Will the Kings be the best rebounding team in the NBA?

CBB_Fan · Post #1 » by **CBB_Fan** » Mon Jul 16, 2012 3:31 pm

DeMarcus Cousins was the best offensive rebounder in the NBA last year (4.1 PG), and averaged 17.3 RP48, behind only Marcus Camby and Dwight Howard.

Tyreke Evans (when played as a point), averaged more RPG and RP48 than any PG in the NBA. He was second in both ORPG and DRPG. As a shooting guard, he still would have been around the top 10, as Vince Carter was #11 with the exact same RP48. He would have been 5th in ORPG and 4th in DRPG as a shooting guard.

James Johnson, recently acquired for a second round pick, is also a good rebounder. He was 13th for SFs in RPG, but 9th per 48.

Finally, Thomas Robinson is supposed to be the best rebounder in this class. As a sophomore, he was just behind Kenneth Faried in rebounding prowess (actually averaged a little more than Faried per minute), which is amazing because Faried is Division I's all-time leader in rebounds. Given that Faried averaged 7.7 RPG his rookie season, I think Robinson should reasonably average 7 RPG, with roughly the same number of minutes.

So, I see that the Kings should have great rebounders at every position but PG. Is there any way they aren't the best rebounding team in the NBA? And will that proficiency translate to wins?

RIPskaterdude · Post #2 » by **RIPskaterdude** » Mon Jul 16, 2012 4:36 pm

Since we'll probably shoot about 35% every game, you better hope so.

Post #3 » by **City of Trees** » Mon Jul 16, 2012 4:39 pm

xx_skaterdude_xx wrote:Since we'll probably shoot about 35% every game, you better hope so.

Haha dude you are all bent outta shape.

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk 2

LewisnotMiller · Post #4 » by **LewisnotMiller** » Tue Jul 17, 2012 1:59 am

Kinda depends how you measure rebounding, I reckon. If you go for straight rebounds per game, or if you look at percentage of available rebounds grabbed.

If you do the latter (which is a fairer representation, in a lot of ways) and you shoot a really crappy percentage at the offensive end, you probably trend down a bit in the rankings. Even a good offensive rebounding team will struggle to grab a high percentage of overall boards if there is too much action at the offensive end due to missed shots.

You'll be a good rebounding team, though, I would think. But you're likely to be terrible from the PG position if breaking it down. Brooks and Jimmer? Not many boards from there.

longfellow44 · Post #5 » by **longfellow44** » Tue Jul 17, 2012 2:02 am

The kings will be the best rebounding team in the league but we will be the worst defensively. our offense will be incredibly dysfunctional with the team scoring a lot but at very low effici ency which will allow us to get beat every night about 102 to 104. close enough to be exciting but still a loss.

Post #6 » by **pillwenney** » Tue Jul 17, 2012 2:22 am

We'll struggle getting a lot of defensive boards because the other teams won't be missing much.

SacKingZZZ · Post #7 » by **SacKingZZZ** » Tue Jul 17, 2012 3:05 am

And that's just it, hard to lead the league in rebounding when you go repeated possessions with none available on either end, from turnovers on one end and easy baskets on the other.

SacKingsPejaFan · Post #8 » by **SacKingsPejaFan** » Tue Jul 17, 2012 4:18 am

First, I don't think we will lead the league in rebounding unless our defense significantly improves. We were 30th in points allowed last year (by far) and 30th in opponent FG%. It's awfully hard to grab defensive boards when your opponents aren't missing. We were also 26th in FG% last year, but still a good rebounding team. Which says what? We caught a lot of our own misses. Yippee. We finished with 44 losses in a 66 game season.

Second, even if we do lead the league in rebounding...so what? The Jazz and T-Wolves were 3rd and 6th in rebounding last year, and look how much good that did for them.

Rebounding--especially in isolation--is not a stat to celebrate over.

CBB_Fan · Post #9 » by **CBB_Fan** » Tue Jul 17, 2012 4:46 am

SacKingsPejaFan wrote:First, I don't think we will lead the league in rebounding unless our defense significantly improves. We were 30th in points allowed last year (by far) and 30th in opponent FG%. It's awfully hard to grab defensive boards when your opponents aren't missing. We were also 26th in FG% last year, but still a good rebounding team. Which says what? We caught a lot of our own misses. Yippee. We finished with 44 losses in a 66 game season.

Second, even if we do lead the league in rebounding...so what? The Jazz and T-Wolves were 3rd and 6th in rebounding last year, and look how much good that did for them.

Rebounding--especially in isolation--is not a stat to celebrate over.

That was the last part of my question: will the rebounding proficiency create wins? If the answer is no, then why have the Kings made such an attempt to build around it?

LewisnotMiller · Post #10 » by **LewisnotMiller** » Tue Jul 17, 2012 5:38 am

Rebounding proficiency in isolation won't create wins. If you're a good transition team, then it can be important in creating points, but for that you need rebound & outlet & transition.

As an outsider, I kinda struggle to work out what the teams personality is going to be. Physical, I am hoping. Cousins, T-Rob and Johnson all seem to be okay with contact. And I don't see that you have enough transition ability or half-court finesse to win a cleaner game.

I dunno...you have talent, but I'm trying to see what your team persona could be. Maybe rebounding, and physical play in general, will help give your team an identity??

CBB_Fan · Post #11 » by **CBB_Fan** » Tue Jul 17, 2012 6:05 am

LewisnotMiller wrote:Rebounding proficiency in isolation won't create wins. If you're a good transition team, then it can be important in creating points, but for that you need rebound & outlet & transition.

As an outsider, I kinda struggle to work out what the teams personality is going to be. Physical, I am hoping. Cousins, T-Rob and Johnson all seem to be okay with contact. And I don't see that you have enough transition ability or half-court finesse to win a cleaner game.

I dunno...you have talent, but I'm trying to see what your team persona could be. Maybe rebounding, and physical play in general, will help give your team an identity??

My best guess is that they are trying to emulate the mentality of the Pistons in the Bad Boy era, if not the effectiveness. Win through bruising, physical play, rebound like crazy to make up for low FG%. If only ThRob was Dennis Rodman reincarnated...

LewisnotMiller · Post #12 » by **LewisnotMiller** » Tue Jul 17, 2012 6:37 am

CBB_Fan wrote:
LewisnotMiller wrote:Rebounding proficiency in isolation won't create wins. If you're a good transition team, then it can be important in creating points, but for that you need rebound & outlet & transition.

As an outsider, I kinda struggle to work out what the teams personality is going to be. Physical, I am hoping. Cousins, T-Rob and Johnson all seem to be okay with contact. And I don't see that you have enough transition ability or half-court finesse to win a cleaner game.

I dunno...you have talent, but I'm trying to see what your team persona could be. Maybe rebounding, and physical play in general, will help give your team an identity??

My best guess is that they are trying to emulate the mentality of the Pistons in the Bad Boy era, if not the effectiveness. Win through bruising, physical play, rebound like crazy to make up for low FG%. If only ThRob was Dennis Rodman reincarnated...

lol...yeah...
The other major issue you have is that you seem to have acquired talent based on offensive talent and physicality, rather than defensive talent and physicality. Although, I haven't seen a tonne of Sac recently.

I mean, I think Cousins was a great pick, and I liked the T-Rob pick (although his summer league play hasn't inspired me, but still...summer league, right?) Evans was initially a great pick. But somehow I just don't see how it is coming together? If DMC is the man, then you have to acquire players that support his skill-set, and the team persona.