Rebounding Issues Unlikely To Improve Soon
by Jeff Nusser on Jan 17, 2012 10:05 PM PST
in 2011-2012 WSU Basketball News
Email
PrintI had planned on writing a post on WSU's rebounding issues and why they were unlikely to improve significantly this season, but lo and behold our new beat guy at the Spokesman-Review already did it tonight!
So, rather than go into some kind of long treatise* on the subject, I figured I'd just give you a few thoughts on it and send you on your merry way to read Christian's story.
Caple notes that WSU ranks ninth in the Pac-12 in defensive rebounding percentage and 10th in offensive rebounding percentage. (Yes, a beat reporter used rebounding percentage. In a totally related move, I want to hug that man.) But if you limit it to just Pac-12 play, it's even worse -- the Cougs are dead last in both categories.
I think the explanation is pretty straightforward: The Cougs just can't match up athletically up front in the Pac-12, something even Bone intimated in Caple's story:
“That’s not to fault the guys in our program. Our guys work hard at it,” Bone said. “Almost every single day, we do rebounding, and our kids work really hard at rebounding. But sometimes, it’s like one of those situations where you can work on throwing an alley-oop to a 6-foot kid that can’t jump very well, and you can try and try and try all you want, but at the end of the day, it’s hard for that guy to get up and get it and dunk it."
The Cougars actually were doing a decent enough job in the nonconference schedule, and much of that had to do with some nice -- and unexpected -- production from Charlie Enquist and Brock Motum. But both have dropped off significantly in conference play: Enquist's overall defensive rebounding percentage is 22, yet in five Pac-12 games it's just 18, while Motum's overall percentage is 15, but just 12 in conference. It's reasonable to assume that the early season production had much to do with WSU's athletically limited opponents.
The most frustrating thing about rebounding is that as much as we want the team to be better at it, that's not likely to happen. Let's take Motum, for example.
If you've been around here for long, you know that I cautioned people against expecting big rebounding improvements out of Motum. The comment I heard most often after last season was, "Get some weight on Motum, and he'll get way better on the boards!" Yet, after putting on even more weight, his defensive rebounding percentage in conference games is up just one from conference games a year ago, and his offensive percentage is up just two.
Now, I'm willing to admit that I'm drawing conclusions to some degree off of just five games, so small sample size and all that -- especially considering his overall percentages were on track to be much better after nonconference play. But I think it's clear that he hasn't transformed into some dominant rebounder with the added bulk. Heck, he's still not even an adequate rebounder at this point.
This isn't to bash on Motum. His offensive production largely offsets his rebounding deficiencies, and for that, I'm thankful. This is more to say what most people who study basketball know: Rebounding seems to be an innate skill akin to floor vision. Guys can improve incrementally, but you rarely see giant jumps in rebounding percentages across years the way you do with shooting percentages.
Either you've got the ability to go get a ball or you don't, and the Cougars' various front court players just don't. Motum doesn't seem to be able to read a rebound, and struggles to box out players of equal stature. Enquist is still all knees and elbows against more athletic opponents. Abe Lodwick tries hard -- and is a better jumper than he's given credit for -- but the reality is he's still a puffed up guard. And D.J. Shelton seems simply lost when it comes to getting a body on someone.
Can the Cougars get better? Of course they can -- there's no excuse for what happened on Saturday. But I just don't know how much better it's possible for them to get until reinforcements arrive next year.
If I was the coach, I'd play the toughness angle to the hilt to try and squeeze just a few more rebounds out of those guys. There's no reason for Lodwick, Enquist and Shelton to not use all 15 of their fouls, and at least six of them should come from fighting for rebounds -- over the back, elbowing guys, whatever. They've got to get in there and fight. As one of my favorite coaches, Frank Martin, likes to say: The refs won't call them all.
It's a culture that has to be cultivated in practice. I don't know if it can be changed now, but it's worth a shot.
*Maybe 700 words still qualifies as a long treatise. I dunno. Whatever.
-----
Want more? Get analysis delivered right to your email inbox with Cougar Sports Weekly. Also follow us on Twitter and Facebook:
77 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I guess I never realized rebounding was more of an innate skill. I thought of it more related to height and/or effort.
I’m curious what the team’s free throw % is over conference play. Seems like improving that a little would help their cause if they’re destined to be this bad in rebounding the rest of the season.
