a ball fake and don't leave their feet until the very last possible moment. They also get enough of the ball to deflect its path allowing them to gain possession or give a teammate a better chance. Therefore they are still in position for a rebound. Brimah is a good, not great, shot blocker. Those that go "flying at someone" are liable to be called for a foul, thereby making position to rebound a moot point.


Loyola had 20 offensive rebounds and UConn had 11 blocks, obviously all of those Off. Rebs. did not come from blocks, but far too many times in this young season, UConn has blocked the ball out of bounds (resulting in a team offensive rebound for the opposition) or did it in such a way to allow an offensive player (not necessarily the shooter) to regained possession. As I said, I expect that stat to get better.

Your lost in everything 25 sorry. Not worth typing with you! Not all great shot blockers go straight up they get it from the weakside or off their man a lot where you don't have to as the body contact isn't part of the play.

And no i didn't miss the point on anything you just never played. Get a shot blocked, battle for the loose ball and try to score again. Pretty simple.......your need to separate all of these is funny. Typical crap from the baseball board - get over yourself pal!

 

[60'sfan]

Rebounding is more about desire than it is about size. Some of the greatest rebounders like Dennis Rodman and Charles Barkley were much smaller than their peers and yet they found a way to grab the ball. Jeff Adrien was smaller than a lot of the other forwards but averaged a double double in 2009. Other than Nappier and Boatright, none of the current Huskies seem to have that hunger for the ball. If Roscoe Smith had stayed I think he would be a great rebounder this year. It's just one part of the game and we are 7-0.

 

[Husky25]

Your lost in everything 25 sorry. Not worth typing with you! Not all great shot blockers go straight up they get it from the weakside or off their man a lot where you don't have to as the body contact isn't part of the play.

And no i didn't miss the point on anything you just never played. Get a shot blocked, battle for the loose ball and try to score again. Pretty simple.......your need to separate all of these is funny. Typical crap from the baseball board - get over yourself pal!

I used to play, but I don't play now. You think I have to play in order to know the rules, how to keep score, or to find fault therein? Interesting...

You're right though. It's not worth arguing about because you only see a debate through your own narrow little blinders...Typical crap from the baseball threads (Its a board for pro sports, not just baseball). Good debaters understand the argument from all sides. You don't even have to be great. Merely good.

 

[David 76]

When did he not have size? One of calhouns trademarks was having NBA size at most/all positions.

Personnel is clearly an issue but KO has made it abundantly clear that rebounding is a priority. Might just take a couple years before we get the players to show it.

And on the flip side our poor rebounding team is one of the best shooting teams in the country. Something calhoun never had

It always strikes me as funny when announcers refer to the tradition of UCONN big men that block shots. Before Emeka, UCONN was known as having a doughnut offense offense e.g. nothing in the middle. That was a decade ago.We certainly have not had that presence for a couple of years. Our "tradition" was about 7 years long.
We also had several undersized power forwards including Freeman and Donny Marshal. Rod Sellers was small and had to struggle with the likes of Patrick Ewing. Jeff Adrian wasn't very big.

KO will be fine. Amida will develop as will Facey. Lubin will join us and these 2 years (last & this) will be forgotten. Oriaki, Roscoe Smith and Wolfe all departed not to mention whatever happened to Tyler. Two good freshmen replacements were recruited including one that everyone else missed. Another rebounder is set to come next year

 

[Gurleyman]

Such as in life, should it be true in sports. "Because that is the way we've always done it," 1) isn't a reason to keep doing it that way, and 2) doesn't mean it is the best way.

Secondly, if a blocked shot goes out of bounds, it does not end up with somebody. It is counted as a team rebound and is not awarded to a specific player. So there goes that. And I don't want to be absurdly generous and give an assist on every basket, I want the stats to create a more accurate picture of what occurred. Loyola did not dominate the offensive glass to the tune that 20 offensive rebounds indicates. Period.

