- russianthistle
- Buff & Blue Club
Offline - Registered: 12/03/2019
- Posts: 163
Re: GW beats Navy Game
GWRising wrote:
If you look at the game, you will see we pulled off a rare feat. We won despite giving up 20 offensive rebounds, making 18 turnovers, shooting 54.5% from the line and giving up 20 points off turnovers and another 20 off second chances. If you told me those stats beforehand I would tell you we would lose 99 out of 100 times. Why did we win? We erased 15 shot attempts. Huge in a game where the other team had nearly 20 more attempts. That is truly rare.
To raise the ghost of Bobby Knight and many of his assistants, do you see a connection between all the blocked shots and the number of the offensive boards and associated with the points in the paint? Just asking.
- Long Suffering Fan
- Buff & Blue Club
Offline
- Registered: 7/23/2019
- Posts: 2,357
Re: GW beats Navy Game
I didn't understand the statement "in front of a packed "Miracle on 22nd Street" crowd. Attendance was a very disappionting 1,869, or to put it another way, the Smith Center was 63% empty. Now that it looks like we have a quality product on the Court, I hope the fanbase returns, because it does not appear to have happened yet.
- GWRising
- Buff & Blue Club
Offline
- Registered: 10/19/2019
- Posts: 2,025
Re: GW beats Navy Game
If you look at the game, you will see we pulled off a rare feat. We won despite giving up 20 offensive rebounds, making 18 turnovers, shooting 54.5% from the line and giving up 20 points off turnovers and another 20 off second chances. If you told me those stats beforehand I would tell you we would lose 99 out of 100 times. Why did we win? We erased 15 shot attempts. Huge in a game where the other team had nearly 20 more attempts. That is truly rare.
To raise the ghost of Bobby Knight and many of his assistants, do you see a connection between all the blocked shots and the number of the offensive boards and associated with the points in the paint? Just asking.
If the point is that we left our feet too many times and didn't box out on the D glass, stipulated.
- keithgreene
- Buff & Blue Club
Offline
- From: Tin Tabernacle Club Member
- Registered: 7/22/2019
- Posts: 176
Re: GW beats Navy Game
I didn't understand the statement "in front of a packed "Miracle on 22nd Street" crowd. Attendance was a very disappionting 1,869, or to put it another way, the Smith Center was 63% empty. Now that it looks like we have a quality product on the Court, I hope the fanbase returns, because it does not appear to have happened yet.
The majority of the empty seats were on the season ticket side of the court. The Navy seats section was also empty. The students have been supportive thus far.
- PKGW
- Buff & Blue Club
Offline
- Registered: 7/23/2019
- Posts: 440
Re: GW beats Navy Game
Agree Keith. Other than the game on Sat before Thanksgiving, the student side (lower middle) and upper has been fairy full. Definitely need more of the blue seats to show up. My rows have been mostly full but certainly not packed and the end zone mostly empty.
- Hugh
- Buff & Blue Club
Offline
- Registered: 11/05/2019
- Posts: 387
Re: GW beats Navy Game
I didn't understand the statement "in front of a packed "Miracle on 22nd Street" crowd. Attendance was a very disappionting 1,869, or to put it another way, the Smith Center was 63% empty. Now that it looks like we have a quality product on the Court, I hope the fanbase returns, because it does not appear to have happened yet.
Funny enough, a better product was partly why I didn't come to the game because I expected it to not be particularly competitive, which obviously was wrong. But I'm also not feeling very compelled to go out of my way (especially on weeknights) to see the likes of Navy, Coppin State, Bowie State, Alcorn State, and UMES for the rest of the month. But I'm looking forward to A10 games and plan to come to all of them.
- russianthistle
- Buff & Blue Club
Offline
- Registered: 12/03/2019
- Posts: 163
Re: GW beats Navy Game
If you look at the game, you will see we pulled off a rare feat. We won despite giving up 20 offensive rebounds, making 18 turnovers, shooting 54.5% from the line and giving up 20 points off turnovers and another 20 off second chances. If you told me those stats beforehand I would tell you we would lose 99 out of 100 times. Why did we win? We erased 15 shot attempts. Huge in a game where the other team had nearly 20 more attempts. That is truly rare.
To raise the ghost of Bobby Knight and many of his assistants, do you see a connection between all the blocked shots and the number of the offensive boards and associated with the points in the paint? Just asking.
If the point is that we left our feet too many times and didn't box out on the D glass, stipulated.
They always say that you are smarter than Knight. Get over your self.
- Gwmayhem
- Buff & Blue Club
Offline
- Registered: 7/22/2019
- Posts: 2,516
Re: GW beats Navy Game
My opinion is that the influx of three point shot attempts has led to an overall devaluing of offensive rebounds. Navy missed 16 three point attempts and many of their offensive rebounds are long rebounds which allowed them to reset their offense. Many still think of offensive rebounding as grabbing the ball around the rim and putting it back in for an easy two. Of course this can and does still happen but it's those long rebounds which do not necessarily lead to easy putbacks that have suppressed the overall value of offensive rebounding.
If you really want a stat that kept Navy in this game, it was that they made four more free throws than GW while taking 9 fewer attempts. 91.7% at the line vs. 54.5% at the line. This seemed to be the equalizer.
- GWRising
- Buff & Blue Club
Offline
- Registered: 10/19/2019
- Posts: 2,025
Re: GW beats Navy Game
To illustrate the point that offensive rebounds do kill you, a quick back of the envelop look at the GW-Navy box score is instructive.
20 points off of 20 offensive rebounds = 1 point per possession.
57 points on a minimum of 67 other possessions (this number of possessions is really higher because of FTs (56 shot attempts plus 11 turnovers) = 0.85 points per possession (this is even lower in reality)
The point is the conversion rate on offensive rebounds is higher and that's why offensive rebounds need to be eliminated to the extent possible.
Last edited by GWRising (12/08/2023 4:17 pm)