share

Rebounding Is Critical

rtbt
Registered User
Joined: 03/25/2009
Posts: 1602
Points: 709
Offline
Rebounding Is Critical

Most fans only pay attention to scoring. But if you read some of my previous posts, you know how I feel about rebounding which I think is crucial to the success of any team. Two rookies demonstrated this scoring vs rebounding paradigm in yesterday's Summer League Action.

Jon Brockman shot only 1 for 5 and scored 2 points.

Jordan Hill shot only 3 for 11 and scored a meager 8 points.

If you simply looked at their scoring you would think both guys were a major disappointment to their coaching staff. However, if you took the time to check out their rebounding stats, you would have learned that both coaches were extremely pleased with their production.

Jon Brockman had 15 rebounds in 32 minutes.

Jordan Hill had 12 rebounds in 28 minutes.

If given the opportunity, I think both players will make significant contributions to their teams this year.


Knicksboy34
Knicksboy34's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/07/2009
Posts: 2876
Points: -98
Offline
If you cannot score, you

If you cannot score, you cannot win.

You can find players every year who wants to hustle and grab rebounds..

sakuragi84
Registered User
Joined: 07/16/2009
Posts: 95
Points: 22
Offline
well the raptors are

well the raptors are terrible at rebounding and they didn't do very well last year. when marion came and helped rebounding from the wing, they started having a decent season from that point on. So I think rebounding is important like rtbt, and most people will agree. The problem is shooting 3 for 11 hurts the team and it's possible the rebounding stat is padded because he may have been picking up cheap offensive rebounds off his misses.

rtbt
Registered User
Joined: 03/25/2009
Posts: 1602
Points: 709
Offline
sakuragi84

sakuragi84, you and specerishawesome made some good points. I'm glad you realized that when Toronto couldn't rebound, they went nowhere.

As for their poor shooting, obviously that's a negative. However, coaches understand guys will occasionally have off nights when it comes to shooting, but rebounding is something you can count on every game.

As for the cheap offensive rebounds, it might be true, but I doubt it. Check out NBA box scores and you will rarely find a player who can grab 15 boards in 32 minutes or 12 boards in 28 minutes. In fact, last year there were only 6 players in the NBA who averaged 10 or more rebounds per game. That's just 6 players in the entire league!

So any time you have a guy who can come up with double digit rebounds, he is going to add value to your team. The ultimate example is Paul Milsap, who is very limited offensively, but worth his weight in gold to Utah.

It might sound obvious, but you can't score without the ball. On the defensive end of the court, nothing is more psychologically devastating then stopping the offense but allowing them to score on an offensive rebound.

Knicksboy34
Knicksboy34's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/07/2009
Posts: 2876
Points: -98
Offline
No, I don't like how are

No, I don't like how are trying to say rebounding is more important than scoring.

I disagree. I think you can find many good solid rebounders throughout the NBA. You called those players Franchise players. You called Rodman a Franchise player...Oakley a Franchise player

Rebounding is good to have at a point. I think having 2 solid rebounders ( 6-8 rebounds) are good.

You take Stats in a summer league game. But, I'm not paying a player who all he does is rebound big money.

In the NBA, Ben Wallace is making 15 mil, Paul Millsap is making 10 mil, David Lee wants 10 mil on a cap that is 57 mil? Sorry, 10 is a good #2 to a Franchise player money

IndianaBasketball
IndianaBasketball's picture
Registered User
Joined: 05/09/2009
Posts: 12827
Points: 24570
Offline
Obviously scoring is more

Obviously scoring is more important than rebounding, because you have to score to win the game. However, rebounding is critical because a great offensive team only shoots 50-51% FGs and 39% 3-PT max. Those are GREAT percentages, BUT still... A LOT of misses. Offensive rebounding gives your team 2ND CHANCE OPPORTUNITIES/POINTS and more possesions. As you know 2nd chance points, can determine the outcome of a game. Defensive rebounding takes 2nd chance points away from the other team while giving your team a chance to score. That's why I could see how a great rebounder may be just as or even more valuable than an decent scorer.

Knicksboy34
Knicksboy34's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/07/2009
Posts: 2876
Points: -98
Offline
That's why I could see how a

That's why I could see how a great rebounder may be just as or even more valuable than an decent scorer.

Umm..A GREAT rebounder is better than a DECENT scorer.

My issue is rtbt thinks rebounders are franchise players. I 100% disagree. I think a solid rebounder is good to have but at 10 mil? Nope.

rtbt
Registered User
Joined: 03/25/2009
Posts: 1602
Points: 709
Offline
Clarifications from RTBT

First, Tezo83 great points!

Second, I never said rebounding was more important than scoring. I said rebounding is more CONSISTENT because scorers have off nights while rebounding should be pretty much the same every game. Scoring and Rebounding are EQUALLY important and Tezo83 touched on many of the reasons.

