• 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!

Danny Manning Credibility Watch

TownieDeac said:
These stupid stats debates always ignore the important differences between descriptive and predictive stats. Anyone who has played a sport knows what it's like to be hot. I know when I see someone (or especially myself) sink a three or nail a drive it helps me visualize doing the same which helps to do the same. Once you've done it a few times, confidence helps your muscle memory, you can be less tight, etc. None of those effects are captured in descriptive statistics. Still, stats are useful in a predictive sense because you can say someone who is hot is likely not to stay hot forever. The larger the sample size the better the predictive capabilities. It's really not rocket science.
Click to expand...

maxresdefault.jpg
 
BamaDeac said:
I think we will have a better idea about after both Xavier and LSU. However, I think the picture will become much "clearer" roughly a little over half way through the ACC season. Unlike last season, we don't open up the first half of our conference schedule against "Murder's Row" (5 games against ranked teams, NCSU which is always a tough game, and at VTech which I don't remember the last time we won at their place). This season first 11 games:

Home: Clemson, BC, #7 UNC, Miami, #5 Duke, GTech
Away: FSU, #14 UVA, NCSU, Syracuse, BC

Personally, I think it's reasonable to expect to win 4 of the home games (Clemson, BC, GTech, and 1 against the other 3). On the road, I think 2 wins are possible (BC, and either 1 against FSU, Syracuse or NCSU). I do think the Syracuse game is very interesting because of their 2-3 zone, and is possible to win if we can shoot the 3 like we have at times in earlier games this season.

That would put us around 6-5, or maybe 5-6 with 7 games left, and hopefully the team can build confidence (something that no team within this Program has had in the previous 6 seasons) knowing that they can win against these teams and finish the season strong.

I think the question is what is the expected/"excepted" ACC record this season? Personally, with the favorable schedule I think anything less than 7 wins would be disappointing, 8-9 wins would be enough for me to see progress. Assuming we finish the non conference with a 9-3 record (don't see us beating Cavier on the road), and 17-13 or 18-12 we would be a lock for the NIT.

What do y'all think is considered acceptable this season?
Click to expand...

At this point, an acceptable season would be just a winning season. Last year we started out 9 - 3 and finished 11 - 20. Don't forget, we had several good wins in OOC before getting molested in conference. In the end, I think we finish with 16 wins and miss the post season again.

I think next year we will finally take a big step forward and make the NIT with 19 wins.
 
Any season that Wake does not make the NCAA tournament has to be considered is a failure.
 
wakelaw13 said:
After 80 pages do we have any idea whether he's credible yet?
Click to expand...
LOL...define credible.

He can definitely recruit.
He's definitely able to coach up the big men which means he will attract even better recruits and it of course makes the team better.
The players have better fundamentals...eg FT shooting is no longer an issue.
He's a great representative for the school.
In-game coaching seems to be the issue for many, but I think a lot of that is team building........eg the rotations have tightened up a lot (7-man + 2).
Defense remains the one hole IMO.

That's pretty credible to me.
 
Last edited:
pourdeac said:
LOL...define credible.

He can definitely recruit.
He's definitely able to coach up the big men which means he will attract even better recruits and it of course makes the team better.
The players have better fundamentals...eg FT shooting is no longer an issue.
He's a great representative for the school.
In-game coaching seems to be the issue for many, but I think a lot of that is team building........eg the rotations have tightened up a lot (7-man + 2).
Defense remains the one hole IMO.

That's pretty credible to me.
Click to expand...

I feel that the turnovers have not been as big an issue so far this season as with teams in the past...

also a result of better recruiting and better team building.

I honestly cannot begin to understand how people are still trying to compare the person that was last considered our coach to the man in his position now.

Danny did more for the correction of this program before he took a step on campus than bzzkill did during his whole tenure here.
 
pourdeac said:
LOL...define credible.

He can definitely recruit.
He's definitely able to coach up the big men which means he will attract even better recruits and it of course makes the team better.
The players have better fundamentals...eg FT shooting is no longer an issue.
He's a great representative for the school.
In-game coaching seems to be the issue for many, but I think a lot of that is team building........eg the rotations have tightened up a lot (7-man + 2).
Defense remains the one hole IMO.

That's pretty credible to me.
Click to expand...

You just described Mark Gottfried. Do you consider him a credible coach?

I agree in saying that Manning was an improvement over Bz, but he is starting year 3 in which he has only won 24 games in 2 years. For comparison, Bz won 21 games his first two years. Marked improvement?
 
Why does Gottfried's name get dropped as if he's NC State's [Redacted] over here?

Considering the state of the program dating all the way back to last season, 4 NCAA appearances in 5 years with 2 Sweet 16 appearances sounds pretty damn good. I'd love to "underachieve" like that.
 
Gottfried is a great representative of the school? Yeah until he gets the hots for a player's girlfriend.
 
RaleighTriad said:
You just described Mark Gottfried. Do you consider him a credible coach?

I agree in saying that Manning was an improvement over Bz, but he is starting year 3 in which he has only won 24 games in 2 years. For comparison, Bz won 21 games his first two years. Marked improvement?
Click to expand...

Yes. I describe Gottfried as a credible coach.
 
canadiandeac said:
I feel that the turnovers have not been as big an issue so far this season as with teams in the past...

also a result of better recruiting and better team building.
Click to expand...