I think vertical leap matters too, but there is definitely an instinct or "nose for the ball"
Remember Dennis Rodman was only 6’6, which isn’t that big for the NBA
Around these parts, a man could get hurt for wearing purple.
e.g. - Charles Barkley
Great rebounder and he was really 6’4".
CougCenter OG since 9/2/2008 | @TheSoCalCoug
Great e.g.
and that proves the point that some players are such good instinctural rebounders that your forget their size.
Around these parts, a man could get hurt for wearing purple.
It is related to height and effort
But there’s just a feel to it that some guys have. Motum is 6-10, and by all counts works hard. So why doesn’t he get more, when a guy like Roberson at Colorado — who is 6-7 — gobbles up everything in sight? It’s a combination of all of those things, though.
by Jeff Nusser on Jan 18, 2012 10:53 AM PST up reply actions
Two questions for Nuss
Is Christian Caple your protege?
You didn’t mention anything about rebounding out of the zone defense. Do you think it is just a problem tied to our personnel not having the athleticism to get a body on someone? Do you think it is a reason to move away from the zone?
Personally, I am ready to see that zone go away all together. I am surprised that Bone sees it as effected. Both Colorado and UW went through long cold streaks, but they also lit it up on us in stretches as well. If our guys can’t rebound out of that zone, I think it is more of a reason to go to man to man.
Around these parts, a man could get hurt for wearing purple.
I thought the same about the zone
I think it’s a damned if you do damned if don’t thing forthis roster. We can’t have Aden and Moore on the floor at the same time and play man. The 3-2 zone was a nice idea but you need two legit rebounding bigs to pull that off against any team that is decently athletic. So Bone is stuck, he can’t play man, and he can’t play zone. Players at the PAC-12 level will expose them.
We will call him Zatara.....sounds fearsome....It means driftwood.
Ya zones really hurt rebounding.
Because you are usually guarding space not a player, so when the ball goes up it makes it harder to find body to block out. You see a lot of follow up dunks. I wanted to look up Syracuse’s rebounding because they always play zone, but Kenpom now charges for that. (they didn’t use to) If my memory serves me right a lot of announcers have talked about how Syracuse is not good on the boards, but their 2-3 zone is awesome. Well our zone isn’t good enough to counteract our rebounding.
CougCenter OG since 9/2/2008 | @TheSoCalCoug
Syracuse is the 319th ranked defensive rebounding team in the country.
They’ve always been bad at it. But here’s the thing: Every Boeheim team has ranked between 10 and 65 (with most in the top 30) in adjusted defensive efficiency since Pomeroy started doing his thing. One does not necessarily lead to the other.
by Jeff Nusser on Jan 18, 2012 10:58 AM PST up reply actions
This is what I was kind of saying.
SU’s 2-3 zone is really good, which helps make up for their lack of rebounding. WSU has a bad zone to go along with their bad rebounding.
CougCenter OG since 9/2/2008 | @TheSoCalCoug
And Bone's contention, as evidenced by his decisions, is that their man is even worse than the zone
So … yeah.
by Jeff Nusser on Jan 18, 2012 12:30 PM PST up reply actions
Ya but limiting the other team's offensive rebounds might be worth going man-to-man.
CougCenter OG since 9/2/2008 | @TheSoCalCoug
I didn't mention anything about the zone
Because Bone talks about it in Caple’s story. Main point: They played man for the final five minutes against UW, and it hardly made a difference.
I’ll be honest: I have a bias against zone, and would rather a team work hard to get good at man-to-man. But that’s not Bone’s philosophy, which seems to be to play whatever defense has the best chance of holding the other team to a reasonable level that they can outscore.
And no, Christian’s not my protoge. I just like to encourage good, young talent in the field. :-)
by Jeff Nusser on Jan 18, 2012 10:55 AM PST up reply actions
I share your defensive philosophy
I also think that it is a ridiculous assertion, “Well, we tried it for five minutes and it didn’t work.” Especially, when those five minutes are talking about the last five minutes of the game.
But as mentioned by Bone, rebounding was the known “Achilles heal” heading into the season. Maybe we can’t complain too much given this is the first “focus piece” to appear on rebounding problem to appear CougCenter and its mid January.
Around these parts, a man could get hurt for wearing purple.