A rebound by definition is the act of successfully gaining possession of the ball after a missed shot. A blocked shot is a missed shot, ergo possession of that loose ball is a rebound like any other rebound. No different, statistically. For the purpose of stat keeping, team rebounds is giving it to somebody (i.e. accounting for it). An individual doesn't get every rebound, but some line on the box score gets a +1 every time a shot is missed. There's a category for team rebounds for that reason and another one for deadball rebounds (missing the first of two foul shots, or missing at the buzzer) in order to make sure that rebounds when the ball isn't in play are also accounted for

Also, if you change the way stats are kept, then you lose the ability to accurately compare from year to year. If they changed the rule now, you couldn't compare our rebounding next year to 2006, when we led the nation in rebounding margin. Sometimes those things happen anyway through the game's evolution (three-point line introduced, the overtime rule in college football allows for extra touchdowns like that Navy quarterback had a couple weeks ago), but an arbitrary changing of a statistical definition just for the sake of changing it serves no purpose other than to skew numbers out of historical context that don't need to be skewed.

 

[Huskybass]

Other than the Glacier, we have no beef up front. That is a huge part of the rebounding issue. Bazz and Boat rebound very well for their size, our bigs get outmuscled pretty easily because they are all thin. Give KO Jeff Adrien or Roscoe and the rebounding issues would be virtually gone.

I suspect our rebounding will improve over the course of the season. If not, we may get knocked out of the tourney by a lower seed.

 

[Husky25]

A rebound by definition is the act of successfully gaining possession of the ball after a missed shot. A blocked shot is a missed shot, ergo possession of that loose ball is a rebound like any other rebound. No different, statistically. For the purpose of stat keeping, team rebounds is giving it to somebody (i.e. accounting for it). An individual doesn't get every rebound, but some line on the box score gets a +1 every time a shot is missed. There's a category for team rebounds for that reason and another one for deadball rebounds (missing the first of two foul shots, or missing at the buzzer) in order to make sure that rebounds when the ball isn't in play are also accounted for

Also, if you change the way stats are kept, then you lose the ability to accurately compare from year to year. If they changed the rule now, you couldn't compare our rebounding next year to 2006, when we led the nation in rebounding margin. Sometimes those things happen anyway through the game's evolution (three-point line introduced, the overtime rule in college football allows for extra touchdowns like that Navy quarterback had a couple weeks ago), but an arbitrary changing of a statistical definition just for the sake of changing it serves no purpose other than to skew numbers out of historical context that don't need to be skewed.

I know what a rebound is defined as...and I couldn't care less about the text book definition. I think it is a stupid way to track the stat. You may not agree and that is fine. Again, I couldn't really care much less.

The bottom line is as Brimah gets better at the art of blocking shots, The rebounds (as the stat is currently recorded) of UConn's opponents will most assuredly decrease by the same rate that UConn's increase. Go back to my original post. That has been my point throughout.

 

[upstater]

It always strikes me as funny when announcers refer to the tradition of UCONN big men that block shots. Before Emeka, UCONN was known as having a doughnut offense offense e.g. nothing in the middle. That was a decade ago.We certainly have not had that presence for a couple of years. Our "tradition" was about 7 years long.
We also had several undersized power forwards including Freeman and Donny Marshal. Rod Sellers was small and had to struggle with the likes of Patrick Ewing. Jeff Adrian wasn't very big.

KO will be fine. Amida will develop as will Facey. Lubin will join us and these 2 years (last & this) will be forgotten. Oriaki, Roscoe Smith and Wolfe all departed not to mention whatever happened to Tyler. Two good freshmen replacements were recruited including one that everyone else missed. Another rebounder is set to come next year

They might have been thought of as a donut team, but boy would we love to have Jake Voskuhl right now. Put Jake on this team and it vaults to the top.

 

[BigErnMcCracken]

but, I'm becoming concerned that we may never be a good (never mind great) rebounding team again.

I know he always talks about it, but we just don't rebound like JC teams used to do. I don't care who we had or how big we were, we always rebounded well. We were almost always national leaders in rebounding margin. Those days may be gone.

I know Kevin will have his own style, and I appreciate what he accomplished last year, how the kids respond to him and how the team is winning games. He's doing a great job and he's going to do things differently, I know. I'm as big a supporter of his as I've ever been.

I just don't think he emphasizes rebounding the way JC did, and that looks like it will be OK.

I can't overstate how silly I think this post is. It's personnel. How could anyone think otherwise? Moreover, even if it isn't personnel, wouldn't we need to wait to see the personnel turn over a couple times before we could determine how Ollie coaches rebounding with a different group? At this point in time you're evaluating a single group of players 7 games into his second season and saying UConn is "never" going to be a good rebounding team again.

