• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

The Way Too Early KenPom Report

Wrangor said:
I understand why wilbekin started to begin the year but now we are getting to the time where a change is appropriate. It's pretty obvious that woods is better. Manning needs to make the move.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Has Manning been asked directly about this yet? Would be interesting to hear his coach-speak about it.
 
Deacsfan27 said:
Wrote a (rather long-winded) article on Keyshawn vs. Mitch.

TL;DR---we should be starting Key over Mitch.

http://www.bloggersodear.com/2016/1...-keyshawn-woods-mitchell-wilbekin-wake-forest
Click to expand...

Good article indeed. Yeah, from watching the games, I also thought that Wilbekin's main use is a spot up shooter and low-turnover player. Part of the reason he's low turnover though is because he just stands on the perimeter and receives passes and passes it back around the perimeter.

Woods is certainly a better player. Manning has his reasons right now though. It may be that he's loyal to Wilbekin and is making Woods justify why he should start. We'll see what happens comes ACC play.

Another theory may be that Manning likes playing waves of players. He tried this in the past but didn't really have the horses to do it. Now he feels he can stick Wilbekin in with the first team and not suffer much and then save Woods for the 2nd team where he can cut his teeth amongst 2nd wave players.
 
Last edited:
I think this biggest impact we would see over time is a more efficient Crawford with more playing time with woods. With woods and Arian on the wings, Crawford would have a lot more room to operate. Right now you can leave wilbekin to help and he isn't really going to hurt you. If you leave woods he is going to cause damage. I would rather tighten up our rotation and play our top 5 30+ minutes every night than worry about balancing our second unit. That may simply be a philosophical difference between manning and I but I have never been a large rotation type coach. Give 5 starters and 2-3 subs and the rest have to try and break into the lineup.

Fwiw manning has severely tightened his rotation this year from his first 2 and that is personally encouraging to me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Pilchard said:
A lot of assumptions made here, and not really backed up by the stats.

WF did not have a slow start in the NW game. WF led 12-5 4:30 into that game. WF led 24-16 with 8 minutes left in the 1st half, and WF led at half time.

Don't see how not starting hurts Woods' chemistry with the other starters. He is shooting an ungodly 57% from 3 and from 2; he is the team's 2nd leading rebounder, scorer and assist guy. He has been getting the ball in position to score, he is setting up his teammates, and he is helping on the boards. Hard to imagine a more seamless transition for him with his new team.

No one said Woods is a role player or one dimensional, and he is not getting treated as such, he is tied for the first team in minutes, playing 30 minutes a game. When you play that many minutes, it's impossible for him to be playing against 2nd team guys, but when he is, WF has a big advantage.

When, and if, WF starts struggling in the 1st 4 minutes of a game (which has not happened yet), there may be a reason to make an adjustment, but right now, really don't see any reason to mess with Woods since he is thriving in his current role.
Click to expand...

Lots of wrong things in this post.

First, leading doesn't equal "being hot." If you remember, we played like ass, as did Northwestern, as both teams limped to halftime. Basically the entire board knew we blew an opportunity to be up by a huge amount, instead we scored 31 points with some absurdly low shooting percentage. Northwestern missing a bunch of shots has zero to do with whether we were "hot."

Second, it's pretty crazy to say starting doesn't hurt chemistry with the other 4 players. Particularly when it's a player's first year playing live games with the team. Floor time with your 4 best matters - and Woods coming off the bench in both the first and second halves significantly reduces that time. There's really zero argument here - the argument is that his minutes are more valuable playing with other subs, which is a good argument.


The idea that Wake hasn't struggled in the opening 4 minutes of halves without Woods playing is... I mean... Not sure where to start with that one.
 
Breaking WF's games into 4 ten minute quarters, WF's best quarter is the first 10 minutes by far +45. WF worst is the last 10 minutes minus 5 (WF is +9 points in the first 10 minutes of the 2nd half).

Don't have the ability to break out the stats by 4 minute increments, but given those stats, hard to see support for the argument that WF is going to be at its worst in the opening 4 minutes of halves.

Not sure we were watching the same WF/NW game, WF controlled the NW game over the first 12 minutes; NW controlled that game in the last 5 minutes.
 
Wrangor said:
I think this biggest impact we would see over time is a more efficient Crawford with more playing time with woods. With woods and Arian on the wings, Crawford would have a lot more room to operate. Right now you can leave wilbekin to help and he isn't really going to hurt you. If you leave woods he is going to cause damage. I would rather tighten up our rotation and play our top 5 30+ minutes every night than worry about balancing our second unit. That may simply be a philosophical difference between manning and I but I have never been a large rotation type coach. Give 5 starters and 2-3 subs and the rest have to try and break into the lineup.

Fwiw manning has severely tightened his rotation this year from his first 2 and that is personally encouraging to me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

He's has basically been doing a 7 man rotation with about 10 mpg for Moore and McClinton. Without foul trouble, McClinton's minutes could easily wane.
 
Wrangor said:
I think this biggest impact we would see over time is a more efficient Crawford with more playing time with woods. With woods and Arian on the wings, Crawford would have a lot more room to operate. Right now you can leave wilbekin to help and he isn't really going to hurt you. If you leave woods he is going to cause damage. I would rather tighten up our rotation and play our top 5 30+ minutes every night than worry about balancing our second unit. That may simply be a philosophical difference between manning and I but I have never been a large rotation type coach. Give 5 starters and 2-3 subs and the rest have to try and break into the lineup.