Well, they were reasonably adequate in nonconference play
They weren’t horrible against Oklahoma, and were actually pretty good against New Mexico. But I’m more or less with you — I believe man-to-man would improve the rebounding, if only marginally. The question then becomes, “Would they be giving up higher shooting percentages in man?” Bone seems to think so.
by Jeff Nusser on Jan 18, 2012 12:07 PM PST up reply actions
Ya but if we play man-to-man
and we get more rebounds we would (hopefully) be limiting second, third and fourth chances. The zone may look better because we shut them down, but how many opportunities are they getting because of offensive rebounds. I am sure there is a equation that would look at this. Play zone and give the opposition more chances (because of offensive rebounds) or play man and let them have a better scoring rate with less offensive rebounds (meaning less chances).
CougCenter OG since 9/2/2008 | @TheSoCalCoug
Definitely not a bball coach so I could be way off but I agree more with Frank Martin.
I always thought the keys to rebounding were toughness, hustle, and smarts. When the ball goes up our guys just need to fight to get in position and most rebounds will fall to them by having better position right? Brockman was athletic but not much bigger than 6’7 and pulled in 8-10 rebounds his whole career.
We’ve been doing the zone for the past year and a half, they still don’t know how to rebound out of it? And I’m sorry, but there is no way in hell I will believe they are so athletically deficient where its ok that a 6’6 guard in Terrence Ross can pull down 14 rebounds and that uw should beat us on the OFFENSIVE boards 22-4. That is absurd, they beat us because they outworked our guys. We stood there and watched uw get boards all game.
Either way I hate this quote from Bone. Sure, its honest, but if that’s the attitude he gives to the media what has he been telling his players? This quote is very Wulff-esque. It reminds me of the “we don’t have the personnel to implement are super-duper-awesome-no-huddle offense. But, just wait 3 years and we’ll have the guys to do it and then watch out!!!”
I agree with this.
There’s an effort component, but effort requires the discipline to bring it on every play, and discipline is a skill. If discipline wasn’t a skill, there’d be a lot fewer fat guys like me walking around who could push themselves away from the table.
by Jeff Nusser on Jan 18, 2012 11:01 AM PST up reply actions
For what it's worth, 6-6 Terrence Ross is pulling down 16.5 percent of the available defensive rebounds
Among WSU’s regular rotation players, only Enquist (21.6) and Lodwick (19.1) exceed that mark.
by Jeff Nusser on Jan 18, 2012 11:48 AM PST up reply actions
That also would have placed him second on WSU last year
Behind DeAngelo Casto (17.5).
by Jeff Nusser on Jan 18, 2012 11:54 AM PST up reply actions
Rebounding is a gift.
You can get a little better at it, but it usually comes naturally. It is an ability to read the bounce and put yourself in the right place at the right time. It is like people who have a natural sense of direction, they just have it. People with bad sense of direction can get better at knowing their way around, but will never have that natural sense. I don’t have problem with Bone’s analogy, it is the truth and something they are working on.
I don’t know if we are getting rebounding enforcements next year.
But I just don’t know how much better it’s possible for them to get until reinforcements arrive next year.Will R. Woolridge be a good rebounding PG? Is Peters known for his rebounding? I think Longrus will be able to help in this area. Q.Johnson will be a good guard, but I don’t know if he can rebound. I don’t know what we are getting in Brett Boese, because there isn’t any film on him and he has been injured. Maybe there will be a JC guy we don’t know about. When Shelton gets more comfortable at this level his rebounding will come back (it won’t be off the charts, but better than what we have), he was a decent rebounder at the JC level. Usually rebounding translates.
CougCenter OG since 9/2/2008 | @TheSoCalCoug
Although I do think teams can get better at rebounding
because of scheme, personnel and a lot of other factors can affect a teams rebounding.
CougCenter OG since 9/2/2008 | @TheSoCalCoug
I don't know how good Peters and Longrus are
Mostly wishful thinking on my part.
by Jeff Nusser on Jan 18, 2012 11:03 AM PST up reply actions
I am hoping Aron Baynes and Bobby Jones.
Although it took a few years in the system for those two guys to become effective. I think Longrus’s offensive skills may be better than Bobby Jones.
CougCenter OG since 9/2/2008 | @TheSoCalCoug
By the way where is Reeves Nelson?
If someone transfers this year could we add him? Would he have to sit out a year? Would he only have 1-year of eligibility?
