39-29 and offensive 19-4 ouch

[lichoya68]

do have some work to do...... just realiazedthat we got outrebounded by forham by i thinbk 39-49....... but even worser...... and we gotta work on it ........ offensive boards we lost i think by 19- 4 .......yup 19-4 ........ wont do it against the big east or in the ncaas ......so great. fun. game...... destroyed them...... BUT need to get that rebounding clinic from the junk yard dog me thinks ....... go hoyas beat rutgers......... AND CRASH THE BOARDS...... 2008 will be great .......IF many more rebounds we can take....... go hoyas ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

[lichoya68]

boo booo other stats had us outrebounded by only 33-32 but even so i think th e19-4 stands and thats an ouch a real ouch hate to be worried after a real blowout by our hoyas who looked unbelievable but need to work on those boards yup go clean the racs glass on sat and rebound and win beat rutgers

[HometownHoya]

I realize now why lic was on that top 10 posters list, he posts twice for every single post ;-). I don't think that we should worry too much about our rebounding in a game that we were up 41-11 mid first half.

[MCIGuy]

Fordham did shoot under 30%. And their big men each played like 38 minutes of the game. That's not the best excuse in the world but it does explain the numbers somewhat.

[vamosalaplaya]

Not sure exactly when they piled up, but from watching the game, Dunston got a ton in the last ten minutes when the game was long over. He had 16 boards and 9 offensive on the game. Dunston is a talented player who never gave up. Fordham also took some very long and often ill considered shots - they missed 15 three pointers - that were careening all over the place throughout the game.

Certainly the image of Memphis pushing around and jumping over Georgetown in the second half of that game is going to live with Hoya fans all year, regardless of how the team rebounds against teams they blow out. But I am not sure what to make of the stats in a game like this, or any other game that has a 20 point plus margin by early in the second half.

[prhoya]

Frankly, this stats are worhtless until the BE season.

For example, our starters made 69% from 3s. Does that happen every game? We'll see.

[dove]

lichoya is right . if a team like fordham can beat us on the boards,what's going to happen when we play a good team-oh wait we already played a good team and look what happened!

[seaweed]

48-23, lichoya, think about those numbers in doing your Oboard comparison. That is the number of missed shots by FU and GU. Our 4 Oboards represents a mere 17.5% of chances made, while their 19 of 48 in almost 40%, and no, that is not something to be thrilled about against an overmatched opponent, but take into consideration garbage time and it isn't too upsetting. I will take a game where the opponent misses 25 more shots that our guys do any day of the week.

Taking the garbage time stat to another level, our starters missed only 10 shots and got 2 offensive boards. Theirs missed 31 shots and grabbed 14 oboards. Considering Dunston's 9 in 38 minutes, I think you start to see how this stat is skewed by us going deep into the bench late in the game while they were still giving experience time to their stars.

[kchoya]

Jan 1, 2008 11:00:43 GMT -5 dove said:

lichoya is right . if a team like fordham can beat us on the boards,what's going to happen when we play a good team-oh wait we already played a good team and look what happened!

Way to ignore the fact that GU shot 56% overall and 52% from 3, while Fordham shot 27% overall and 28% from three. maybe that helped contribute to the 39-35 edge on the boards.

I'll take those kinds of numbers every game.

[hoyaboy1]

Jan 1, 2008 11:57:05 GMT -5 kchoya said:

Jan 1, 2008 11:00:43 GMT -5 dove said:

lichoya is right . if a team like fordham can beat us on the boards,what's going to happen when we play a good team-oh wait we already played a good team and look what happened!

Way to ignore the fact that GU shot 56% overall and 52% from 3, while Fordham shot 27% overall and 28% from three. maybe that helped contribute to the 39-35 edge on the boards.

I'll take those kinds of numbers every game.

I've said this before, but I think it needs repeating - it is easier to outrebound the other team when they shoot poorly, because basically every team gets greater than 50% of the available defensive rebounds.

[PopeJohn2]

Jan 1, 2008 11:57:05 GMT -5 kchoya said:

Jan 1, 2008 11:00:43 GMT -5 dove said:

lichoya is right . if a team like fordham can beat us on the boards,what's going to happen when we play a good team-oh wait we already played a good team and look what happened!

Way to ignore the fact that GU shot 56% overall and 52% from 3, while Fordham shot 27% overall and 28% from three. maybe that helped contribute to the 39-35 edge on the boards.

I'll take those kinds of numbers every game.

dude, the point was that our rebouding is a problem. how well we shot on offense is not relevant. its like saying we rebounded poorly but the game was a sellout.

the fact is we gave up 19 offensive rebounds. 19. no way to spin that into a positive.

[prhoya]

Where did the "ignore" feature go?

[HoyaSinceBirth]

the whole point about the shooting percentage and the offensive rebounding stats is that since we made so many shots we didn't have as many oppertunities to grab them than fordham did. that's the point of bring up the shooting percentages.

[hoyaboy1]

Jan 1, 2008 13:33:01 GMT -5 HoyaSinceBirth said:

the whole point about the shooting percentage and the offensive rebounding stats is that since we made so many shots we didn't have as many oppertunities to grab them than fordham did. that's the point of bring up the shooting percentages.

Yes, but this is only relevant in relation to offensive rebounds (and even there, Fordham had a much higher rate). When talking about overall rebounding numbers, the opponent shooting poorly should help the Hoyas, not hurt them.

[vamosalaplaya]

Fordham's shots - which were terrible - were bouncing so far off the rim at odd angles the whole game it is not clear to me that getting good rebounding position made much of a difference in many cases. There were a ton that went long off of badly taken three point shots that weren't even close. To that end, the number of missed shots, combined with the fact that the game was a rout from early on, makes this whole exercise a bit overwrought.

[SFHoya99]

While I agree the team basically turned off the effort about 12 minutes in, it isn't like the Fordham is the only evidence the rebounding is an issue. If anything, we should be saying that this game provided no evidence that anything has changed, and that our rebounding is still an issue. The team has to prove it has improved at this point.

[mapei]

I didn't see the Fordham game, but I saw Memphis and AU. In both of the two I saw we were not just outrebounded but outhustled when rebounds were there for the taking - the smallest player on AU's team got more boards than anyone on ours, for instance. And we were statistically weak rebounding in all three of those. Yes, we can come up with various excuses (all those missed shots had bad angles!), but I'd rather improve this part of our game. It's pretty much the only facet of the game where we're weak.

[lichoya68]

AGREE WITH POPE JOHN AND THE DOVE AND MAPEI no excuses need to rebound or itll kill us in the big easy no explanations etc.. NEED TO FREAKING REBOUND AND THATS about smarts positioning and hustle that and foul shots and as jt3 said this could be a SCARY TEAM YUP LIKE ALAMO SCARY rebbies.. the seven footer and foul shots g hoyas beat the scarlet knights at the rac NOT aneasy task

[OldHoyafan]

For those who saw the game, Summers got 9 rebounds today. Did he play the big forward position most of the time? Its been reported that in high school Summers played with his back to the basket. I would assume at center and big forward. Do you think the 9 rebounds was a result of his being familiar with the rebounding positioning for big forwards? He has had to learn the small forward position at Georgetown.

[Nevada Hoya]

Did you see those offensive rebs that Fordham got.? Most of thing were clangers that rebounded far over our heads. We had good position; it was just that the 3s that FU put up were over our heads and into their hands.