Perceived rebounding issue

[ER3]

I just wish the rest of the MVC went back to like they were in the early 90's and maybe we could easily win the thing and get an 8/9 seed in the NCAA and get an early exit.

-whatever-

Oh...you mean back when the Valley was a one bid league? C'mon, that's crazy talk...that will never, ever happen.

[Dallas Brave]

Bradley's 5 top scorers were--
Jeremy Crouch.....15.8
Daniel Ruffin........14.1
Andrew Warren....13.2
Theron Wilson.....11.7
Sam Maniscalco....7.7

Which one of those would you eliminate from the team so you could replace him with a better rebounder?

If Bradley had someone else who could have gotten a couple extra rebounds a game, he would have to replace someone else in the lineup.
If the coaches did that, I would wager that the same people who complain about a rebounding differential of 1.7 rebounds per game, would instead be complaining that Bradley doesn't score enough.

Those guys hustle and I like all of them. But ... we have missed going to the NCAA the last two years. We need to improve our rebounding. The height stats that Ken Pomeroy published this year in the tournamet issue of SI provides strong evidence that if you want to dance with authority, get some height ... and play it.

[Da Coach]

Offensive rebounding
BU 407
Opp 432
Difference (-64)

we might not have gotten mauled on the offensive boards like we did this year

Maybe you might want to check your math here again.
To me that looks like a difference of just 25 offensive rebounds (not 64) for the season- in 38 games. That's less than 2/3 of an offensive rebound per game difference. And the total rebounding differential was a whopping -1.7 per game. Not exactly being "mauled". This is just another example of the massive hyperbole that we constantly see from the bashers of this team.

[Dallas Brave]

Just to be clear. I think next year could be a better year than the last two and we have an outside chance of making the NCAA ... I really beleive it. We will have the most balanced team since our Sweet 16 run. The coaches have a lot to work with.

My concern with a lack of height has more to do with 2009-10 and beyond. That lack might be addressed in next year's recruiting class by adding a juco.

[mrcoachdude]

With Collins and AT starting and sending in RS and SS and WE....we will not have a rebounding issue next season.....

Then the next with AT and WE and a Juco big man and an impact big 4 year player.....

just dreaming in type

[ER3]

Maybe you might want to check your math here again.
To me that looks like a difference of just 25 offensive rebounds (not 64) for the season- in 38 games. That's less than 2/3 of an offensive rebound per game difference. And the total rebounding differential was a whopping -1.7 per game. Not exactly being "mauled". This is just another example of the massive hyperbole that we constantly see from the bashers of this team.

So...is your contention that we were a good rebounding team this year? That overall we were pretty effective at limiting second chance opportunities for our opponents?? You obviously don't agree with my assessment (which is fine...), but I would certainly like to hear yours.
We got "mauled" on the offensive boards in the loss against Tulsa...in the loss at Missouri State...in the loss against Michigan State...in the loss at home against Drake...etc., etc. Did we get some offensive rebounds of our own throughout the year?...sure...but that really wasn't my point.
My point here was that I think we did a less than stellar job at keeping teams off of the offensive boards at critical junctures in critical games...and we paid the price for it with losses in those games...however, I do feel that this is something that should be "fixable" if the staff and players place a priority on it.
I don't think it is accurate or fair to dismiss my opinions and to label me as a "basher of this team" simply because I see what I perceive to be consistent weakness of the team and want measures to be taken to insure that improvements are made in that area throughout the year.

[Da Coach]

Of course, if you pick out the couple worst rebounding games of the entire year, you can say we were mauled by those teams.
I think you do enjoy bashing and critcizing this team, and you do it in nearly every post.

I don't think it's reasonable to say
we might not have gotten mauled on the offensive boards like we did this year

[ER3]

Of course, if you pick out the couple worst rebounding games of the entire year, you can say we were mauled by those teams.

I picked out four games that I clearly remembered our ineffectiveness on our defensive boards to be a big reason why I felt we lost the game...that was my point from my original post...that our inability to consistently keep teams from getting an inordinant number of offensive rebounds cost this year's team in many, many games. Do you find that to be an unsupportable opinion on my part? What is your opinion?

I think you do enjoy bashing and critcizing this team, and you do it in nearly every post.

That simply isn't true...and is "massive hyperbole" on your part. Am I critical of aspects of this team?...absolutely. This board needs some counterpoints to every kool-aid point of view, IMO...it should help to make for more interesting discussions about the various aspects of the program... But at the same time, there are performances by players, coaches, home crowds, etc...that I have been very impressed with and have commented on those as well from time to time...

[VeveJones007]

I picked out four games that I clearly remembered our ineffectiveness on our defensive boards to be a big reason why I felt we lost the game...that was my point from my original post...that our inability to consistently keep teams from getting an inordinant number of offensive rebounds cost this year's team in many, many games.