CougCenter OG since 9/2/2008 | @TheSoCalCoug
I'm probably biased
but way back when I played I wasn’t a great shooter so I focused most of my effort on defense and rebounding. And that’s what I think is essential to being good at rebounding – effort.
Of course you need physical abilities like at least moderate quickness and more height is better than less, but as much as anything rebounding is about desire. Either you’re willing to put your body on a body and get physical and maybe even a little mean to get a board, or you’re not.
I don’t know if coach Bone can beat that attitude into his players during practice but it seems like it would be worth trying rather than more or less accepting defeat on the boards and saying wait until next year.
Sometimes I sits and thinks and sometimes I just sits
And is desire a skill or not?
Did all of your teammates have the same desire as you?
by Jeff Nusser on Jan 18, 2012 11:43 AM PST up reply actions
Desire is not a skill.
You either have it, or you don’t. And if you don’t, no matter how smart/athletic you are, you’re not going to pull some rebounds on a consistent basis.
"Desire is not a skill. You either have it, or you don’t."
Exactly. Desire is an innate ability. Perhaps these players do not have this innate ability.
by Jeff Nusser on Jan 18, 2012 11:49 AM PST up reply actions
I disagree - if you make it crystal clear that playing time is directly tied to level of effort
on defense and rebounding, every single player on the team would get better at those aspects of the game because their great desire to play would exceed their tendency to be lazy on defense/rebounding.
Just like training children and pets, you offer carrots and sticks to get the behavior you want. Good defense/rebounding = more playing time; poor effort = bench. Simple.
Sometimes I sits and thinks and sometimes I just sits
by Say Howdy Kid on Jan 18, 2012 11:59 AM PST up reply actions
I don't disagree that it can be a motivator
I just question how much it will actually improve the overall results. Basic psychology teaches us that incentives such as this are rarely long lasting in individuals.
by Jeff Nusser on Jan 18, 2012 12:08 PM PST up reply actions
I also disagree that they are currently "lazy"
Which was sort of the point of the whole piece, so I guess we’re just going to have to agree to disagree philosophically.
by Jeff Nusser on Jan 18, 2012 12:09 PM PST up reply actions
You keep talking about how you focused on rebounding
because you were not a great shooter. It is probably because you were actually decent/good at rebounding so you worked on it. You knew you could improve that area because there was a skill inside you for it (and you didn’t even know it). You had a skill and developed it more. Why didn’t you develop your shooting then? What would have happened if you were a good shooter, but not a good rebounder? You probably would have focused on shooting more. People tend to focus on the skill they have inside them and they don’t even realize it. People tend to focus on the areas they know they can improve.
CougCenter OG since 9/2/2008 | @TheSoCalCoug
I don't always think it is effort.
I am sure they work a lot on rebounding in practice. Bone knows it is a problem so I am sure he has put a lot of influence on it. I don’t think they lack of effort, I just don’t think they are that good at it. It would be like dangling a carrot in front of Capers and telling him if he shoots 45%+ from the field by taking jump shots he can play more. I am sure he would work hard at it, but it just won’t happened, but you need him in there for the other attributes he brings to the team.
CougCenter OG since 9/2/2008 | @TheSoCalCoug
I agree
This problem isn’t fixable with the current roster.
Just hope Peters and Longrus next season can both be a solid rebounding tandem, as well as Q being a Ross/Thompson level rebounder.
by dertingfactor on Jan 18, 2012 12:53 PM PST up reply actions
I think it goes back to the "mental toughness" and "killer instinct" issues raised by Bone after the UT/COL week
Around these parts, a man could get hurt for wearing purple.
That's probably the essence of it
It seems like we need more toughness and the willingness to be a little bit mean, even dirty, on the boards and the defensive end of the court in general. As stated earlier, the bigs should use all their fouls because the refs won’t call them all and those extra few possessions could be the difference between winning and losing close games. And maybe even change entire games when the competition finds out early that hips and sharp elbows are part of our game.
Sometimes I sits and thinks and sometimes I just sits
by Say Howdy Kid on Jan 18, 2012 12:20 PM PST up reply actions
And I shouldn't have said just the 'bigs' - this should apply to our ball handlers too
Sometimes I sits and thinks and sometimes I just sits
by Say Howdy Kid on Jan 18, 2012 12:21 PM PST up reply actions
Now this I can agree with.