I know the whole point on the Boneyard is drawing fatalistic conclusions based on nothing but this seems a little extreme.

My girlfriend knows close to nothing about college basketball. We happened to be standing on the sideline when the players came out at Barclays and the first thing she said was "UConn looks so much smaller than Maryland." Dez Wells is exponentially stronger than any of our bigs, who are either twigs or fat (sorry Tyler). It's a hell of a lot easier to "coach rebounding" when you've got a front line that's as big or bigger than anything you'll see in the NBA, as Calhoun often did.

Going through Calhoun's teams over the years I can think of at least 2 guys on basically every team who would be the best rebounding bigs on this current team. Hell, I'd take a Curtis Kelly on this team and rebounding would improve. I'm sorry but that's not because Calhoun "coached" rebounding differently.

 

[CTBasketball]

I can't overstate how silly I think this post is. It's personnel. How could anyone think otherwise? Moreover, even if it isn't personnel, wouldn't we need to wait to see the personnel turn over a couple times before we could determine how Ollie coaches rebounding with a different group? At this point in time you're evaluating a single group of players 7 games into his second season and saying UConn is "never" going to be a good rebounding team again.

I know the whole point on the Boneyard is drawing fatalistic conclusions based on nothing but this seems a little extreme.

My girlfriend knows close to nothing about college basketball. We happened to be standing on the sideline when the players came out at Barclays and the first thing she said was "UConn looks so much smaller than Maryland." Dez Wells is exponentially stronger than any of our bigs, who are either twigs or fat (sorry Tyler). It's a hell of a lot easier to "coach rebounding" when you've got a front line that's as big or bigger than anything you'll see in the NBA, as Calhoun often did.

Going through Calhoun's teams over the years I can think of at least 2 guys on basically every team who would be the best rebounding bigs on this current team. Hell, I'd take a Curtis Kelly on this team and rebounding would improve. I'm sorry but that's not because Calhoun "coached" rebounding differently.

100% agree. We need to recruit people that are not afraid to go and get the ball. People that love to rebound and play defense.

 

[UCHuskies08]

Somehow I think if you put Julius Randle on this team, KO wouldn't have trouble getting him to rebound

 

[mauconnfan]

I know what a rebound is defined as...and I couldn't care less about the text book definition. I think it is a stupid way to track the stat. You may not agree and that is fine. Again, I couldn't really care much less.

The bottom line is as Brimah gets better at the art of blocking shots, The rebounds (as the stat is currently recorded) of UConn's opponents will most assuredly decrease by the same rate that UConn's increase. Go back to my original post. That has been my point throughout.

I don't care about the definition of a d**k either but I know that your picture is right there in the dictionary pal....what is your problem - really? Gurley was trying to be nice and you in no way can communicate in that matter. You must have a miserable freakin life 25........really miserable.

 

[Gurleyman]

I know what a rebound is defined as...and I couldn't care less about the text book definition. I think it is a stupid way to track the stat. You may not agree and that is fine. Again, I couldn't really care much less.

The bottom line is as Brimah gets better at the art of blocking shots, The rebounds (as the stat is currently recorded) of UConn's opponents will most assuredly decrease by the same rate that UConn's increase. Go back to my original post. That has been my point throughout.

What one person does with blocked shots isn't statistically significant enough to make any sort of noticeable difference. Brimah blocked three shots yesterday, out of 79 non-deadball missed shots, and we got one of them, so at best we could have improved by two rebounds out of the 79 (2.5 percent). Of course, you cant expect to get 100 percent in the best of circumstances. Going by aggregate math, in basketball, roughly 70 percent of all rebounds go to the defensive team, while blocked shots are around 57 percent (so roughly every eight blocks should sway one rebound statistically). On a day like yesterday, when we blocked 11 and they blocked 2, law of averages says that should make a difference for 1.1 rebounds. It didn't work out that way since we underperformed on the averages and only got 3 of the 11 rebounds off our blocks (instead of 6), which does change the numbers a little bit. We would have out rebounded them 42-37 if you just switched those 3 boards. But the sample size is small.