Based on the average, though, our rebounding must have been considerably better in some other games to offset the discrepancy in those games. I understand what you're saying, but I feel that Bradley had an average rebounding team last year, not a bad rebounding team. I think the stats back up that assessment.

Rebounding is just one of the areas in which the Braves need to improve. We need to be better defensively, we need to get an inside presence on offense, we need an inside presence on defense, we need to be more consistent...etc. I think everyone could agree that our rebounding could definitely use improvement, but I just think that some, if not many, posters feel that it's not a dire situation.

[TRIMAN]

I picked out four games that I clearly remembered our ineffectiveness on our defensive boards to be a big reason why I felt we lost the game...that was my point from my original post...that our inability to consistently keep teams from getting an inordinant number of offensive rebounds cost this year's team in many, many games. Do you find that to be an unsupportable opinion on my part? What is your opinion?


That simply isn't true...and is "massive hyperbole" on your part. Am I critical of aspects of this team?...absolutely. This board needs some counterpoints to every kool-aid point of view, IMO...it should help to make for more interesting discussions about the various aspects of the program... But at the same time, there are performances by players, coaches, home crowds, etc...that I have been very impressed with and have commented on those as well from time to time...

I apparently watched the same games as ER3 and different games than the rest of you. There were too many times this year where we couldn't buy a board. We out rebounded Maryland Eastern Shore by one, but I know that they are a final four contender every year. At least we got 6 on Florida Gulf Coast!

With some better teams: Mich St beat us by 19. Tulsa by 9 in the final game.

Butler was even. Outrebounded VCU by 4 (both in blow-outs)

Rebounding definitely cost us some games, and the bigs need to improve. Or Wilson needs to grow. Ask Memphis how ignoring a category works.

[shaunguth]

We were also an awful three-point shooting team last season. Just look at the Indiana State (14.8%), Butler (15.8%), Northern Iowa (20.7%), and Creighton (20.8%) games and you'll see why we lost games!

[Scouter]

We were also an awful three-point shooting team last season. Just look at the Indiana State (14.8%), Butler (15.8%), Northern Iowa (20.7%), and Creighton (20.8%) games and you'll see why we lost games!

Rebounding in those games:
at InSU: InSU 39, BU 32
at Butler: Butler 32, BU 32
vs. Norhtern Iowa: UNI 45, BU 27
vs. Creighton (MVCT): CU 39, BU 38

[shaunguth]

I chose to pick the worst three-point shooting games of the season to show that rebounding is not the only thing determining wins/losses. Three-point shooting was 42.7% in wins and 31.3% in losses.

[Scouter]

I chose to pick the worst three-point shooting games of the season to show that rebounding is not the only thing determining wins/losses. Three-point shooting was 42.7% in wins and 31.3% in losses.

I completely understand that. Not denying it at all. All I did was provide some facts.

The two games that frustrated me the most this season were the home losses to UNI and Wichita State. Yes, yes, Ruffin was out for those two games, but rebounding, IMO, played a much larger role on the outcome of them.

Against UNI, BU was out-rebounded 45-27.
Against Wichita, BU was out-rebounded 38-22.
If BU was anywhere CLOSE to winning the rebounding battle in those two games, it likely wins both. Instead of 9-9 in the league and the fifth seed, Bradley finishes 11-7 and tied for third place (as the fourth seed), 19-12 overall and possibly gets into the NIT instead of Creighton.

Another frustrating game that could've had a major impact on the season was Michigan State. Bradley got out-rebounded 48-29. Now, I don't expect Bradley to out-rebound Michigan State, but even if BU is just minus-10 in that category instead of minus-19, I like our chances a lot more. Win that game (coupled with the wins over WSU and UNI) and we're definitely in the NIT, have a 20-win regular season and are maybe on the extreme outside of the NCAA bubble.

So that's my frustration with rebounding. Win those two conference games and you have a respectable regular season. Win the third (which would be more of a toss-up if the rebounding margin were anywhere close) and you have the program's biggest regular season win in a decade, if not longer.

[ER3]

We were also an awful three-point shooting team last season. Just look at the Indiana State (14.8%), Butler (15.8%), Northern Iowa (20.7%), and Creighton (20.8%) games and you'll see why we lost games!

So is it your opinion that we were a good rebounding team overall? That we did a good job at keeping teams from getting offensive rebounds against us?
I don't feel like I went out of my way to find the only four games that we had trouble keeping teams from getting offensive rebounds against us...like those games were the exception to the rule. I just remembered back to the ones that stuck out in my mind as being the glaring examples of games we lost when it seemed that teams were getting offensive rebounds at will against us.
Did we struggle shooting the 3 in some games? sure...every team does, but I certainly don't see that as a consistent problem for this team...and it isn't the topic being discussed in this thread. I realize it is possible to find four games where we didn't shoot FTs well, didn't shoot 3s well, didn't shoot 12 foot jump shots well, etc. and call that "proof" that there is a problem in that area...but I don't feel like that is what I did in this case...