Duke and Offensive Rebounding

[Kedsy]

Duke dominated the offensive boards against Indiana tonight, grabbing an impressive 54.3% of available offensive rebounds. For the season, our offensive rebounding percentage stands at 41.2%. Obviously it's still early days for the season, but if we can keep up our offensive rebounding, it could mean good things come tournament time.

Here is a list of all Duke seasons since they started keeping offensive rebounds as a stat:



Year OR% Finish
1999 44.3% 2
2016 41.2%* ?
1990 40.9% 2
2010 40.6% 1
1988 40.5% 4
1998 39.7% 8
1992 39.5% 1
2004 39.2% 4
1996 38.3% 64
1994 38.0% 2
1991 38.0% 1
1987 37.9% 16
2009 37.4% 16
2000 37.4% 16
2005 37.3% 16
2003 37.0% 16
2001 37.0% 1
1995 36.9% n/a
1993 36.7% 32
2007 36.4% 64
1997 36.3% 32
1989 36.3% 4
2015 35.8% 1
2014 35.2% 64
2011 35.1% 16
2012 34.7% 64
2002 34.5% 16
2008 34.0% 32
2006 30.9% 16
2013 28.8% 8


* - so far...

It could be a statistical anomaly, but the results here are pretty amazing. Of the 10 Duke teams with an offensive rebounding percentage of 38% or better, eight of the teams have made the Final Four, with a ninth team making the Elite Eight. Perhaps even more impressive, there have only been three "false negatives" (out of 19 seasons), i.e., Duke teams that had an offensive rebounding percentage worse than 38% but still made the Final Four (plus the 2013 edition that was a very poor offensive rebounding team but still made the Elite Eight). One of those teams was last season, and two of the three false negatives won the natty, but still with so few false negatives and only one "false positive" (1996), it's a fairly compelling stat.

It should be noted that they didn't keep the offensive rebounding stat for our 1986 Final Four team. But since the 1987 team had a 37.9% OR%, and the 1986 team had a better overall rebounding percentage than the 1987 team (54.5% to 51.4%), it is very probable that the 1986 team made the cutoff as well, though of course we'll never know for certain.

So here's hoping we continue to pound the offensive glass, and that Duke's tournament trend for top offensive rebounding teams continues.

[Bob Green]

This is an encouraging statistic. Basketball analyst consistently list second chance points as one of their keys to victory. At a minimum, this will be something to follow throughout the season. Good stuff.

[CameronBornAndBred]

This is an encouraging statistic. Basketball analyst consistently list second chance points as one of their keys to victory. At a minimum, this will be something to follow throughout the season. Good stuff.
I have no idea how many of them are offensive vs. defensive, but Amile is averaging 10.6 rebounds per game and Marshall is pulling down an average of 7.1. That's a pretty nice combo to have.

[Ichabod Drain]

I have no idea how many of them are offensive vs. defensive, but Amile is averaging 10.6 rebounds per game and Marshall is pulling down an average of 7.1. That's a pretty nice combo to have.

Also of note, according to Kenpom Amile has the 5th best offensive rebounding percentage in the country. Very nice to have.

[-jk]

I don't think we can really take much away by comparing this year's November and very early December team to past seasons' teams. However, Amile at 5th in the nation is interesting.

-jk

[MChambers]

Most of those top rebounding teams were also very good defensive teams, so I'm not sure how much of the postseason success is attributable to offensive rebounding, but I agree the early numbers for this team make me optimistic.

[davekay1971]

A big similarity is developing between our inside guys on this team and on the 2010 team, and that's nothing but good. In 2010 we had two experienced seniors who were comfortable with the idea of being role players. They were both good and aggressive rebounders on the offensive glass, and both were very sharp and pulling down a rebound and looking for an open shooter. The 2010 team lived off of very good team defense and offensive efficiency (largely through second chance points). Plumlee and Jefferson remind me of Zoubs and Thomas, though I would argue that the 2016 duo is more athletic, and Jefferson has more ability to provide his own offense than did Thomas.

Since Ingram and Kennard may be coming out of their early season shooting woes, and Thornton and Allen and Jones are already demonstrating good shooting ability from range, the offensive rebound-to-kickout could become every bit as helpful for the 2016 team's offense as it was for the 2010 team's.

