This team will live on rebounding

[RUBigFrank]

We are second in the Big Ten in rebound margin! This is more significant stat than our shooting percentage - although mediocre- rebounding will be our difference maker in additional shots for offense and stops on defense!


Rebounding Margin G Team Avg. Opponent Avg. Margin
1. Indiana 5 242 48.4 148 29.6 +18.8
2. Rutgers 6 286 47.7 178 29.7 +18.0
3. Wisconsin 7 288 41.1 186 26.6 +14.6
4. Purdue 6 226 37.7 169 28.2 +9.5
5. Ohio State 6 251 41.8 198 33.0 +8.8
6. Northwestern 6 229 38.2 188 31.3 +6.8
7. Maryland 7 276 39.4 240 34.3 +5.1
8. Nebraska 6 234 39.0 205 34.2 +4.8
9. Michigan State 7 271 38.7 243 34.7 +4.0
10. Illinois 7 269 38.4 244 34.9 +3.6
11. Minnesota 6 247 41.2 228 38.0 +3.2
12. Iowa 6 241 40.2 228 38.0 +2.2
13. Michigan 6 201 33.5 192 32.0 +1.5
14. Penn State 7 241 34.4 268 38.3 -3.9

 

[seels2662]

Boy if we don't beat PSU at least once this year we will never beat them.

 

[toby83]

those stats at this point don't mean much with the cream puff scheduling. if you look at the top teams here you will find at least couple games where they played a high school team and doubled them up on the boards.

NCAA BB Team Total Rebounding % (Rebound Rate)
More Team Stats...
Season:
Date:
Rank Team 2016 Last 3 Last 1 Home Away 2015
1 Rutgers 62.1% 60.7% 56.5% 61.9% 63.0% 45.0%
2 Indiana 61.8% 62.7% 64.9% 68.0% 54.0% 54.9%
3 Utah 61.7% 61.7% 60.5% 61.7% -- 52.7%
4 Wisconsin 60.8% 58.5% 62.9% 64.1% 58.1% 52.3%
5 N Carolina 60.0% 61.2% 59.4% 59.6% 60.2% 55.9%
6 S Methodist 59.5% 59.1% 52.7% 62.2% 56.8% 57.4%
7 Virginia 58.8% 54.4% 51.0% 62.1% 54.9% 53.2%
8 California 58.8% 55.4% 53.7% 59.2% 57.5% 54.5%
9 Ste F Austin 58.3% 58.3% 59.7% 59.7% 56.9% 51.2%
10 St Marys 58.1% 53.9% 51.9% 61.1% 53.7% 53.7%

 

[BillyC80]

I wonder how our Offensive Rebounding margin stacks up.

 

[RU-ROCS]

those stats at this point don't mean much with the cream puff scheduling. if you look at the top teams here you will find at least couple games where they played a high school team and doubled them up on the boards.

I agree. While the rebounding numbers are definitely encouraging compared to last year, RU should be trouncing such weak and vertically challenged competition on the boards. If we have a sizable rebounding advantage against Miami and SHU in the OOC schedule, that will be reason for excitement!

 

[winfield102]

I'd like to see the SOS of the other b1g teams to date. Anyone have an easier schedule so far? Are any comparable? What was our rebounding margin against our 10 worst opponents last year? -3 would be my guess.

 

[RUBigFrank]

O rebounding has been solid due to Freeman.

Trend may tighten as the competition amps up - but this is a very good trend. Significantly more important than our 3 PT. shooting.

Rebounding Offense G Rebounds Avg./G
1. Indiana 5 242 48.4
2. Rutgers 6 286 47.7
3. Ohio State 6 251 41.8
4. Minnesota 6 247 41.2
5. Wisconsin 7 288 41.1
6. Iowa 6 241 40.2
7. Maryland 7 276 39.4
8. Nebraska 6 234 39.0
9. Michigan State 7 271 38.7
10. Illinois 7 269 38.4
11. Northwestern 7 266 38.0
12. Purdue 6 226 37.7
13. Penn State 7 241 34.4
14. Michigan 6 201 33.5


Offensive Rebounds GP No. Avg.
1. Deshawn Freeman, Rutgers 6 24 4.0
2. Jae'Sean Tate, Ohio State 6 20 3.3
Caleb Swanigan, Purdue 6 20 3.3
Ethan Happ, Wisconsin 7 23 3.3
5. Michael Finke, Illinois 7 22 3.1
6. Ed Morrow Jr., Nebraska 6 18 3.0
7. Thomas Bryant, Indiana 5 14 2.8
8. Justin JACKSON, Maryland 7 19 2.7
9. Juwan Morgan, Indiana 5 13 2.6
10. Jordan Murphy, Minnesota 6 15 2.5
Mark Donnal, Michigan 6 15 2.5
Tyler Cook, Iowa 6 15 2.5
C.J. Gettys, Rutgers 6 15 2.5
Mike Williams, Rutgers 6 15 2.5
15. Candido Sa, Rutgers 6 13 2.2
Jordy Tshimanga, Nebraska 6 13 2.2
DJ Wilson, Michigan 6 13 2.2
Eric Curry, Minnesota 6 13 2.2
19. Mike Watkins, Penn State 7 15 2.1

 

[jellyman]

those stats at this point don't mean much with the cream puff scheduling. if you look at the top teams here you will find at least couple games where they played a high school team and doubled them up on the boards.

NCAA BB Team Total Rebounding % (Rebound Rate)
More Team Stats...
Season:
Date:
Rank Team 2016 Last 3 Last 1 Home Away 2015
1 Rutgers 62.1% 60.7% 56.5% 61.9% 63.0% 45.0%
2 Indiana 61.8% 62.7% 64.9% 68.0% 54.0% 54.9%
3 Utah 61.7% 61.7% 60.5% 61.7% -- 52.7%
4 Wisconsin 60.8% 58.5% 62.9% 64.1% 58.1% 52.3%
5 N Carolina 60.0% 61.2% 59.4% 59.6% 60.2% 55.9%
6 S Methodist 59.5% 59.1% 52.7% 62.2% 56.8% 57.4%
7 Virginia 58.8% 54.4% 51.0% 62.1% 54.9% 53.2%
8 California 58.8% 55.4% 53.7% 59.2% 57.5% 54.5%
9 Ste F Austin 58.3% 58.3% 59.7% 59.7% 56.9% 51.2%
10 St Marys 58.1% 53.9% 51.9% 61.1% 53.7% 53.7%

Consider this ... in 2015, RU's rebound % was 45% ... I do not know what rebounding % means, but I am going to assume that is absolutely PUTRID. Of course in many games we started a 6'6" Laurent at center, and had a 6'4" 2G as the power forward ... and at times had that 6'4" 2G as center, with the 6'2" Williams as power forward.

I am also going to assume that mid-50's % (55% to 58%) is solid to very good. So we presume that the current rebounding % is inflated due to a weak schedule, but if RU can sustain a 55% or better rebound % for the season, that would be a VAST improvement.

 

[FELONIOUSMONK]

Whatever it is we are having discussions here the likes of which had been dead and buried for this century and prior.

 

[BillyC80]

We lead the nation in Offensive Rebounding percentage, rebounding 46.7% of our misses. North Carolina is number two.

https://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-basketball/stat/offensive-rebounding-pct