The Atlanta Hawks are 28th in the League in Rebounds Per Game

[AHF]

We also averaged 43% shooting and 32% from 3 in those losses, which are right in line with the rest of our losses this season.

 

Personally, I think the rebounding is one of a number of different factors that can lead to victory or defeat.  Every offensive rebound is like a turnover so it is significant but it is only one facet of the game.  That can be offset with great D, great O, taking care of the ball, etc.  However, it reduces your margin for victory so that when you start shooting a bit worse or start turning the ball over a bit more suddenly those offensive rebounds prevent you from overcoming a slip somewhere else.  We have been great at overcoming the offensive rebounds but they are a drag on us and we get nothing of real value from giving those up schematically (unlike where giving up our own chances at offensive rebounds can help lead to better FG% defense, etc.).

[Guest]

There isn't one reason why we lost.

We shot poorly, gave up too many ORebs, defense was spotty, we didn't pass enough, too many bad TOs at the worse time, and the execution down the stretch left a lot to be desired.

[Admin]

There isn't one reason why we lost.

We shot poorly, gave up too many ORebs, defense was spotty, we didn't pass enough, too many bad TOs at the worse time, and the execution down the stretch left a lot to be desired.

 

, we didn't have Payne on the bench...

[Guest]

, we didn't have Payne on the bench...

Lol, that too.

[RandomFan]

Hrmm, this seems pertinent to the discussion at hand: it's an interview with one of our bench coaches Darvin Ham. I'm only clipping out the relevant parts, but it's a good overall interview about how the Hawks compare to that 2004 Pistons team that Ham was a member of.

 

http://www.sheridanhoops.com/2015/02/13/eisenberg-how-do-these-hawks-compare-with-the-2004-pistons/

 

 

Jacob Eisenberg: “The front court is interesting because while there is a similar talent overlap, the roles that the players perform are vastly different.”

Darvin Ham: “Of course Al and Paul are way different than Ben and ‘Sheed. But the way they play off of each other and the way they can switch up match-ups is similar. They can both switch on the smalls and do an above average job – a really good job – of keeping the guard in front of them if there’s a switch on the floor. The similarities are there.”

 

DH: “Our bench here is just like our bench was there.

- Pero (Antić) knows his role on defense and can knock down the perimeter shot like Mehmet Okur did.

 

JE: “The first thing people are going to be quick to point out with this comparison is that Al doesn’t protect the rim like Ben Wallace did. They are similar in terms of how important they are for the defense but are very different in how they use their talents.”

DH: “Absolutely. I think Al has made leaps and bounds in getting back comfortable physically. After the two injuries to both his pecks, physically you see the confidence when he goes in and attacks the rim. And defensively, his verticality and blocking shots at the rim, I think it’s amazing.

You know, nobody is a Ben Wallace. You’re talking about a four-time Defensive Player of the Year. But still, people would play off of Ben on the other end and you can’t do that with Al. There’s always a segment in comparing these individuals where it’s a little more on this side for this guy but it’s a little more on that side for the other guy. It balances out in the end.”

 

JE: “Without a rim protector on this team, the biggest strategy on defense has been as simple as just getting back. You’ve sacrificed offensive rebounds to prioritize getting back on defense. How important is that strategy to compensate for the lack of rim protection?”

DH: “It’s huge. It’s your first line of defense. What would you rather have: say 8-to-12 extra possessions where you’re not guaranteed to score or really getting back and preventing them from getting maybe 12-to-20 fast break points?

 

To me, the defensive element of getting back and getting our activity and energy there is crucial. In my opinion, the rim protector thing is a little overrated. As long as you’re moving and doing your work early, we’re able to compensate.

 

We have a systematic defense where if a guy gets broken down from the perimeter, there’s going to be a guy out to help there. And when that guy knows he’s going to have help behind him, he can come early and get into a good position. A charge is just as good as a blocked shot. Or verticality and protecting the net is just as good as a blocked shot. When that guy comes to help, that guy knows there’s someone else getting back to take his man off the glass. And then that guy back knows there’s someone else in help position to support if we have to close out on a perimeter shot. Systematically, our guys have the utmost confidence. Coach Bud has done a great job hitting home and establishing our defensive system with practice and film. You look at the rim protector thing, some of these teams with these quote-unquote ‘rim protectors’ are the teams giving up the most points in the paint just because they’re relying on that one guy to stop whoever’s driving in there. We don’t want to be like that. We want to score like a team and defend like a team. If you look at it, it’s worked out pretty well up to this point.”

[benhillboy]

Very impressive winning the rebounding battle by 5 (even in blocks and +8 in paint points as well) over Milwaukee, even though they average virtually the same amount of boards as we do, they're one of the longer teams. They played 5 guys at 6"10' and over, we played 2.

