Offensive efficiency is the issue

[cowboysooner]

The foundational blocks of offensive efficiency are shooting, turnovers and offensive rebounding. Basketball is designed to give every team the same number of possessions. In the absence of turnovers or offensive rebounds (no second shots) the game is decided by who shoots the best. Turnovers eliminate one side's possessions and add to the other's possessions. Second and third shots allow you to shoot a lower percentage and still score the same or more points as your opponent, even when they shoot a higher percentage.

Didn't notice this until the post buddy years, but we haven't had an offensive rebound in around 4 years that wasn't accidental (ball bounds out). It has been so bad that I have started to wonder if this is on purpose. That maybe Lon has decided that not getting back on defense is statistically more important than what second or third shots mean to your ending score.

So, my question is are we a bad offensive rebounding team because we don't commit to it, or does Lon want to be good at it and encourage it, but we are just bad at it. Does anyone on her know?

 

[steverocks35]

The foundational blocks of offensive efficiency are shooting, turnovers and offensive rebounding. Basketball is designed to give every team the same number of possessions. In the absence of turnovers or offensive rebounds (no second shots) the game is decided by who shoots the best. Turnovers eliminate one side's possessions and add to the other's possessions. Second and third shots allow you to shoot a lower percentage and still score the same or more points as your opponent, even when they shoot a higher percentage.

Didn't notice this until the post buddy years, but we haven't had an offensive rebound in around 4 years that wasn't accidental (ball bounds out). It has been so bad that I have started to wonder if this is on purpose. That maybe Lon has decided that not getting back on defense is statistically more important than what second or third shots mean to your ending score.

So, my question is are we a bad offensive rebounding team because we don't commit to it, or does Lon want to be good at it and encourage it, but we are just bad at it. Does anyone on her know?

One more factor in scoring is getting to the free throw line, but your points are all well taken.

As to your question, I don't think we commit to rebounding like we should but I don't know if it's coaching or just not having the attitude nor the ability.

 

[stormspencer]

As far as offensive rebounding, it certainly seems most of the time that at least three of our guys are in full retreat to get back on defense once a shot goes up....thus giving us two guys going after a board. The exception being Jalen Hill (and to a lesser extent Victor). Hill seems to go hard after every board....wish we had more of that mentality consistently on this team.

And the more I've watched this over the entirety of the season, this is what I believe the players are being instructed to do. With this strategy, the good news is we don't give us many points in transition, but the bad news is that we absolutely suck at getting offensive rebounds.

 

[oudna]

OU doesn’t commit fouls or turnovers, hits their FTs, and does a good job minimizing easy opponent FG attempts.

Unfortunately they didn’t make enough shots vs Texas.

 

[MJSooner]

One more factor in scoring is getting to the free throw line, but your points are all well taken.

As to your question, I don't think we commit to rebounding like we should but I don't know if it's coaching or just not having the attitude nor the ability.

Agree with steve, I don't think we are committed to it as we should be, which results in a lack of ability to rebound.

For instance, Brady does a terrible job of rebounding, but it is more skill related. He puts his body on a guy but never jumps to the ball. That is why it constantly appears if the guy is over the back- Brady is flat-footed reaching for the ball.

Other guys, go after the ball but wait for it without boxing out. If you box out for the ball, and all guys are doing so, fundamentally, the ball should be able to bounce off the rim and hit the floor without the offensive team getting it. But this means a tremendous commitment to it and time in practice, which takes away from other skills.

I don't think this is a team that uses the bubble drill. Maybe they should.

 

[cowboysooner]

Storm, your observation about everyone getting back when the is going to the rim is why i wonder if it is an intentional thing. In other words we might not be trying to offensive rebound

 

[Hollisp]

Have the same thought. It’s def intentional

 

[TheMont]

I agree with what others have said, but I will add that when we DO commit to all five guys rebounding, we aren’t bad at it. For example, in the first half last night, we got outrebounded badly. I don’t recall the exact margin, but it was definitely double digits. But we finished the game only losing the rebounding battle by 3. There are times when we’re pretty dang good at rebounding, particularly for being at a size disadvantage most nights. It’s as if we turn a switch on and decide to rebound.

 

[MJSooner]

I agree with what others have said, but I will add that when we DO commit to all five guys rebounding, we aren’t bad at it. For example, in the first half last night, we got outrebounded badly. I don’t recall the exact margin, but it was definitely double digits. But we finished the game only losing the rebounding battle by 3. There are times when we’re pretty dang good at rebounding, particularly for being at a size disadvantage most nights. It’s as if we turn a switch on and decide to rebound.

If I remember looking at the scoreboard correctly, we were outrebounded 24-14 at half. We were tied at the end of the game prior to Doo's missed free-throw, so I guess they outrebounded us by one. Part of it was better effort, but part of us catching up is Texas also started to miss more shots in the second half.

 

[BoulderSooner]

OU doesn’t commit fouls or turnovers, hits their FTs, and does a good job minimizing easy opponent FG attempts.

Unfortunately they didn’t make enough shots vs Texas.

this is spot on

 

[cowboysooner]

I started this thread because it seems to me that if you aren't going to attempt to get second and third shots, and you are not a team that is going to press and be extremely physical, then your offensive efficiency is tied entirely to shooting percentage.

I don't have much if any knowledge of current basketball thinking re game strategy. It might be statistically better to get back and not allow transition threes that get second or third shots. I don't know if this is correct, but if it is, then OK. It might be that we want to get offensive rebounds and can't do it. It seems to me we aren't even trying to do it and thus the thread.

A relative of mine was a college coach and we talked about the common practice of a soft delaying man on the ball to half court after inbounding the ball. He says this is just to reduce the time in the half court that you have to defend a kid that could score. Better to defend a kid for 6-8 seconds in the backcourt where you don't have to be as tight or worry about him shooting the ball. This makes sense to me, as it reduces the shot clock for opposing teams. We don't do this, and I doubt this is unintentional. My guess it is because we worry about losing people in the half court and allowing unguarded threes. I do wonder if this strategy make sense with the 3 line having been moved back. Could have seen this in years past making more sense.