Home
Forums
New Posts
Illini Basketball
Illini Football
Sports Talk
Log in
Register
What's new
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Sports
Illini Basketball
To Crash or Not to Crash: Transition Def v Off Rebounding
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="SwarminOrange" data-source="post: 1187627" data-attributes="member: 234863"><p>I've complained a few times (maybe too many times) that I disagree with Groce's philosophy to send all (most) guys back on defense after the shot goes up instead of crashing the offensive boards (sending at least two or three). I know many of you disagree and that's ok. </p><p></p><p>I wanted to post this interesting study by MIT - "<strong><a href="http://www.sloansportsconference.com/?p=10196" target="_blank">To Crash or Not to Crash: A quantitative look at the relationship between offensive rebounding and transition defense in the NBA</a></strong>".</p><p></p><p>And if you want to see the slides they're <a href="http://www.sloansportsconference.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/Slides/RP/To%20Crash%20or%20not%20to%20crash.pdf" target="_blank">here</a>: </p><p></p><p>I know this is an NBA study and not NCAAM but basically it says sending more players to crash boards instead of getting back in transition defense pays off, resulting in a net +4 points difference per game. And I know there are a ton of other caveats (style of play, your personnel, etc) but in general I agree that the gamble pays off more often than not. As bad as our transition defense is, our offensive rebounding is virtually non-existent which I think hurts us worse. I'll hang up and listen to your answer.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="SwarminOrange, post: 1187627, member: 234863"] I've complained a few times (maybe too many times) that I disagree with Groce's philosophy to send all (most) guys back on defense after the shot goes up instead of crashing the offensive boards (sending at least two or three). I know many of you disagree and that's ok. I wanted to post this interesting study by MIT - "[B][URL="http://www.sloansportsconference.com/?p=10196"]To Crash or Not to Crash: A quantitative look at the relationship between offensive rebounding and transition defense in the NBA[/URL][/B]". And if you want to see the slides they're [URL="http://www.sloansportsconference.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/Slides/RP/To%20Crash%20or%20not%20to%20crash.pdf"]here[/URL]: I know this is an NBA study and not NCAAM but basically it says sending more players to crash boards instead of getting back in transition defense pays off, resulting in a net +4 points difference per game. And I know there are a ton of other caveats (style of play, your personnel, etc) but in general I agree that the gamble pays off more often than not. As bad as our transition defense is, our offensive rebounding is virtually non-existent which I think hurts us worse. I'll hang up and listen to your answer. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Sports
Illini Basketball
To Crash or Not to Crash: Transition Def v Off Rebounding
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…