Edited February 23, 2015 by benhillboy

[Diesel]

The problem with this type of rebounding is that we are basically wholeheartedly relying on efficiency.  We are saying as long as our offense remains efficient and our defense gets stops and gets the ball at least half of the time, we will win.  It looks good on paper until we play a good defensive team who goes after offensive boards (cough Chicago.. cough cough.).  Our winning is going to be tied to effort because when the shots aren't falling, we will have to hope that our defense still gets stops and gets the ball...  That's going to come down to the effort of Horf and Sap.  You would like to be in a better place in the playoffs.  Namely, having that guy who will go out and get the boards.

[macdaddy]

The problem with this type of rebounding is that we are basically wholeheartedly relying on efficiency.  We are saying as long as our offense remains efficient and our defense gets stops and gets the ball at least half of the time, we will win.  It looks good on paper until we play a good defensive team who goes after offensive boards (cough Chicago.. cough cough.).  Our winning is going to be tied to effort because when the shots aren't falling, we will have to hope that our defense still gets stops and gets the ball...  That's going to come down to the effort of Horf and Sap.  You would like to be in a better place in the playoffs.  Namely, having that guy who will go out and get the boards.

 

It doesn't just look good on paper.  It's looked damn good on the court (cough 44-12 cough.cough).   It sounds good to say the playoffs are all about defense and rebounding but in reality they are every bit as much about making shots which is something the Hawks sucked at before Bud got here.

[benhillboy]

The problem with this type of rebounding is that we are basically wholeheartedly relying on efficiency. We are saying as long as our offense remains efficient and our defense gets stops and gets the ball at least half of the time, we will win. It looks good on paper until we play a good defensive team who goes after offensive boards (cough Chicago.. cough cough.). Our winning is going to be tied to effort because when the shots aren't falling, we will have to hope that our defense still gets stops and gets the ball... That's going to come down to the effort of Horf and Sap. You would like to be in a better place in the playoffs. Namely, having that guy who will go out and get the boards.

Chicago is only a good defensive team with Rose on the bench. They're much better served with Brooks playing the same amount of minutes bringing pressure and better three point shooting.

I just don't see the rebounding, size, and late scoring concerns that are hashtags for this squad. The main concern with this team is defending the three point line, that's it. And Pero's shooting.

Edited February 23, 2015 by benhillboy

[Guest]

Just had to share what Sekou said re. the Hawks playoff prospects, rebounding woes, etc.

 

- Said Millsap/Horf are as big a matchup nightmare for opposing bigs as people assume other bigs will be for the Hawks.

- Said they can go to the basket, play in the post, play in the midrange, extend out to the 3 and can defend all other bigs effectively.

- Rebounding woes are more reflective of the smalls than the bigs but they haven't been as big a deal as other say it will be (or STTE).

 

Long story short he dispelled all the myths from all the eggsperts.  Was totally homerific but I loved it anyways.

[Guest]

Just had to share what Sekou said re. the Hawks playoff prospects, rebounding woes, etc.

- Said Millsap/Horf are as big a matchup nightmare for opposing bigs as people assume other bigs will be for the Hawks.

- Said they can go to the basket, play in the post, play in the midrange, extend out to the 3 and can defend all other bigs effectively.

- Rebounding woes are more reflective of the smalls than the bigs but they haven't been as big a deal as other say it will be (or STTE).

Long story short he dispelled all the myths from all the eggsperts. Was totally homerific but I loved it anyways.

Yep, I've said it before, when other teams SF/SG rebound that's where we suffer. Lance and PG killed us in the Indy series with their rebounding. Same with DeRozan and Toronto.

[benhillboy]

It's official, this team has no weaknesses. The way they hit the offensive glass this series versus the 4th highest defensive rebounding team in the regular season was exceptional.

This was a hot topic of debate during the season, everyone wondered how we would overcome it knowing our style of play. But Bud sacrificed his philosophy of getting back in transition to get us many more possessions when we needed them most. Shooting like dogs plays a part, but it's much more heart involved.

The team conquering their Achilles against two much bigger teams in these playoffs has me thinking the hardest part is over.

Edited May 16, 2015 by benhillboy

[Bonkers]

It's official, this team has no weaknesses. The way they hit the offensive glass this series versus the 4th highest defensive rebounding team in the regular season was exceptional.

This was a hot topic of debate during the season, everyone wondered how we would overcome it knowing our style of play. But Bud sacrificed his philosophy of getting back in transition to get us many more possessions when we needed them most. Shooting like dogs plays a part, but it's much more heart involved.

The team conquering their Achilles against two much bigger teams in these playoffs has me thinking the hardest part is over.

Man u don't know how wrong u were and how right I was lol

[Bonkers]

Again I was 100% right!!!!!!

[Alex]

Rebounding doesn't matter!?!

I guess it matters when you get rebounded by 15 and allow 20 offensive rebounds to your opponent.

[Bonkers]

A lot of folks in this thread exposed their low BBall IQs

[devilwentdown2GA]

Rebound must be addressed this offseason. it has absolutely killed us this series.

[yungsta]

they are DESTROYING us on the offensive glass. There is no other series that screams we need a legit big than this one. 

[Dnice]

Got by but caught up with them.

[Bonkers]

Yep