Fwiw manning has severely tightened his rotation this year from his first 2 and that is personally encouraging to me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

That's basically the rotation I would use. Start Crawford, Woods, Arians, Dinos, Collins.

Only play Wilbekin with Crawford and Woods or Arians.
Only sub Childress for Crawford

In other words, don't play Childress and Wilbekin together. Use these rotations at the 1-3.
--Crawford, Woods, Arians (starters)
--Crawford, Wilbekin, Woods
--Crawford, Wilbekin, Arians
--Childress, Woods, Arians

I think Crawford needs to be the primary ballhandler when he's in the game and I don't trust Childress off the ball (not that I trust him with the ball either).

In the post:
Dinos/Collins as much as possible
Dinos/Moore when Collins is out
Collins/Moore in spots around TV timeouts

Use timeouts to give the bigs a break. Use McClinton sparingly at the 4 to rest Dinos. Avoid playing Arians at PF.
 
MichDeac25 said:
Good article indeed. Yeah, from watching the games, I also thought that Wilbekin's main use is a spot up shooter and low-turnover player. Part of the reason he's low turnover though is because he just stands on the perimeter and receives passes and passes it back around the perimeter.

Woods is certainly a better player. Manning has his reasons right now though. It may be that he's loyal to Wilbekin and is making Woods justify why he should start. We'll see what happens comes ACC play.

Another theory may be that Manning likes playing waves of players. He tried this in the past but didn't really have the horses to do it. Now he feels he can stick Wilbekin in with the first team and not suffer much and then save Woods for the 2nd team where he can cut his teeth amongst 2nd wave players.
Click to expand...
Manning seems to worry a lot about team dynamics....effort/reward kind of stuff....so I imagine Wilbekin is putting out the effort in practice and is getting rewarded in games. As long as Wilbekin doesn't have issues (game or practice), I bet he'll get the nod as the starter. If he goes into a slump, then I bet Woods will start.
 
PhDeac said:
That's basically the rotation I would use. Start Crawford, Woods, Arians, Dinos, Collins.

Only play Wilbekin with Crawford and Woods or Arians.
Only sub Childress for Crawford

In other words, don't play Childress and Wilbekin together. Use these rotations at the 1-3.
--Crawford, Woods, Arians (starters)
--Crawford, Wilbekin, Woods
--Crawford, Wilbekin, Arians
--Childress, Woods, Arians

I think Crawford needs to be the primary ballhandler when he's in the game and I don't trust Childress off the ball (not that I trust him with the ball either).

In the post:
Dinos/Collins as much as possible
Dinos/Moore when Collins is out
Collins/Moore in spots around TV timeouts

Use timeouts to give the bigs a break. Use McClinton sparingly at the 4 to rest Dinos. Avoid playing Arians at PF.
Click to expand...

Agree with this. Wish Manning did.
 
Up to 52, an improvement of 10 spots in the past 5 days. At this pace we'll be a top-10 team by New Year's.
 
Wake has a decent chance to move up a bit with a double digit win over Unc-G. That would set up a nice battle with Xavier where we will be around ten point road dogs.
 
One thing that will keep us in games and possibly help us win games that we shouldn't......Wake is currently tied for 15th in the NATION in free throw percentage (77.6%). That is something to be proud of.
 
Deacsfan27 said:
Wake has a decent chance to move up a bit with a double digit win over Unc-G. That would set up a nice battle with Xavier where we will be around ten point road dogs.
Click to expand...

I REALLY wish this game was at home this year.
 
Buckwild said:
One thing that will keep us in games and possibly help us win games that we shouldn't......Wake is currently tied for 15th in the NATION in free throw percentage (77.6%). That is something to be proud of.
Click to expand...

Just as the opposite was true over the last few years, our FT shooting is going to help us win some games this year.
 
Last night our best three guys at getting to the line (Collins, Dinos, and Crawford) went 16-18

Dinos - 7/7
Collins- 8/10
Crawford - 1/1

That will win some close games if those guys make their free throws.
 
Deacsfan27 said:
Last night our best three guys at getting to the line (Collins, Dinos, and Crawford) went 16-18

Dinos - 7/7
Collins- 8/10
Crawford - 1/1

That will win some close games if those guys make their free throws.
Click to expand...


It is particularly an advantage when the bigs who are working inside hit their free throws. At least some of those are "and ones" for old fashioned three point plays. High percentage on free throws from those guys leaves their defenders with a real dilemna: give up an easy layup or dunk, or foul to stop it, and give up an almost equally likely two points on made free throws. Or end up with the worst possible outcome, made basket plus a (likely made) free throw. With Collins skills around the basket and Dinos developing low block game, that combination is going to give a lot of teams difficulty.
 
Deacsfan27 said:
Wake has a decent chance to move up a bit with a double digit win over Unc-G. That would set up a nice battle with Xavier where we will be around ten point road dogs.
Click to expand...

We are ten point dogs? Their resume really is not very impressive. I don't see how it's any better than ours except for a 6 pt win against Clemson. I can only assume that their top 20 slot in Kenpom is driven more by preseason ratings than actual results.
 
WFU Lurker said:
We are ten point dogs? Their resume really is not very impressive. I don't see how it's any better than ours except for a 6 pt win against Clemson. I can only assume that their top 20 slot in Kenpom is driven more by preseason ratings than actual results.
Click to expand...
The RPI sites have us around a 4 point dog...with Xavier at 8-12 and us around 27.

Edit...my mistake...16 point dog!

http://realtimerpi.com/rpi_130_Men.html
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top