Vernon Transferring

[WyoExpat]

I don't get why people think we are ever going to be a big rebounding team.
It isn't Coach Shy's style.
It sucks when we get beat on offensive boards, but our team always puts up the shot then gets back on D.
The fact our defense is among the best in the country should show you that.

Look at Florida, they are not a high powered rebounding team either, yet they are #1 in the country.

Coach Shy's coaching style is to not crash the offensive boards. We all understand that and accept it. It works.

The problem is that we GIVE UP so many offensive boards. Great defense is absolutely pointless if you don't get the ball back. 95% of the time, if a team gets 20 more shots than you do, you lose. We beat SDSU with that stat but had to shoot 60% from the floor to do it.

I don't like the chances of relying on shooting 60% from the floor to win games.

This is exactly my problem with Coach Shyatt and, if I remember correctly, the biggest change from Coach Shyatt's first go-round and the 2002 NCAA team was that the 2002 team was absolutely loaded with rebounders and out-muscled the whole conference on the boards.

I understand what coach is trying to do by having the team get back on defense after the shot goes up, but I also understand what the trade-off is and fear it will be our undoing in the long run. To illustrate my point, when I fill out my NCAA bracket, rebounding margin is the main statistic I look at to see which teams I expect to make a deep run and which teams I expect to get knocked out sooner rather than later. Bad rebounding almost always catches up to a team eventually and great rebounding usually helps a team survive games when nothing else seems to be going well. Defense also works this way has more exposure to quicker, more athletic teams than rebounding dominance does.

 

[WyoExpat]

Whoever said something about losing conference record for 11 straight years...check the standings...we don't have a losing record in conference play.

We also don't have a winning record for the last 11 years. Ten years of losing and one year of a tie, but not one year in the last 11 where Wyoming has had a winning record in the conference.

Well, 9 years of losing and 2 years of .500 if you want to be precise about it..

The important difference last year and this year is that the Pokes passed the "eye test" when at full strength. I was disappointed with the record down the stretch, but I have not seen the team look generally clueless and hopeless since Coach Shyatt arrived three years ago. I could not say the same thing about the preceding three years. I also know that each returning player will be better next year than he was this year. That has not always been true of past teams either.

 

[PotatoCreekPete]

Whoever said something about losing conference record for 11 straight years...check the standings...we don't have a losing record in conference play.

We also don't have a winning record for the last 11 years. Ten years of losing and one year of a tie, but not one year in the last 11 where Wyoming has had a winning record in the conference.

Well, 9 years of losing and 2 years of .500 if you want to be precise about it..

The important difference last year and this year is that the Pokes passed the "eye test" when at full strength. I was disappointed with the record down the stretch, but I have not seen the team look generally clueless and hopeless since Coach Shyatt arrived three years ago. I could not say the same thing about the preceding three years. I also know that each returning player will be better next year than he was this year. That has not always been true of past teams either.

Very true, except for the last game against Texas A&M the Pokes never looked like they were clueless and hopeless. They constantly looked like they were in games and had chances to win, especially before Nance went down. It just looked like the Pokes wore down as the season went along. Hopefully next season Shyatt will be able to use a deeper rotation that will keep players from getting so worn down. I have really mixed feelings about Nance coming back next season. From the messages that I have read that have come from him, he is anxious to get back, but I hope that he just doesn't push it too fast or too hard. We have all seen too many players that tried to come back too early and what it did for them. But back to the team as a whole, the program is on the upswing, and I am hoping that next season they are able to put all of the pieces together.

 

[NowherePoke]

I don't get why people think we are ever going to be a big rebounding team.
It isn't Coach Shy's style.
It sucks when we get beat on offensive boards, but our team always puts up the shot then gets back on D.
The fact our defense is among the best in the country should show you that.

Look at Florida, they are not a high powered rebounding team either, yet they are #1 in the country.

Coach Shy's coaching style is to not crash the offensive boards. We all understand that and accept it. It works.