For and giggles, I went back through the play by plays. Brimah has 24 blocks this year - we've gotten 11 of those rebounds and our opponents have gotten 13. Math says that should be the other way around - so we are looking at a deviation of two rebounds over seven games (510 total rebounds) based on what we should be getting off Brimah's blocks to what we are.

Big picture wise, in 2009, we led the nation in blocks by a mile and still out rebounded our opponents by 9 per game. In 2004 with Okafor, we out rebounded our opponents by 10 per game. In 2006 it was 9.5. The stat rules were the same, but it didn't hurt our numbers because we had good rebounding teams. I think you can explain away an outlying box score (like yesterday) with offensive rebounds after blocks, but over the long haul, there is very little statistical significance.

 

[Husky25]

I don't care about the definition of a d**k either but I know that your picture is right there in the dictionary pal....what is your problem - really? Gurley was trying to be nice and you in no way can communicate in that matter. You must have a miserable freakin life 25........really miserable.

Whatever Mau, Instead of picking up on my underlying point, you got hung up on the "ridiculousness" of my rebound off a block opinion. The point was lost on you. Forgetting for a moment that that my response was not even directed toward you, what about it was rude? People are allowed to disagree. Gurleyman has over 2,700 posts I'm positive he can defend himself.

I hope you have a nice Thanksgiving and I hope you don't pick a fight if you don't like how the wishbone broke.

 

[willie99]

I can't overstate how silly I think this post is. It's personnel. How could anyone think otherwise? Moreover, even if it isn't personnel, wouldn't we need to wait to see the personnel turn over a couple times before we could determine how Ollie coaches rebounding with a different group? At this point in time you're evaluating a single group of players 7 games into his second season and saying UConn is "never" going to be a good rebounding team again.

I know the whole point on the Boneyard is drawing fatalistic conclusions based on nothing but this seems a little extreme.

My girlfriend knows close to nothing about college basketball. We happened to be standing on the sideline when the players came out at Barclays and the first thing she said was "UConn looks so much smaller than Maryland." Dez Wells is exponentially stronger than any of our bigs, who are either twigs or fat (sorry Tyler). It's a hell of a lot easier to "coach rebounding" when you've got a front line that's as big or bigger than anything you'll see in the NBA, as Calhoun often did.

Going through Calhoun's teams over the years I can think of at least 2 guys on basically every team who would be the best rebounding bigs on this current team. Hell, I'd take a Curtis Kelly on this team and rebounding would improve. I'm sorry but that's not because Calhoun "coached" rebounding differently.

well, after cutting through all the clutter I would suggest you're arguing coaching doesn't make a difference. Of course it does, and I'm arguing JC coached differently.

as for fatalistic, you have the wrong dude. We're winning, we won last year, we're just winning differently

Ollie will be his own man, I have all the confidence in the world in him, we're winning, but I don't think we'll be that team that dominates the paint under Ollie

PS: were Yale and Loyola and BU bigger than us too?

 

[Husky25]

What one person does with blocked shots isn't statistically significant enough to make any sort of noticeable difference. Brimah blocked three shots yesterday, out of 79 non-deadball missed shots, and we got one of them, so at best we could have improved by two rebounds out of the 79 (2.5 percent). Of course, you cant expect to get 100 percent in the best of circumstances. Going by aggregate math, in basketball, roughly 70 percent of all rebounds go to the defensive team, while blocked shots are around 57 percent (so roughly every eight blocks should sway one rebound statistically). On a day like yesterday, when we blocked 11 and they blocked 2, law of averages says that should make a difference for 1.1 rebounds. It didn't work out that way since we underperformed on the averages and only got 3 of the 11 rebounds off our blocks (instead of 6), which does change the numbers a little bit. We would have out rebounded them 42-37 if you just switched those 3 boards. But the sample size is small.

For s and giggles, I went back through the play by plays. Brimah has 24 blocks this year - we've gotten 11 of those rebounds and our opponents have gotten 13. Math says that should be the other way around - so we are looking at a deviation of two rebounds over seven games (510 total rebounds) based on what we should be getting off Brimah's blocks to what we are.

Big picture wise, in 2009, we led the nation in blocks by a mile and still out rebounded our opponents by 9 per game. In 2004 with Okafor, we out rebounded our opponents by 10 per game. In 2006 it was 9.5. The stat rules were the same, but it didn't hurt our numbers because we had good rebounding teams. I think you can explain away an outlying box score (like yesterday) with offensive rebounds after blocks, but over the long haul, there is very little statistical significance.