Physical play can really affect a game. Some opponents do not react well to it. It gets in their head. Guys slow down because they have to think twice if they want to get knocked to the floor or get en elbow going for a rebound or get pushed on a loose ball. Rodman and Barkley got into a lot of players heads do to their physicality.
CougCenter OG since 9/2/2008 | @TheSoCalCoug
When your opponent thinks that any rebound or loose ball may cost them a few teeth, then you have a rebounding advantage
Around these parts, a man could get hurt for wearing purple.
Just a question
What level of basketball did you play? I don’t mean that as a shot at you, but to try and bring up a bigger point.
One reason I think the idea that rebounding is about effort is so common is that at the high school level it is easy to identify players that are getting rebounds based purely on effort, and that this is where they find their playing time. But most high school basketball is played below the rim, and rebounds are gathered in well below the rim.
At the college level things change. The athletic ability shifts greatly. And this has a huge impact on rebounding. Effort is no longer enough, as you can make contact with an offensive player, only to have that player leap before you are ready and they get the rebound. Some of the Offensive rebounds that UW got were tip drill rebounds, where the ball just kept getting knocked up into the air. Their players were generally faster at jumping again then our players, and effort doesn’t make Charlie Enquist jump faster. Some players can barely hit the ground before getting back up, others have to gather.
What I am really getting at is that at the high school level (or high school JV, where I spend most of my current time) I can harp on players to be fundamental and outwork guys for rebounds. It can be about effort. But when we bring in players from higher levels (varsity players and alumni that currently play college basketball) and do rebounding drills, I can see players effort on their faces and in the blood and sweat they are shedding, while also seeing the more advanced players grabbing the rebound.
Scheme and emphasis can cover up some of WSU’s lack of natural rebounders, but at the end of the day our frontcourt is made up of a former walk on and an Australian that is more comfortable as a high post shooter/passer than a true banger. No amount of scheme or effort really changes our basic weakness, it only hides it.
by 02Coug on Jan 18, 2012 12:22 PM PST up reply actions 5 recs
I agree with you and go back to my original point that
you need physical abilities like at least moderate quickness and more height is better than less. If the Cougs lack quickness (fast-twitch muscle fibers) there’s nothing you can do about that. Likewise with height. But I don’t know how much quicker other teams are than us because I see game after game after game where opponents go untouched to the boards on both ends of the court and to me that is a sign of either lack of effort or coaching or toughness or all three.
We have got to be willing to lay out guys that are freely hitting the boards against us – and I don’t mean in a dirty way but in a way that sends a message. We need bodies on bodies.
Sometimes I sits and thinks and sometimes I just sits
by Say Howdy Kid on Jan 18, 2012 12:31 PM PST up reply actions
It is hard to get bodies on bodies when you are playing zone.
Also a lot of times the offensive team has a better idea where the ball is going after a shot, because they are already looking at the hoop and the 2-3 zone is in space (not body on body) looking at the offensive players and by the time they turn around to the hoop the offensive player is already on a direct path for the rebound, this makes it look like we are being lazing, because the offense already has an extra step ahead of the defender. They are taking that extra step while the defender is turning around to look for the rebound. There are processes to the game that might make players look like they are lacking effort when it is scheme.
CougCenter OG since 9/2/2008 | @TheSoCalCoug
Add to this
The potential that we are a step slower or slower off the ground, and it may not matter how much we practice rebounding out of a zone. Some nights we just won’t do it well.
But the irony of this conversation is that it is an offshoot of the fact that the zone was doing one of the things we wanted it to do, make the other team miss shots, especially from the outside.
This
But the irony of this conversation is that it is an offshoot of the fact that the zone was doing one of the things we wanted it to do, make the other team miss shots, especially from the outside.
I think that seemed true for stretches, but verus COL and UW, there were stretches we got lit up. Do you think those outcomes would have been worse in a constant man? I think it is a matter of the other team being hot or cold. But, you and Coach Bone seem to disagree.
Around these parts, a man could get hurt for wearing purple.
I don't think Bone and I disagree
I think the gamble Bone is choosing to take is that we will allow a team to shoot over us in a zone and bet on them making or missing those shots, but consistently we will hold them to outside shots (which are lower percentage).
If we were in man, we would be giving up more drives and shots in the key, at the rim. Much higher percentage shots.