The problem is that we GIVE UP so many offensive boards. Great defense is absolutely pointless if you don't get the ball back. 95% of the time, if a team gets 20 more shots than you do, you lose. We beat SDSU with that stat but had to shoot 60% from the floor to do it.

I don't like the chances of relying on shooting 60% from the floor to win games.

This is exactly my problem with Coach Shyatt and, if I remember correctly, the biggest change from Coach Shyatt's first go-round and the 2002 NCAA team was that the 2002 team was absolutely loaded with rebounders and out-muscled the whole conference on the boards.

I understand what coach is trying to do by having the team get back on defense after the shot goes up, but I also understand what the trade-off is and fear it will be our undoing in the long run. To illustrate my point, when I fill out my NCAA bracket, rebounding margin is the main statistic I look at to see which teams I expect to make a deep run and which teams I expect to get knocked out sooner rather than later. Bad rebounding almost always catches up to a team eventually and great rebounding usually helps a team survive games when nothing else seems to be going well. Defense also works this way has more exposure to quicker, more athletic teams than rebounding dominance does.

I think it's a very interesting discussion. A couple of points:

1. Hard to put much of a comparison into place with 98 and 02. The only player that played on both teams was Ugo and he was a true freshman in 98 and an post-injury version of himself in 02 (role player). The 02 team had a tremendous interior rotation of rebounders in Uche, Davis, and Mingo with Ugo as the 4th big man.

2. In terms of rebounding, our real problem IMO is not the strategic decision to forego attacking the offensive glass, but rather the fact that we don't have the personnel to control the defensive glass. I guarantee that Shyatt focuses heavily on the defensive glass because he cares about defensive and making stops and you don't get credit for a stop till you get the ball back. However, when we are trotting out a lineup of Grabau, Adams, Sobey, Granberry, and Cooke we are at a height disadvantage at every single position at times and sometimes significantly so. Not to mention most of these guys, except Cooke, just aren't natural rebounders.

3. Following up on #2, I thought it was interesting to read Zach Lowe's recent article on Grantland regarding to improving Charlotte Bobcats. Their new coach, Clifford, also eschews offensive rebounding in favor of getting back on defense to prevent transition baskets. One big difference though is they are effective on the defensive glass and have been able to move up the standings (they were awful the last two years) by getting stops despite still not being very good offensively.

4. Looking at the Sweet 16, an admittedly small sample, there are 4 teams left playing that are ranked below 250 in Offensive Rebounding Percentage (Wisconsin, Stanford, Michigan, and Iowa St.), but none ranked that low in Defensive Rebounding Percentage. Of course, you can turn that around and say that 3 of the top 4 offensive rebounding teams in the country are still playing (Baylor, Tennessee, Kentucky). I think it just shows that there are multiple strategies that can work in that regard but either way if you can't control the defensive glass you can't win.




Long story short. Pokes need more interior depth and they need their perimeter players to help out more on the defensive glass. We aren't really a fast break team, so we don't need our guards leaking out for transition baskets. Grabau is limited physically (small, slow, not a quick jumper) so I don't expect a lot of rebounds out of him, but Adams and Hankerson (if he comes back) can be far more effective on the glass than they have been. In addition, we will need some additional frontcourt help off the bench so that we don't have to play 4 guards at times.

 

[BackHarlowRoad]

Spot on NP. There's no doubt that there can be value in choosing to play defense over crashing the offensive boards.

There is no strategy and no positives from getting outrebounded on the defensive end. It's all bad.

I think shooting percentage should be eliminated from the stat book because if you miss 3 shots but score on the same possession anyway because the other team can't rebound....that's 100% for the possession.

There should be a "points per possession" stat. In Laramie, we out-shot SDSU by 20% (that's HUGE)...but scored the exact same amount of baskets.

 

[WyoExpat]

I don't get why people think we are ever going to be a big rebounding team.
It isn't Coach Shy's style.
It sucks when we get beat on offensive boards, but our team always puts up the shot then gets back on D.
The fact our defense is among the best in the country should show you that.

