Follow me on twitter

Most recent entries

  • Your 2014 kPOY: Russ Smith
  • Tourney scoring up; pace down
  • Who’s the best in-game coach?
  • This was the best year in history for free-throw shooting
  • Sweet 16 log5
  • Draw trumps seeding
  • 2014 NCAA tournament log5
  • Big West log5
  • WAC log5
  • Sun Belt log5
  • Favorites


    Hoops
  • Murray State and variance
  • Play-by-play Theater: earliest disqualification
  • Predicting John Henson's free throw percentage
  • Can Derrick Williams set the three-point accuracy record?
  • Why I won't give up on Washington (or Kentucky)
  • On overvaluing road play (again)
  • One shining e-mail
  • A treatise on plus-minus
  • The preseason AP poll is great
  • Non-hoops
  • Just how crazy was the Pacquiao/Bradley decision?
  • You have no skill at betting on NFL games
  • The case for Tiger Woods
  • Replaying Isner/Mahut a million times
  • The Majerus Files
  • Rick Majerus: awesome coach
  • Majerus does the unthinkable...again
  • Let's play four
  • One day at a time
  • Monthly Archives

  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • July 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003

  • RSS feed

    When rebounding needs no adjective

    by Ken Pomeroy on Wednesday, February 6, 2013


    I always wonder why analysts get away with saying a team is good at “rebounding”, thereby conflating both offensive and defensive aspects to the skill. Nobody says a team is good at “turnovers” or “shooting” and means that to say a team is good at those things both offensively and defensively.

    Before you send the e-mail, I understand why rebounding is referred to differently. It’s essentially the same act whether it occurs after a team’s own shot or its opponent’s. And rebounds were not differentiated statistically until about 1991 so generations before that had no way to distinguish between the offensive and defensive versions. Some of those traditions linger today and I get it. Still, rebounding stats were modernized a few years before the internet happened, yet people referring to rebounding margin in a broadcast are held in higher regard than those who do research using printed encyclopedias.

    Things are coming around, though. The Big Ten Network’s Dave Revsine is the honorary chair of the Foundation for Rebounding Percentage Awareness and takes great pain during each Minnesota broadcast to inform viewers about the Gophers’ offensive rebounding prowess and their puzzling weakness on the defensive glass. There are many others like him, both on the national networks and calling games locally. (These aren’t the only ones, but shout-outs are in order to South Carolina’s Andy Demetra and BYU’s Greg Wrubell for advancing the cause.)

    Minnesota’s case might seem unusual, but it’s not as rare as you might think. The top ten teams in offensive rebounding percentage last season had the following ranks in defensive rebounding percentage: 34, 215, 117, 64, 219, 76, 78, 130, 83, and 25. As David Hess pointed out last season, the correlation in the D-I universe between a team’s offensive and defensive rebounding is surprisingly weak. I’ve plotted the last five seasons of team-level data below.

    (My executive summary to why rebounding margin is evil comes down to two things: It combines only loosely-related skills, and field goal percentage skews the raw rebounding figures that go into it.)

    That’s not to say there’s no relationship between the two skills at all, though. A very good offensive rebounding team is more likely than not to be above average at defensive defensive rebounding. But, it’s rare to be great at both. Of the 100 best offensive rebounding seasons over the past five years, just nine also had one of the top 100 defensive rebounding seasons.

    Colorado State leads the nation in rebound margin this season, and I suppose it’s fair to say they are a great rebounding team. The only reason I know they lead in rebounding margin is because it’s mentioned on nearly every one of their broadcasts. It makes sense, because they currently reside in the top three in the country in both offensive (42.1%, third) and defensive rebounding percentage (77.7%, first).

    It’s equally interesting that CSU is doing this without a lot of big people. Their effective height ranks 268th. Yes, they have Colton Iverson (6-10, 261 - thanks for the precise weight measurements, CSU), who is indeed a large human being, but the nominees for best supporting role in a rebounding juggernaut go to 6-5 Pierce Hornung, 6-6 Greg Smith, and 6-4 Daniel Bejarano. These guys are front-line players, giving away inches in almost every game they play. Larry Eustachy isn’t really doing anything gimmicky - his guards are not involved in rebounding at all. Three guys on the floor, two of them undersized, are responsible for almost all of the rebounds on both ends.

    Since there are many teams in the Mountain West that aren’t interested in or good at offensive rebounding, I think it’s a safe bet that the Rams will finish with the best defensive rebounding percentage in the nation. Their offensive rebounding may slip a little, but since they’ve grabbed about 39% of available offensive boards in conference play, maybe not by much. Still, what they’re doing is rare. Only one team has finished top five on both sides of the glass in the past decade (2006 Texas, who ranked fifth in both).

    So yeah, just saying Colorado State is a great rebounding team is accurate and by using rebounding margin, you’ll get to that conclusion. But I’d still say it waters down the enormity of their accomplishment this season. It’s extremely rare to simultaneously dominate the offensive and defensive glass and it’s a feat that can’t be appreciated by viewing rebounding as a single entity.