Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from PHX85014. Show PHX85014's posts

    Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction

    In Response to Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction:
    [QUOTE]concord27 is saying the Celts didn't address this problem. Not totally true. By removing Ray and JO the Celts got younger. That means more hustle from younger players. Celts have more chance of getting those 50-50 balls with Lee and Wilcox, Bass, or even Sully than if the Celts had Ray and JO with Pierce, KG, and Rondo.  The main reason why the Celts didn't get a big who can rebound, like Kris Humphries, is because the Celts simply couldn't afford them. Humphries got 12m per and Ilyasova got 9m per. Totally out of the Celts price range. The only way the Celts could have gotten those players is if the Celts renounced all their FAs to free up cap room. Overall the Celts got better in rebounding by just becoming a younger team. Right now it's true the Celts will not be like the Lakers when it comes to rebounding. But as long as the Celts are a decent rebounding team, then the Celts will always be a threat to every NBA team on any given night.
    Posted by Fiercest34[/QUOTE]

    QUESTION: WHO WILL BE THE BETTER $9M/pr FREE AGENT SIGNING: JEFF GREEN OR Ilyasova ? Is Ilyasova hyped or is he really a bigtime power forward ?
    And would Ilyasova be a better fit with the Celtics than Jeff Green ?


     
     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from PuPirate. Show PuPirate's posts

    Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction

    In Response to Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction : QUESTION: WHO WILL BE THE BETTER $9M/pr FREE AGENT SIGNING: JEFF GREEN OR Ilyasova ? Is Ilyasova hyped or is he really a bigtime power forward ? And would Ilyasova be a better fit with the Celtics than Jeff Green ?  
    Posted by PHX85014[/QUOTE]

    ...Green

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction

    In Response to Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction : QUESTION: WHO WILL BE THE BETTER $9M/pr FREE AGENT SIGNING: JEFF GREEN OR Ilyasova ? Is Ilyasova hyped or is he really a bigtime power forward ? And would Ilyasova be a better fit with the Celtics than Jeff Green ?  
    Posted by PHX85014[/QUOTE]

    What is better Green, Bass and Terry

    Or Ilyasova and Pietrus?
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Gasthoerer. Show Gasthoerer's posts

    Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction

    In Response to Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction:
    [QUOTE]The main reason why the Celts didn't get a big who can rebound, like Kris Humphries, is because the Celts simply couldn't afford them.
    Posted by Fiercest34[/QUOTE]

    Correct!

    In Response to Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction : It was so frustrating watching Ray just let an opposing player get an offensive rebound because he was not boxing out. And as far as I can remember, I never saw Ray dive for a loose ball.
    Posted by Fiercest34[/QUOTE]

    Watch the games without you Anti-Ray glasses! I (and other here as well) saw Ray diving for lose balls last post season and also saw him grabbing crucial rebounds in the crunch time which won a game for us. Ray is not a worse rebounder that AB and had good rebounding #'s in last years playoffs.

    In Response to Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction : Pierce, Ray, and KG's rebounding numbers all went down starting in 2010. The stats are consistent, as the Big 3 grew old, they got worse in the rebounding department. Posted by Fiercest34[/QUOTE]

    Just checked the stats and for the regulas season. For me it is difficult to make this jugment based on the stats of Ray and Pierce especially if you consider the minutes per game. At least the trend is very weak and cannot explain our total drop.

    In Response to Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction : In the 10 games that Ray started in the playoffs, the Celts only won the rebounding battle twice, Game 6 against the Sixers and Game 3 against the Heat. When Bradley was starting, the Celts outrebounded the Hawks in 3 of the 6 games of the series. They also outrebounded Philly in 2 of the first 4 games when Bradley was still starting. So without Bradley the Celts went 2-8. With Bradley the Celts went 5-5.
    Posted by Fiercest34[/QUOTE]

    You really think that is caused by the 2 boards/game by AB and his nose for lose balls? There is no correlation with the opponents getting better as you make a deeper run to the playoffs, KG being gased in the last games or Pierce getting injured and could't board to save his life (especially against James)? It is all AB vs. Allen, really? Wow, what an effect AB on our rebounding has in 25 minutes/game and with 2 bad shoulders.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction

    Actually I checked the stats and fierce is wrong on this one. The big 3 rebounded at practically the same rate the last 3 years as they did their first 2 years here. Pierce was exactly the same. The others saw a drop of less than 1 rebound per 36 minutes.