In other words, we have two defensive weaknesses and they don’t go well together at all. We don’t have 5 guys that can play good solid man/help side principles without having guys on the floor that don’t play great offense (I think this is Bone’s thought, I actually think we can play good offense with our 5 best man defenders). Because of this, he goes with his best Offensive lineup and a defensive zone to hide our bad defensive players. This exposes our other weakness, which is poor rebounding in the more free flowing rebounding situations of a zone.
No, I was implying that you and Bone seem to disagree with me because I favor the man
But I was just wanting to see what your argument for the zone was. I think you make it pretty well. Andd I agree we are kind of screwed both ways with what we have. I think that we can both concur that it gets brutal when those outside shots begin to fall and that has happened during stretches of the last two games. In Colorado, their lead got out of hand. And versus UW, a ten point lead shifted to a ten point deficit in a heartbeat.
Around these parts, a man could get hurt for wearing purple.
Maybe Bone can look at it as,
if I play zone the rest of year will the zone or defensive rebounding get better? Or if I play man-to-man will our defense and rebounding get better. I am starting to think the latter. I think our guys will get a twinge better at man-to-man defense and our rebounding will get better because everyone is responsible for one person. I think we should stick to one thing and get is good at it as we can. I don’t mind adding in half court or 3/4 court trapping to mix things up, but keep the base defense the same all the time. Examples of sticking to one defense, Bo Ryan, Tom Izzo and Jim Boeheim.
CougCenter OG since 9/2/2008 | @TheSoCalCoug
Whether you're playing zone or man the very first thing a defender should do when a shot goes up
is make physical contact with the nearest opponent. One of the main reasons I can barely stand to watch the NBA is that so many of the players fail to do the basics of rebounding: you only turn to face the rim when you are in contact with someone. Except for the occasional long rebound, you get boards by staying between the opponent and the hoop, not by simply turning around and hoping you can out-jump/out-quick the opponent.
Facing the rim and in contact with an offensive player you know through touch which way he wants to go and you apply pressure with your body to stop him from going there. If you think about it in terms of football, if a DB turns his back and loses contact with a receiver the DB is toast and the receiver catches the ball every time.
Now if the opponent is significantly quicker and/or taller than you are it is harder to block them out but you can still try to muscle them away from the hoop and hope a team mate gets the rebound.
And after watching a fair number of our games this year I doesn’t seem like our guys are all that slower or shorter than the competition, so in my mind it just comes down to lack of good block-out technique and not having a junkyard dog attitude about it. You get a guy on your hip you keep him there. Whatever it takes. Period. End of story.
Sometimes I sits and thinks and sometimes I just sits
by Say Howdy Kid on Jan 18, 2012 3:43 PM PST up reply actions
Easy said than done in a zone.
It is hard to block out a guy when he is 3’+ from you. By the time you run over to block him the ball (which you are probably not paying attention to because you are trying to find a body) will probably bounce where you are running from or will go somewhere you are not aware of because you are trying to find a body. Syracuse who runs a zone all the time with stellar athletes is 319th in the country in defensive rebounding. I am sure everything you are talking about WSU players are trying to do. If the NBA—which has the best athletes and rebounders—bothers you in this aspect, doesn’t that confirm that rebounding may be harder than it looks. I am sure it is hard to rebound in the NBA because you are trying to keep the best players in the world from getting around you.
Also, if a DB doesn’t turn and look at the ball it will be pass interference 99% of the time. You have to have good timing, just like in blocking out. When blocking out you still have to have an idea where the ball is or the other guy already has an advantage on you because he knows where the ball is going. That is why it is so hard to rebound in the zone, you have to find a man who is usually not near you and track the ball plus get a body on him. A lot to do in .5 some seconds. Zones are traditionally bad for defensive rebounding.
Now I agree with you about the junkyard attitude. We can try to get more physical. That is why K-State is so tough, Frank Martin instills that. I also think Martin usually uses a man-to-man defense most of the time.
CougCenter OG since 9/2/2008 | @TheSoCalCoug
Where does coaching go in this discussion?
I know Bone talked about running drills to improve the rebounding, but shouldn’t he be able to create matchups and schemes to help counter our lack of rebounding ability? I believe a good coach can always find a way to use what he has to be competitive.
I think Enquist nails it when he says "When we do more zone in games, we’re going to have to learn how to rebound better out of the zone." That’s coaching…right?
So if he changes the matchups to enhance rebounding
Does that come to the detriment of the offense? Something to think about.
by Jeff Nusser on Jan 18, 2012 12:56 PM PST up reply actions
Yes, that may happen.