[Billy Dat]

A big similarity is developing between our inside guys on this team and on the 2010 team, and that's nothing but good. In 2010 we had two experienced seniors who were comfortable with the idea of being role players. They were both good and aggressive rebounders on the offensive glass, and both were very sharp and pulling down a rebound and looking for an open shooter. The 2010 team lived off of very good team defense and offensive efficiency (largely through second chance points). Plumlee and Jefferson remind me of Zoubs and Thomas, though I would argue that the 2016 duo is more athletic, and Jefferson has more ability to provide his own offense than did Thomas.

Since Ingram and Kennard may be coming out of their early season shooting woes, and Thornton and Allen and Jones are already demonstrating good shooting ability from range, the offensive rebound-to-kickout could become every bit as helpful for the 2016 team's offense as it was for the 2010 team's.

I had this exact thought, that when you get a senior who knows his role - and has the chops to be a good offensive rebounder - then you've got a real shot at being elite in this category. Younger players at this level all were elite scorers in high school and likely hang their head and let their focus/effort slip when they aren't scoring. Amile, after all this time, knows who he is and what he needs to do to maximize the team's success. It's great.

Plus, if he looks to his elder Lance Thomas, he'll see that with a little work, intense resiliency, the ability to stay positive over the course of years and dozens of NBA 10-day contracts, he can become a rotation player, 3 point shooter in the NBA!

[CDu]

A big similarity is developing between our inside guys on this team and on the 2010 team, and that's nothing but good. In 2010 we had two experienced seniors who were comfortable with the idea of being role players. They were both good and aggressive rebounders on the offensive glass, and both were very sharp and pulling down a rebound and looking for an open shooter. The 2010 team lived off of very good team defense and offensive efficiency (largely through second chance points). Plumlee and Jefferson remind me of Zoubs and Thomas, though I would argue that the 2016 duo is more athletic, and Jefferson has more ability to provide his own offense than did Thomas.

Since Ingram and Kennard may be coming out of their early season shooting woes, and Thornton and Allen and Jones are already demonstrating good shooting ability from range, the offensive rebound-to-kickout could become every bit as helpful for the 2016 team's offense as it was for the 2010 team's.

Yeah, the 2010 team gets referenced frequently, and perhaps with good reason: a team without a go-to presence offensively in the post, a team without a traditional PG (though Scheyer certainly imitated one very nicely!). I don't know that Jefferson is quite the defender yet that senior-year Thomas was, and Plumlee isn't nearly the rebounder that Zoubek was, but the combination of the two may be similar (Plumlee is a more capable defender in space than Zoubek, Jefferson a FAR better rebounder than Thomas). The two combine to rebound at a rate not too far off the combo of Zoubek/Thomas (with the obvious caveat that those percentages aren't/weren't exclusively during PT together), and their combined defense is pretty good. What's more, Jefferson is a more productive scorer than either Zoubs or Thomas was.

Of course, a good chunk of what made that team go was the dynamic perimeter trio of Scheyer, Smith, and Singler. So even if Jefferson and Plumlee can combine to approximate Zoubek and Thomas, there is still quite a bit of work to do. Furthermore, the Devils had two athletic, talented, strong, backup bigs in the Plumlees, which we don't have (Jeter is talented and somewhat athletic and could be a comparison to freshman Mason, but Obi/Vrankovic are a big dropoff from Miles.

It's a very young team on the perimeter, though, and ultimately that is the question: can our deep and talented but young perimeter guys make enough strides over the course of the season to take advantage of the solid anchors in Jefferson and Plumlee and Jones?

[FerryFor50]

Best part about the offensive rebound is the fact that he next shot of the possession seems to be one that's wide open as the defense scrambles to get back into position. That's why offensive rebounds are so important. They're not just 2nd chances; they're 2nd chances with better shot selection.

[COYS]

Best part about the offensive rebound is the fact that he next shot of the possession seems to be one that's wide open as the defense scrambles to get back into position. That's why offensive rebounds are so important. They're not just 2nd chances; they're 2nd chances with better shot selection.

That's a great point. It ties in with a discussion about efficiency that some of us were having in the Indiana post game thread. One poster wondered why Matt, who is a less efficient scorer than Grayson, would take 19 shots. I mentioned that part of having an efficient team offense is that your secondary/tertiary etc. scorers have to be good enough at putting the ball through the net so that defenses are made to pay for concentrating too much on Grayson. But offensive rebounding is another important factor. As long as Amile is raking in offensive boards, the team's margin for error on offense is a lot bigger. The occasional bad shot or missed open shot is no big deal because a certain percentage of those will be gobbled up by Amile. The team really does have a lot of ways to hurt opponents on the offensive end.