Look at Florida, they are not a high powered rebounding team either, yet they are #1 in the country.

Coach Shy's coaching style is to not crash the offensive boards. We all understand that and accept it. It works.

The problem is that we GIVE UP so many offensive boards. Great defense is absolutely pointless if you don't get the ball back. 95% of the time, if a team gets 20 more shots than you do, you lose. We beat SDSU with that stat but had to shoot 60% from the floor to do it.

I don't like the chances of relying on shooting 60% from the floor to win games.

This is exactly my problem with Coach Shyatt and, if I remember correctly, the biggest change from Coach Shyatt's first go-round and the 2002 NCAA team was that the 2002 team was absolutely loaded with rebounders and out-muscled the whole conference on the boards.

I understand what coach is trying to do by having the team get back on defense after the shot goes up, but I also understand what the trade-off is and fear it will be our undoing in the long run. To illustrate my point, when I fill out my NCAA bracket, rebounding margin is the main statistic I look at to see which teams I expect to make a deep run and which teams I expect to get knocked out sooner rather than later. Bad rebounding almost always catches up to a team eventually and great rebounding usually helps a team survive games when nothing else seems to be going well. Defense also works this way has more exposure to quicker, more athletic teams than rebounding dominance does.

I think it's a very interesting discussion. A couple of points:

1. Hard to put much of a comparison into place with 98 and 02. The only player that played on both teams was Ugo and he was a true freshman in 98 and an post-injury version of himself in 02 (role player). The 02 team had a tremendous interior rotation of rebounders in Uche, Davis, and Mingo with Ugo as the 4th big man.

2. In terms of rebounding, our real problem IMO is not the strategic decision to forego attacking the offensive glass, but rather the fact that we don't have the personnel to control the defensive glass. I guarantee that Shyatt focuses heavily on the defensive glass because he cares about defensive and making stops and you don't get credit for a stop till you get the ball back. However, when we are trotting out a lineup of Grabau, Adams, Sobey, Granberry, and Cooke we are at a height disadvantage at every single position at times and sometimes significantly so. Not to mention most of these guys, except Cooke, just aren't natural rebounders.

3. Following up on #2, I thought it was interesting to read Zach Lowe's recent article on Grantland regarding to improving Charlotte Bobcats. Their new coach, Clifford, also eschews offensive rebounding in favor of getting back on defense to prevent transition baskets. One big difference though is they are effective on the defensive glass and have been able to move up the standings (they were awful the last two years) by getting stops despite still not being very good offensively.

4. Looking at the Sweet 16, an admittedly small sample, there are 4 teams left playing that are ranked below 250 in Offensive Rebounding Percentage (Wisconsin, Stanford, Michigan, and Iowa St.), but none ranked that low in Defensive Rebounding Percentage. Of course, you can turn that around and say that 3 of the top 4 offensive rebounding teams in the country are still playing (Baylor, Tennessee, Kentucky). I think it just shows that there are multiple strategies that can work in that regard but either way if you can't control the defensive glass you can't win.




Long story short. Pokes need more interior depth and they need their perimeter players to help out more on the defensive glass. We aren't really a fast break team, so we don't need our guards leaking out for transition baskets. Grabau is limited physically (small, slow, not a quick jumper) so I don't expect a lot of rebounds out of him, but Adams and Hankerson (if he comes back) can be far more effective on the glass than they have been. In addition, we will need some additional frontcourt help off the bench so that we don't have to play 4 guards at times.

I think you hit the nail on the head re: defensive rebounding and front-court personnel.

I do think that there is a little more that we can compare and contrast between 1997-98 (Shyatt's first appearance in Laramie) and 2001-02 (McClain's NCAA bid). Davis was also a Shyatt recruit and this year's team seemed to be built and operated similarly to his 1997-98 team. The most striking thing to me was how different the 2002 NCAA team looked getting off of the bus. It basically illustrates your point about frontcourt personnel.