True. And turnovers as SO correctable. Manning clearly made that point to Crawford after the Northwestern fiasco. But what I am really digging about this team is the dramatically improved FT shooting. We'll see how this plays out during the conference season (when pressure to make late game FT's will be greater) ... but I am very encouraged in the early going. Feeling pretty confident when Keyshawn, Wilbekin, Dinos, Arians or Childress goes to the line.
 
RaleighTriad said:
You just described Mark Gottfried. Do you consider him a credible coach?

I agree in saying that Manning was an improvement over Bz, but he is starting year 3 in which he has only won 24 games in 2 years. For comparison, Bz won 21 games his first two years. Marked improvement?
Click to expand...
Well he's been in the tournament 4 of the last 5 years including 2 Sweet 16s so....sure. Isn't that kind of the actual goal?

As for that list describing him....I don't see it that way at all. He hasn't really coached up anyone that I've seen and the players have OK fundamentals, often making pretty poor mental mistakes. That's what NCSU fans complain about. What I see there is someone who has landed great talent but then fails to live up to those high expectations. Manning's players are playing above expectations, the completely opposite trend.
 
His team's usually gets better as the year goes along too. I expect this year to be no different.
 
Deacsfan27 said:
His team's usually gets better as the year goes along too. I expect this year to be no different.
Click to expand...
If you're talking about Manning, I'm not sure about that quite yet. It's hard to tell with the tougher conference schedule. Last year we pretty much peaked as a team around now..probably first half Xavier. I've blamed the decline the rest of the year on Devin and CMM checking out. Hopefully we see something different this year now that it's almost all Manning players.
 
pourdeac said:
If you're talking about Manning, I'm not sure about that quite yet. It's hard to tell with the tougher conference schedule. Last year we pretty much peaked as a team around now..probably first half Xavier. I've blamed the decline the rest of the year on Devin and CMM checking out. Hopefully we see something different this year now that it's almost all Manning players.
Click to expand...

Ambiguous reference...meant Gottfried. Apologies for the lack of clarity.
 
If you can't tell the difference between our team with Manning than you could with our team with Bz, then I am not sure why you are watching the game of basketball. Bz scheduled powder puff games every year. His record (as bad as it was) was completely inflated by the insanely terrible OOC schedule we had each year. Manning has scheduled a very respectible OOC schedule, and we have won every game we were supposed to. Northwestern was really our only stumble this year, and it wasn't a terrible loss. Would have been a great road win, but not entirely unexpected that we didn't win. We played Villanova extremely tough (probably one of our better games of the year) on a neutral court. We need to beat UNC-G comfortably, bring our best effort against X (small chance to win that game) and then make sure we take care of LSU at home. If we enter league play with a loss to Villanova on a neutral court, a close loss to Northwestern on the road, and a loss to Xavier on the road we will be in good shape to make the tournament. .500 conference record would do it at that point IMO.

Let's take a look at that:

@FSU - L (will be a close game. If we can keep Collins and Dinos on the floor we can win this game)
Clemson - W
BC - Big W
@UVA - L (probably get beat by double digits here)
UNC - L (upset potential after UVA game)
Miami - W (I think we win this one at home)
@NC State - W (We are better than NC State this year IMO, and take them on the road)
@Syracuse - L (Close game, but we lose by less than 5)
Duke - L (they are just too good)
@BC - W
GT - W
@Notre Dame - L (they are similar to us, but do it a little better)
NC State - W
@Clemson - W
@Duke - L (not pretty)
Pittsburgh- W (I hate playing Pitt, but we get them because it is at home
Louisville - L (too many weapons)
@Virginia Tech - L

That is a pretty basic look without any huge stretches to get to 9-9. That would put us at 18-12, and probably 8th - 10th in the conference. Assuming we get to .500 I Think this sneaks us in the tournament. If we are able to pull off a signature win along the way (Duke, UNC, Louisville, UVA) then we are a lock. We have improved a lot this year. I don't think we get to 20 wins in the regular season, but it wouldn't completely shock me. If we get to .500 and are able to win our first round ACC game we are in (assuming we take care of UNC-G and LSU).

The ACC is so stacked it isn't fair. We should probably have 10 teams in the tournament this year, if not 11 or 12.

9 teams in the top 30 for offensive efficiency
6 teams in the top 30 for defensive efficiency
8 teams in the top 30 (KPom)

I think we can be that 9th or 10th team, and I think the middle portion of the ACC is wide open based upon what I have seen of everyone outside of UVA, UNC, Duke, and Louisville. 5th - 12th is going to be a battle royal. 1 loss could be the difference in 4-5 spots in the standings.
 
FWIW, KenPom gives us a 29% percent chance of winning at Clemson. State is better at 42%, but we haven't won in Raleigh since the nut-punch game
 
Yeah, I think KP is underrated us a good bit right now. Based on what I have seen I think we can compete with anyone in the country. We aren't a top 15 team, but it wouldn't shock me in the least if we beat some top 15 teams this year.
 
pourdeac said:
If you're talking about Manning, I'm not sure about that quite yet. It's hard to tell with the tougher conference schedule. Last year we pretty much peaked as a team around now..probably first half Xavier. I've blamed the decline the rest of the year on Devin and CMM checking out. Hopefully we see something different this year now that it's almost all Manning players.
Click to expand...

More like CMM checking IN amirite /wfu22fan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top