    Yes they were all more injured starting with KG in '09 then they were prior to that. Meaning less talented backups got more mins. But when they were on the court doc played them at practically the same rate and they rebounded at the same level showing this idea that they didn't hustle and were just too old to be false.

    Big 3 reb's per 36 mins '08-'09

    KG - 10
    PP - 5.2
    Ray - 3.6

    Big 3's reb's per 36 mins '10-'12

    KG - 9.5
    PP - 5.2
    Ray - 3.3

    I guess I was right when I put the onus more on the different supporting cast, playing in the same system that didn't put a high emphasis on rebounding, instea dof this 'big 3 got old' theory. although of course I assumed that had something to do with it, yeah all of 1 rebound a game....
     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from PuPirate. Show PuPirate's posts

    Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction

    In Response to Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction : Why do you compute for per 36 mins when what you should be computing is actual stats. You're manipulating the facts! 2007-08  KG - 9.2 rpg Pierce - 5.1 rpg Ray - 3.7 rpg 2008-09 KG - 8.5 rpg Pierce - 5.6 rpg Ray - 3.5 rpg 2009-10 KG - 7.3 rpg Pierce - 4.4 rpg Ray - 3.2 rpg 2010-11 KG - 8.9 rpg Pierce - 5.4 rpg Ray - 3.4 rpg 2011-12 KG - 8.2 rpg Pierce - 5.2 rpg Ray - 3.1 rpg Now tell me if the Big 3's numbers in rebounding didn't go down since 2009. Seriously, why are you using per 36 mins when you can use the actual rebounds per game.
    Posted by Fiercest34[/QUOTE]

    ...(sigh) As usual smh 
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction

    The per 36 minute stat is used to show what the player produces if given an average of 36 minutes a game... it shows that the players ability to get rebounds in the actual minutes they were on the court barely decreased from '08-'11

    It was more the mixed-matched moving chairs of a supporting cast than the big 3 to blame for that HUGE 3 rebound drop-off that you love to point out is the be all end all # to determine a title contender

    it was injuries and not rebounds that killed us
     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction

    In Response to Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction : That's not true. In Game 7 of the 2010 Finals, the Lakers outrebounded the Celtics 53-40. The Celts allowed the Lakers to get 23 offensive rebounds in that game. Last season against the Heat, the Celts only outrebounded the Heat once, in Game 3, in that 7-game series. In the history of the NBA, no team has won a championship averaging less than 40 rebounds per game in the regular season. The Celts came close in 2010 when they just averaged 38.6 rpg. But in Game 7 of that 2010 Finals, rebounds was their downfall. You really expect to win a Game 7 if you give up 23 offensive rebounds? Also, you can't use per 36 mins on the Big 3. There were seasons when Ray and Pierce averaged more than 36 minutes per game. Use actual stats.
    Posted by Fiercest34[/QUOTE]

    so the game 7 celtics should blame the -13 rebounds and not their missing center and two HOFers playing on one leg?

    and of course the insane FT disparity and phantom calls

    we will never agree on this

    but you CANNOT say it is 'not true'

    I at least say rebounding was an issue, a distant 3rd, but still an issue... you can't speak in absolutes on this, and if you think rebounding was more of a problem for this team the past 3 years than injuries you need to...

    PUT THAT COFFEE DOWN!
     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from mbrann. Show mbrann's posts

    Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction

    Question -- if a player grabs a "loose ball"...does this count as a rebound? For example, if the ball bounces off the rim or backboard and then bounces on the floor and is then grabbed by a player.
     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from mbrann. Show mbrann's posts

    Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction

    Makes sense...a rebound signals a new posession...it does not matter how it came about. So it's not all about height...speed, energy(youth) and enthusiasm help a lot. I keep hoping that Doc will...one of these years...limit the minutes of the Big Old 3 (now the Big Old 2) so that PP and KG can be fresh at the end.
     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction

    In Response to Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction:
    [QUOTE]rame I did more research.  This is what I found out: When the Celts were going back to LA, they were leading the series against the Lakers 3-2. The result was a blowout, the Celts lost by 22 in Game 6. Lakers 52 rebounds, Celtics only 39 rebounds in that Game 6. Last season the Celts were leading the Heat 3-2 in the ECF heading back to Boston. The Celts could've closed out the series in Boston. But the result was a 19-point victory by the Heat. Miami also outrebounded the Celts, 44-34, in that Game 6. No rebounds, no rings! 
    Posted by Fiercest34[/QUOTE]

    you can supply all the stats that everyone already knows...

    if you think we lose to LA with the series tied 1-1 with Ray not having a bruised up leg/charlie horse or up 3-2 and Perk not going down within minutes of game 6 or if KG never needed surgery the year before, ur kidding yourself

    if you think we lose to Miami with Bradley, Green and Wilcox in the series, or Ray/Pierce not being hurt at all you are kidding yourself as well.

    Injuries come before rebounding issues my friend, there is no way around it

    we win the series and the '10 and likely '12 title if we have no injuries... the rebounding issues were caused both by those injuries and Danny putting together a lineup that did not rely on rebounding as its main strength, but when everything was going right it did not matter that they were 38-39 reb teams...

    they would have won if they were healthy

    FACT
     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction

    So basically Pierce in '08 and Bynum in '10 are the same thing

    you blame player effort going after the boards (or a lack of a player with reb skills on he team) and I say injuries are a BIGGER PROBLEM. It is quite clear to say that if player A.B,C and D were not hurt a team leading through 3 quarters of TWO game 7's likely advances..

    And I am right, obv. injuries happen, injuries to the C's happened and kept them from winning, so you saying the teams didn't deserve to win b/c they didn't huslte, were too short and Danny didn't make _________ unknown move to help are all negative cowardly excuses when the injury 'excuse' was clearly the BIGGER obstacle to a title.

    If LA lost in '10 they could point to Bynum's injury (that really only limited him in 1-2 games) as a reason, b/c it prob would've been a contributing factor, or Kobe's 6-24 when he was not hurt (Ray's 4-28 was obv. due to an INJURY). Many teams got to raise banners b/c they were healthy, many teams were going home ringless b/c injuries happened... we are talking about the bigger reason we lost.

    complaining about 50-50 balls, the fact that we depending on a fat headcase who sat behind the 3 line or a fat 6'7" PF with alligator arms is neither here nor there, that was a title team without injuries and the '12 squad prob was as well
     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from BynumizaHERO. Show BynumizaHERO's posts

    Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction

    In Response to Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction:
    [QUOTE]So basically Pierce in '08 and Bynum in '10 are the same thing you blame player effort going after the boards (or a lack of a player with reb skills on he team) and I say injuries are a BIGGER PROBLEM. It is quite clear to say that if player A.B,C and D were not hurt a team leading through 3 quarters of TWO game 7's likely advances.. And I am right, obv. injuries happen, injuries to the C's happened and kept them from winning, so you saying the teams didn't deserve to win b/c they didn't huslte, were too short and Danny didn't make _________ unknown move to help are all negative cowardly excuses when the injury 'excuse' was clearly the BIGGER obstacle to a title. If LA lost in '10 they could point to Bynum's injury (that really only limited him in 1-2 games) as a reason, b/c it prob would've been a contributing factor, or Kobe's 6-24 when he was not hurt (Ray's 4-28 was obv. due to an INJURY). Many teams got to raise banners b/c they were healthy, many teams were going home ringless b/c injuries happened... we are talking about the bigger reason we lost. complaining about 50-50 balls, the fact that we depending on a fat headcase who sat behind the 3 line or a fat 6'7" PF with alligator arms is neither here nor there, that was a title team without injuries and the '12 squad prob was as well
    Posted by rameakap[/QUOTE]

    What a moron. Wasn't 2010 when Kobe played with a torn ligament in his shooting hand and broken pinky finger for the ENTIRE season including that game 7 in which his team won the title? Not to mention the other injuries incurred throughout that year. You need to research more before you post, as you look very foolish.

    http://dimemag.com/2010/01/kobe-bryants-mounting-injuries-raising-red-flags/
     

Share