RealGM

I didn't watch the Bucks game. Obviously, it was a great game, a blowout, etc.

But if you look at both the offensive and defensive rebounding percentages, they were not good at all. Was that just a byproduct and acceptable price of something about defensive schemes, shot selection, and so on? (E.g., long offensive rebounds off of bricked Milwaukee 3s.) Or was it a genuine blemish on an otherwise outstanding performance?

The ball took a weird bounce from the Bucks missing so wildly.
I mean seriously the ball just avoided the rim, and went back into their hands.

There were a lot of weird bounces and the Bucs missed so many shots that the game pattern when the Celts were on D was out of kilter.

Plus the Celtics play such aggressive defense on the perimeter that they are not a great board-crashing team. With the Bucs missing their bigs I suspect that they had been told to crash the boards themselves.

KG rebound numbers are down for obvious reasons so if Perk is not scooping at a high rate then rebounds can be a Celtic weakness.

PJ Brown's toughness on the boards gave a glimpse of his playoff value IMO (4 assists too).

There were a lot of rebounds in this game that went long. I was amazed at how many went out to half court or in the corner. Not all that many came off the rim for the the bigs to grab inside.

They have not been able to "get a booty on a brother". But, if they keep scoring at a high percentage and playing good D, it won't matter.

doc attributed it to the long rebounds

he said the guards got alot of those boards, just the way the ball bounced tonight i suppose