UConn actually didn't lead the nation in blocks by a mile in 2008-09. Miss St. was less than a half block behind UConn on a per game average. They had more over the course of the year, but played in 4 more games as well.

Statistically significant or not, I think it's a dumb way to award offensive rebounds. How many rebounds did opposing offensive rebounds did Okafor and/or Thabeet prevent by keeping the ball inbounds? I do not have the statistics to back it up (Mau doesn't believe in statistics anyway) but according to the eye test, I recall it was more than quite a few. This brings me back to my original point. As Brimah's shot blocking develops, he will be able to control where the block goes a little better. Chances are UConn's offensive rebound number will decrease at the same rate that UConn's defensive rebound numbers increase.

 

[mauconnfan]

Emeka and Amida posturize

Whatever Mau, Instead of picking up on my underlying point, you got hung up on the "ridiculousness" of my rebound off a block opinion. The point was lost on you. Forgetting for a moment that that my response was not even directed toward you, what about it was rude? People are allowed to disagree. Gurleyman has over 2,700 posts I'm positive he can defend himself.

I hope you have a nice Thanksgiving and I hope you don't pick a fight if you don't like how the wishbone broke.

Happy Thanksgiving to you too.......no worries on the wishbone!......and no points lost here, there weren't any worth losing as per usual, had to get the "last word" in as you say!

 

[nomar]

Who are our rebounders?

Deandre plays the 4 and he is a SF.

Nolan is not up to it, Brimah is raw, and Tyler is limited.

It's personnel, not coaching.

I'm not sure how Willie or anyone else could possibly think differently. I'm pretty certain KO could coach a guy like Kenneth Faried.

 

[David 76]

They might have been thought of as a donut team, but boy would we love to have Jake Voskuhl right now. Put Jake on this team and it vaults to the top.

Jake, Travis or even Rod. I agree. But my point is still that the history of UCONN's big men gets distorted. Especially by the announcers.

 

[David 76]

Wait...Isn't there some truth to what 25 says? If UCONN blocks a shot that goes out of bounds, they get a rebound. I'll take that every time and it does not mean UCONN was out-rebounded on that play.
If UCONN has 11 blocks and 8 go out of bounds, that's 8 rbs through no credit of their own.
A block that stays in bounds is earned by hard work.

Believe me, I understand the rules and that a rb is a rb and UCONN drastically needs more of them. But a blocked shot going out of bounds would be my favorite lost rb.

 

[Gurleyman]

Wait...Isn't there some truth to what 25 says? If UCONN blocks a shot that goes out of bounds, they get a rebound. I'll take that every time and it does not mean UCONN was out-rebounded on that play.
If UCONN has 11 blocks and 8 go out of bounds, that's 8 rbs through no credit of their own.
A block that stays in bounds is earned by hard work.

Believe me, I understand the rules and that a rb is a rb and UCONN drastically needs more of them. But a blocked shot going out of bounds would be my favorite lost rb.

8 blocked rebounds didn't go out of bounds - only 2 did. The other six stayed in bounds and were recovered by Loyola because they got to the loose ball first (overall 9 of 11 stayed inbounds, and we got 3 of those and Loyola got 6). One of Loyola's 2 blocks went out of bounds as well, so if you were to adjust the box score and disregard all blocks that went out bounds from the rebounding stats (you can't adjust for one side of the floor and not the other), it would have swayed the stats by one rebound (instead of being outrebounded 40-39, it would have been tied 38-38). Statistical insignificance.

If you were to disregard all blocks, even ones that stayed in bounds, we would have outrebounded them 35-31. That's a more statistically significant change, but Loyola got to more of those offensive rebounds than the statistical norm. Based on the aggregate numbers of what's normal (70 percent vs. 57 percent), getting 11 blocks to your opponents two would change the box score by basically one rebound (maybe 1.2 if you go down to decimals).

Also, the difference between 8 blocks a game and 7.5 is a big gap statistically (and third place was less than 7). With 350 programs all basically between 1 block and 8 blocks a game, .5 is a huge variance between two positions. If you did a graph and put a dot for all 350 schools, our dot would be quite lonesome out on the end.