I think it is a systemic issue - at least, it was also a problem v. Fla.
But I’m Dennis Gates on this issue personally – Mizzou get terribly out-rebounded last year, but Gates’s basic view (at least publicly) is that they don’t give out points for rebounding. They give out points for making baskets, and that’s what you need to max out.
I worry that if we over-focus on the rebounding issue, we could solve it. But at what cost? At. What. Cost?
(I think the biggest cost would be de-helter-skelterizing our defense, which is probably one of our better attributes. I think we need to get better at scoring – Easy, right? – and better at the helter-skeltering and just let the stats nerds and food safety lawyers of the world worry about counting rebounds)
Maybe the answer is move upstream – why are we letting other teams shoot the ball? This could be corrected. Get stocks as high as possible, and you just worry less and less about the 20% or of defensive possessions that result in a shot for the opposition (that hits the rim or backboard).
Why are we not stealing the ball or getting a block every time? The obvious answer is to minimize shots that hit the rim or backboard, b/c the most likely outcome is that shot will be gathered by the opposing team and laid back in. Done – this is easy.
Let me make the closest thing I have to an earnest point on this: I don’t think we currently have the personnel to be a very good defensive and very good rebounding team. I think the best version of our defense is a bit more disruptive, which is going to yield some rebounds and easier buckets.
The best attributes on this team are kinda what we’ve suspected all around: athleticism and disruption. I would think our best shot at max’ing out what we can do this year are to still lean into those attributes, not try to lose those advantages by making this team something it’s not.
Basically, our best players are RD and Reece, and both will most likely be gone next year, so let’s try to play to their strengths. (and to further the point - I sorta think Blake is going to more naturally fit into disruptive defense than sound defense, for various reasons, at least at this point in his career – I’m rambling now…)
I agree, there is an earnest point here. Forcing a bad shot (Tony Classic) doesn’t help us if a miss doesn’t end the possession. A terrible defensive rebounding team has to force turnovers (New Tony!). Course we still need to shore up the drebs, but… little of both please.
I don’t know. We have a team in its fifth game, and a lot of new parts. We brought back about 2,200 total court minutes from last year (Beekman 1,050, McKneely 700, Dunn 400, Murray 100).
It’ll take some time for them to gel.
The 2014 team took till game 14 for them to get their crap together (and included an ugly loss to Wisconsin; we went 11-47 (!!!) from the floor in that one). Like this year, it was integrating a lot of pieces — Perrantes and Gill and reintegrating Brogdon (with all three playing starters’ minutes).
They also struggled at times on the defensive glass early on — Davidson had 15 offensive rebounds, Wisconsin 11, Northern Iowa 12, for example.
I’m not saying this is 2014’s team — much higher ceiling then — but we’ll need to be patient.
Yeah, that’s fair. I’m not even sure if I agree with it. I think I’m saying that I’m not sure we have the “soundest” team. Not enough girthiness/experience down low (esp. if Minor isn’t playing much) and we might need to be a bit helter skelter to generate decent offensive looks
I don’t really understand the Harris hate. We’re only 4 games in, and I think already he shows he provides some pop that we simply don’t have otherwise. Also think over time, he’ll get more comfortable in the system and be better- especially with limiting turnovers and picking his spots. Have to remember this is his first game action in a year plus.
Different conversation if talking about who he best fits with, but I think he’d be fine as an above average veteran starter next year.
I think there’s merit to this, but it’s hard to flip the switch in a totally different direction when it comes to defensive principles. Getting in the passing lanes more also might mean changing where the help is coming from, how they defend ball-screens, where the planned rotations are happening, etc.