[MChambers]

That's a great point. It ties in with a discussion about efficiency that some of us were having in the Indiana post game thread. One poster wondered why Matt, who is a less efficient scorer than Grayson, would take 19 shots. I mentioned that part of having an efficient team offense is that your secondary/tertiary etc. scorers have to be good enough at putting the ball through the net so that defenses are made to pay for concentrating too much on Grayson. But offensive rebounding is another important factor. As long as Amile is raking in offensive boards, the team's margin for error on offense is a lot bigger. The occasional bad shot or missed open shot is no big deal because a certain percentage of those will be gobbled up by Amile. The team really does have a lot of ways to hurt opponents on the offensive end.
I wonder if a lot of Matt's shots last night came off passes after an offensive rebound?

[tux]

I wonder if a lot of Matt's shots last night came off passes after an offensive rebound?

Quite a few, IIRC. I didn't see Matt take many bad shots last night, so the 19 doesn't bother me. All our perimeter players are encouraged to shoot when open. Matt did a great job of finding holes/space and he should absolutely take those shots.

[Kedsy]

I wonder if a lot of Matt's shots last night came off passes after an offensive rebound?

According to the official box score, exactly two of Matt's shots came off passes soon after an offensive rebound. He made both shots.

[FerryFor50]

That's a great point. It ties in with a discussion about efficiency that some of us were having in the Indiana post game thread. One poster wondered why Matt, who is a less efficient scorer than Grayson, would take 19 shots. I mentioned that part of having an efficient team offense is that your secondary/tertiary etc. scorers have to be good enough at putting the ball through the net so that defenses are made to pay for concentrating too much on Grayson. But offensive rebounding is another important factor. As long as Amile is raking in offensive boards, the team's margin for error on offense is a lot bigger. The occasional bad shot or missed open shot is no big deal because a certain percentage of those will be gobbled up by Amile. The team really does have a lot of ways to hurt opponents on the offensive end.

lol

I was the one who said Matt shouldn't be taking 19 shots. I still tend to think that, but I can see the point you are making.

[FerryFor50]

According to the official box score, exactly two of Matt's shots came off passes soon after an offensive rebound. He made both shots.

Many of Matt's shots came off of passes on the initial possession. Indiana just decided they'd live with him shooting it.

Teams do much of the same with Amile and MP3, but that actually makes sense. And they used to do it with Tyler Thornton. But Jones can shoot better than all of them could.

[MChambers]

Yeah, the 2010 team gets referenced frequently, and perhaps with good reason: a team without a go-to presence offensively in the post, a team without a traditional PG (though Scheyer certainly imitated one very nicely!). I don't know that Jefferson is quite the defender yet that senior-year Thomas was, and Plumlee isn't nearly the rebounder that Zoubek was, but the combination of the two may be similar (Plumlee is a more capable defender in space than Zoubek, Jefferson a FAR better rebounder than Thomas). The two combine to rebound at a rate not too far off the combo of Zoubek/Thomas (with the obvious caveat that those percentages aren't/weren't exclusively during PT together), and their combined defense is pretty good. What's more, Jefferson is a more productive scorer than either Zoubs or Thomas was.

Of course, a good chunk of what made that team go was the dynamic perimeter trio of Scheyer, Smith, and Singler. So even if Jefferson and Plumlee can combine to approximate Zoubek and Thomas, there is still quite a bit of work to do. Furthermore, the Devils had two athletic, talented, strong, backup bigs in the Plumlees, which we don't have (Jeter is talented and somewhat athletic and could be a comparison to freshman Mason, but Obi/Vrankovic are a big dropoff from Miles.

It's a very young team on the perimeter, though, and ultimately that is the question: can our deep and talented but young perimeter guys make enough strides over the course of the season to take advantage of the solid anchors in Jefferson and Plumlee and Jones?
This is a great comparison. Although this team doesn't have the inside depth that 2010 had, it's got a lot more versatility, since Ingram can move to the 4 against smaller team, and 2015 has far more perimeter depth. Obviously, the perimeter is probably not as good, just because it is less experienced, but it may be more talented than the 2010 perimeter. Guess we'll know whether that is the case in about 10 years.