Third, a great rebounder is every bit as valuable as a big time scorer. The best example in the game today is Dwight Howard who dominates the glass. I don't classify him as a great scorer. Even though they are equally valuable, I believe it's harder to find great rebounders than outstanding scorers. There are so many great scorers coming out of college every year, but only a handful of guys who clean the glass.

IndianaBasketball
IndianaBasketball's picture
Registered User
Joined: 05/09/2009
Posts: 12827
Points: 24570
Offline
Considering the definition

Considering the definition of a franchise player, a player who is only great at rebounding could NEVER be a franchise player. You don't build your entire team around a player that's great at rebounding lol. The NBA is a business, so a franchise player not only dominates on the court, he can fill arenas... They can put him on billboards, etc. You can't market around a player who's only great at rebounding lol. The same way you can't market around a hustle player, though they're valuable to a team. You can't sell out arenas by marketing your "great rebounder". The NBA is a business.

However, rebounding is a special skill. Teams know this. Fans may not notice it, but GM's, coaches and "FRANCHISE PLAYERS" lol notice it. You have to have a Paul Millsap, David Lee, Dennis Rodman, etc to win games. I don't think they're worth 10 million because of the nature of the business, but if they're truly a GREAT rebounder, then they're worth a good chunk of change IMO.

JordanC20
Registered User
Joined: 04/26/2009
Posts: 629
Points: -80
Online
I like Brockman I think he

I like Brockman I think he is the kind of player that can help a team win championships.

sakuragi84
Registered User
Joined: 07/16/2009
Posts: 95
Points: 22
Offline
tezo83, i agree that they're

tezo83, i agree that they're not worth $10 million but to be fair, but the amount of pure rebounders in the league has kinda diminished. JYD was a fan favourite in Toronto, we all noticed his ability to rebound.

kcboy49
Registered User
Joined: 03/12/2009
Posts: 36
Points: -22
Offline
look at demarre carrol

the grizzles drafted him just to be a juml yard dog and hustle and get boards

you only need3 or 4 scoring threats on the floor at a time and one hustle king

they are the glue to your team

also if that guy cant score hes a great player

rtbt
Registered User
Joined: 03/25/2009
Posts: 1602
Points: 709
Offline
tezo83 - definition of a franchise player

Tezo83, would you classify Dwight Howard as a franchise player? I do and his two most important skills are rebounding and shot blocking. He can score, but at this point in his career, that's not his forte. Although I agree with your general definition of a franchise player, there are always exceptions.

As for how much money a great rebounder makes, it all depends upon the market and how important he is to that team. I always say a core player for any team is a guy who

1. Has a skill or set of skills that is critical to the success of the team.
2. He cannot be replaced.

Therefore, if you have a guy who is a great rebounder and defender [or shot blocker], but he isn't a premier scorer, there's a pretty good chance you cannot replace him. Without his skills you know the team isn't going anywhere, then that player can command a large salary.

The first name that comes to mind is Paul Milsap. Many people who focus on scoring probably think he's vastly overpaid, but Jerry Sloan knows he cannot win without Milsap cleaning the glass. Apparently Portland felt the same way about him.

Knicksboy34
Knicksboy34's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/07/2009
Posts: 2876
Points: -98
Offline
Rtbt...Do you think David

Rtbt...Do you think David Lee and Paul Millsap should get 10 million because they rebound? Yes or No?

Knicksboy34
Knicksboy34's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/07/2009
Posts: 2876
Points: -98
Offline
Rtbt...Do you think David

Rtbt...Do you think David Lee and Paul Millsap should get 10 million because they rebound? Yes or No?

rtbt
Registered User
Joined: 03/25/2009
Posts: 1602
Points: 709
Offline
Knicksboy34

Please don't limit me to a simply yes or no. I don't see anybody reigning in your comments.

There are a lot of players in the NBA who are vastly overrated and over paid, not just rebounders. Look at Martin Gortat, he was a guy who barely played last year and look at the salary he commanded. Obviously he wasn't paid on production, he was paid because of his importance to the team. In other words, Orlando feels if Dwight Howards is injured, suspended, or cannot play for any other reason, they are finished without a competent back up center. Therefore, even though the guy barely played, for them, he is worth $5 million a year.

As for me personally, I don't think Lee or Milsap are worth $10 million per year. If I'm correct, Milsap got 4 years @ $8 million per year.

Even though Milsap is a better rebounder, I think David Lee is slightly more valuable because he is a decent threat to score. If it were up to me, I think he should get essentially the same contract as Milsap, $8 million per year. You don't find too many guys who put up double doubles almost every night, plus he's a consummate team player.