If you start tweaking with your lineup, defense (zone vs man or press), and offense (various plays/screens) you will obviously get varied results. I think it is the job of the coach to create matchups/mismatches that favor his game plan. The coach needs to use what he has and teach the team to play competitive basketball.
I find it hard to believe our team is so talentless we should be out rebounded by UW 46-24 or turn the ball over a gazillion times (couldn’t find the turnover stat).
Good teams are well coached and disciplined. Am I wrong?
We had 12 turnovers on Sunday.
We average 14 per game. According to ESPN that ranks us at 182 out of 344. I’m sure someone on here probably has a stat that is adjusted for pace.
Ok, so it wasn't exactly a gazillion.
During the game it seemed like it was a lot.
I guess we were down to 12 from 14. That’s what I call improvement. Things are trending up for the Cougs!!
I do agree that during the game it seemed like more.
There were stretches of some really sloppy play where both teams just kept giving the ball away.
Bone has been tweaking his lineup all year
Have you not been watching? He’s tried pretty much every combination imaginable. He benched Reggie for Kernich-Drew, for goodness sake. I’ve not been impressed with some of the decisions he’s made, but I also think we have serious talent issues that can’t be made up for with a simple “the coach needs to use what he has and teach”.
DKD: 2 minutes vs. UT, 14 min vs. COL (start), DNP vs. UW
I wonder what Bone saw in those 14 minutes that ticked him off. Seems kind of erratic.
Around these parts, a man could get hurt for wearing purple.
He did mention that the Colorado decision was based on matchups.
I don’t think he did anything wrong, per se.
Oh yeah, I know has been changing up his lineup all year.
I wasn’t saying all he needs to do is shake things up and that’s going to solve all of our problems. Maybe we are overmatched by our opponent’s talent, but by looking at the PAC…I don’t think so.
Are saying we lack the talent to even be competitive in the PAC?
Yeah, that's sort of what I'm saying
We’ve been over this before, but this senior class is simply not Pac-12 level.
Crap!
I guess I’m an optimist when it comes to the Cougs. It kills me to think we can’t compete in the PAC.
Being a Coug fan it is pretty much a given we have to be optimistic.
I think we have guys coming back next year who are getting playing time that is really going to help us. Lacy, Shelton and Motum will all be integral to next year. They will pair up with R.Wooldridge, who is basically a great additive to this incoming class, Q. Johnson (who I think will be a nice player), Longrus, Peters and I don’t know much about Boese. I have this gut feeling we might lose a bench player or two and Bone brings another player in. (Bone is seeing that he needs to revamp and get the roster the way he wants) I have posted this before, but this lineup seems exciting to me.
Woolridge (Former Kansas player, He average 30.2 pts in HS)
Lacy (Can’t wait to see his soph year)
Johnson (best shooter in the west, 20.5 pt avg., KT avg. 21 in HS)
Motum (will have a good Sr. yr.)
Peters/Shelton (Peters is 6’10" 250lbs, Shelton will have more experience)
Longrus off the bench (He could be the key ingredient)
All these guys coming in are 3-star recruits and were recruited by other major conference schools, something we haven’t seen in a while.
CougCenter OG since 9/2/2008 | @TheSoCalCoug
Agree next years model should be a significant improvement
Think about it. 2012-13 will be really interesting on both the gridiron and hardwoods. It’s great to be a Coug. We all live in hope.
Sometimes I sits and thinks and sometimes I just sits
by Say Howdy Kid on Jan 18, 2012 9:05 PM PST up reply actions
This also come from a player who is a walk on.
I wonder if we had a recruited, scholarship player playing his position if we would be talking about this. Players make plays. I think there is a limit sometimes to coaching, just like a good poker player can only play so good with a bad hand.
CougCenter OG since 9/2/2008 | @TheSoCalCoug
I agree better players always help create a better team.
But did the Bennett (both) era turn around come from better players or better coaching?? I think it came from better coaching. I was there to watch the Graham transition to Bennett. If the Football team wins 7 games next year, is that from “better players” or better coaching??
You must be new around here.
Because we are not going down this road again.
by Jeff Nusser on Jan 18, 2012 2:36 PM PST up reply actions 6 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Community Guidelines
Related FanPosts on CougCenter
Related FanShots on CougCenter
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