Dollar values for professional athletes are way out of whack in basketball and football. In baseball, a shortstop hitting 250 might command several million a year. I'm assuming it's because of his great defense, in other words, he's irreplaceable.

Knicksboy34
Knicksboy34's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/07/2009
Posts: 2876
Points: -98
Offline
Look at Martin Gortat, he

Look at Martin Gortat, he was a guy who barely played last year and look at the salary he commanded.

-No, He got 34 mil because noone signs for less then the MLE ( which is killing Basketball)

Even though Milsap is a better rebounder, I think David Lee is slightly more valuable because he is a decent threat to score. If it were up to me, I think he should get essentially the same contract as Milsap, $8 million per year

Millsap is making 10 mil this year.

Knicksboy34
Knicksboy34's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/07/2009
Posts: 2876
Points: -98
Offline
what are you talking about

what are you talking about irreplaceable? If the NBA had a legit Farm System, not one rebounder who could not score well would even get 8 mil

rtbt
Registered User
Joined: 03/25/2009
Posts: 1602
Points: 709
Offline
Knicksboy34 I don't understand your point

The Jazz made it official Friday, matching Portland's four-year, $32 million offer sheet to keep restricted free agent forward Paul Millsap in Utah. Although he will receive $10 the first year, the contract averages out to $8 million per year. I think he deserved that and as I said above, that's approximately what I think David Lee should get.

I don't understand your Martin Gortat point or logic. He received $5 million per year because of the reasons I mentioned. It obviously had nothing to do with performance because he barely played last season.

rtbt
Registered User
Joined: 03/25/2009
Posts: 1602
Points: 709
Offline
Knicksboy34

Knicksboy34, I'm beginning to wonder about your knowledge and understanding of basketball. You wrote, "what are you talking about irreplaceable? If the NBA had a legit Farm System, not one rebounder who could not score well would even get 8 mil."

Any good coach knows the extreme value of rebounding and that's why a great rebounder is so valuable. Do you think Jerry Sloan is stupid for paying Milsap $8 million per year? Jerry Sloan is one of the greatest coaches in NBA history and he understands the value of a guy like Milsap.

You and others can focus solely upon scoring, but teams cannot win unless they rebound well, both skill sets are important.

rtbt
Registered User
Joined: 03/25/2009
Posts: 1602
Points: 709
Offline
FutureoftheGame

FutureoftheGame, do you really believe Utah would make a major decision to pay Paul Milsap $8 million per year without first consulting with Jerry Sloan and getting his approval?

Narc
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 389
Points: 234
Offline
Sloan has been there for how

Sloan has been there for how long now...about 20-23 years...trust me he has a say in player movement and salary suggestions.

Knicksboy34
Knicksboy34's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/07/2009
Posts: 2876
Points: -98
Offline
Rtbt, I'm beginning to

Rtbt, I'm beginning to Question your knowledge and understanding of basketball period.

If the NBDL was more of a Farm league to the NBA, you would not see " rebound specialist" and block specialist getting paid big money because you would have lower paid big man developing and they would be brought up instead of paying. I think your thinking is a little screwed. I would not want to pay a pg who cannot score and a big man who cannot score because- scoring wins. Dennis Rodman was my favorite player all time but I would not pay him 10 million because- he rebounds well.

Like I said before, I rather have 2 good rebounders ( about 5-8 rebounds per game) for about 3 mil each then a 14rpg rebounder for 10 mil. In the NBA LAST SEASON, 68 players averaged at least 5 rebounds. 68 players! Now a 3rd of them averaged at least 8 rebounds.

In the NBA, IMO you cannot win without a good scorer. You do not need a BIG rebounder to win. You need some rebounding.

Plus you say Rebounding Wins alot? Who was 2nd in rebounding? Troy Murphy who makes 11 mil. Waste.

OldSkoolBasketball
OldSkoolBasketball's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/18/2009
Posts: 1863
Points: 2540
Offline
He's going to deserve that

He's going to deserve that money since he is replacing Boozer.

Narc
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 389
Points: 234
Offline
Troy Murphy might have been

Troy Murphy might have been 2nd, but Dwight Howard was first, and the magic as a team was 3rd in rebounding. The Champion Los Angles Lakers were first. Scoring is important, but if you can't rebound, you get less chance to score. Rebounding is just as important as scoring.

rtbt
Registered User
Joined: 03/25/2009
Posts: 1602
Points: 709
Offline
Knicksboy34 Please Read What I Write

KnicksBoy34, please read what I write. I never once claimed that rebounding by itself deserves a ton of money. Yes rebounding is critical, but your dollar value is based on your contribution to the team and how important you are to their success. I'm going to repeat what I said earlier in this threat and this is the key to garnering a big salary.

As for how much money a great rebounder makes, it all depends upon the market and how important he is to that team. I always say a core player for any team is a guy who

1. Has a skill or set of skills that is critical to the success of the team.
2. He cannot be replaced.

I don't think Troy Murphy qualifies in either 1 or 2 above. However, Utah and Coach Sloan obviously felt that P. Milsap fits into the categories described above.

ckowalski
Registered User
Joined: 06/11/2009
Posts: 404
Points: 89
Offline
I don't think he said

I don't think he said rebounding wins a lot, he said rebounding gives you more oppurtunities to win because you have the ball in your hands more often.

Narc
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 389
Points: 234
Offline
Ckowalski is

Ckowalski is right...rebounding gives you more opportunities because of the potential 2nd and 3rd chance points.

billyk
Registered User
Joined: 12/05/2008
Posts: 1017
Points: 546
Offline
Dennis Rodman in his prime

Dennis Rodman in his prime is worth 10 mil a year.... 91-92: 10 ppg 19 rebs 2 asst and All NBA defense (thats worth 10 mil a year)

Knicksboy34
Knicksboy34's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/07/2009
Posts: 2876
Points: -98
Offline
But our acting as if

But our acting as if Rebounding was super important.

If Gasol averaged 10 ppg, would they have won a title?

If Howard averaged 10 ppg would they have been in the Finals?

Nope.

But you gave me a list of guys like Dennis Rodman and Charles Oakley and said these guys are Franchise players....and they are just as important

If the NBA used the NBDL as a legit farm system, players like Troy Murphy, Paul Millsap ( 9 times outta 10) wouldn't have been offered 8,9 10 mil

rtbt
Registered User
Joined: 03/25/2009
Posts: 1602
Points: 709
Offline
Dennis Rodman

Let me get back to one of the points I was trying to make to KnicksBoy34. Dennis Rodman is an excellent example.

The manner in which the Pistons were put together made Rodman an irreplaceable core player that was sooooooo... critical to the success of the Pistons. But even with the same skill set, Dennis Rodman wouldn't be critical to a team such as the LA Clippers. Yes he would have high rebounding numbers but they wouldn't have the same impact. Therefore, Rodman playing with Detroit was so valuable that he commanded an extremely high salary. In today's league, Troy Murphy is a guy who isn't durable and his numbers really didn't result in his team being successful.

Narc
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 389
Points: 234
Offline
To be fair to Troy

To be fair to Troy Murphy...he does have other skills other than rebounding. And Paul Milsap has proven that he can play in the NBA, as an undersized power foward and all. Guys like Milsap, Undonis Haslem and Anderson Varejo all deserve to be in the league because of the one other intangible other than being just labeled as a good rebounder. That intangible being toughness and grit.

Knicksboy34
Knicksboy34's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/07/2009
Posts: 2876
Points: -98
Offline
Dennis Rodman is an

Dennis Rodman is an excellent example.

Yea he is but you think the Pistons would keep him over Dumars? Lambieer? Thomas? I dunno

rtbt
Registered User
Joined: 03/25/2009
Posts: 1602
Points: 709
Offline
Narc and Troy Murphy

Narc, Other than the fact that he can't play any defense, I'm not saying anything negative about Troy Murphy. He is obviously a guy who can both score and rebound which makes him valuable. I used him as an example only because his name was brought up by KnicksBoy34. And my point was simple, even though Murhpy had very good numbers, that production wasn't part of a winning team, therefore, he doesn't deserve as much money as someone on a better team.

Narc
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 389
Points: 234
Offline
Don't get me wrong, Troy

Don't get me wrong, Troy Murphy is vastly overpaid, I know this. No way he deserves 11 mil (I think) per season. I just think that its unfair to say that he belongs in the d-league, along with guys like Milsap.

Plus, I think that the D-League is a legit farm system. It just started in the early 2000's and it has produced some players already making to the NBA.

Knicksboy34
Knicksboy34's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/07/2009
Posts: 2876
Points: -98
Offline
Plus, I think that the

Plus, I think that the D-League is a legit farm system. It just started in the early 2000's and it has produced some players already making to the NBA.

Sorry Narc, a couple of players dont cut it. I think the NBA needs to give each team a NBDL team and allow players to develop.

For every Chris Anderson, there's a player like Gerald Green who needed more time.

My rule would be, You can come out of HS but play half the year in the NBDL

Narc
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 389
Points: 234
Offline
Sorry Narc, a couple of

Sorry Narc, a couple of players dont cut it. I think the NBA needs to give each team a NBDL team and allow players to develop.

The NBA doesn't have the financial resources to give every team in the NBA a D-League affiliate. They would have to go out and find business men willing to bite...and in todays economy that may not happen, with a minor league team. Its not easy creating a franchise.

Considering that the D-League isn't even 10 years old yet, they have done an excellent job IMO.

But that is a great rule for high school players having to play in the D-League first.

RSS: Syndicate content