• 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

What do you mean by reliable? In many ways the accuracy of the talent data is irrelevant as long as it is consistent.

If the data is accurate then Manning is going to be a hell of a coach. If it is inaccurate then Manning is a hell of a talent evaluator, which at the college level can lead to you being a hell of a coach.

True this. There's no way to tell if its coaching or talent arb based on the analysis, but based on some valid judgements watching the games, seems its the latter. Key will be how will this holds-up throughout the season. If we did the same analysis at this point last season, we probably would've been outperforming by a much wider margin than this year. All of this is to say: do we really need to make credibility judgements on a game-by-game basis? Subjectively, we're showing more promise and glimmers of goodness than we have in a long time. Let's just see where this goes. Sometimes it feela like we're one questionable substitution from a billboard campaign.
 
Was talking more about RChildress's posts. You're comparing full seasons of data to less than half a season, and then lecturing people on sample size. Let's just let the rest of the games this season play out first.
 
Sorry Ayo, I didn't have time to do a full on MCMC Bayesian regression model with competing hypotheses and DIC scores. I just threw some shit together in excel to visualize Manning's success compared to our previous coaches. Feel free to do a real statistical analysis. Here is some JAGS code I copied form another project and changed the variable names to get you started, but you'll have to load your own data. Probably running it all through R with the R2JAGS package would be the best way forward. I'd also suggest modifying the code to incorporate "inclusion parameters" on the betas as is demonstrated here, but I first learned about it here. I think the Hooten and Hobbs explanation is more straight forward for non-statisticians like me. The inclusion parameters will tell you whether it is useful to include the variable in your model.

model_string <- "model{

# Likelihood
for(i in 1:n){
Y ~ dnorm(mu,inv.var)
mu <- beta[1] + beta[2]*Tscore + beta[3]*coach
}

# Prior for beta
for(j in 1:3){
beta[j] ~ dnorm(0,0.0001)
}

# Prior for the inverse variance
inv.var ~ dgamma(0.01, 0.01)
sigma <- 1/sqrt(inv.var)

}"



I love this place.
 
From recruiting and in game coaching there seems to be many similarities between DM and Roy Williams. Williams is at best an average in game coach (ask a unc fan how they feel about this) and a great recruiter. Once we see more improvement on the court, Danny should be able to pull in great recruiting classes. 2015 & 2017 are both very good.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Are you seriously comparing Manning to Williams who is a HOF coach? That is like trying to compare Childress to Jordan, come on!
 
I know we like to mock 'ole Roy; but the fact is that he coaches tough defense and one of the very best fast breaks in all of basketball. Whether we like it or not, he is a good coach.
 
I know we like to mock 'ole Roy; but the fact is that he coaches tough defense and one of the very best fast breaks in all of basketball. Whether we like it or not, he is a good coach.

5 star pscyho athletes tend to be good at playing man defense and running hard and dunking. It's not like he coaches up a UVA-type system over there.

I was thinking about this thread during the UNC/Clemson game. UNC was up by 8 at like the 5 minute mark, took bad shots and fumbled around until calling a timeout up 1 with 2 and a half minutes left. The offense from that point on was just lining all 4 guys not named Joel Berry up across the baseline outside of the paint and letting him run the clock down then drive it. That's all they did. The only points they scored were on free throws from an offensive rebound. Berry went 0/3 with 2 turnovers and a foul in that time. And the foul should have lost them the game with Clemson heading to the line tied with 5 seconds on the clock.

Wake at least got some good looks during our Clemson meltdown. Wish they'd missed all those shots against us down the stretch like they did against UNC...
 
I know we like to mock 'ole Roy; but the fact is that he coaches tough defense and one of the very best fast breaks in all of basketball. Whether we like it or not, he is a good coach.

He is the Forest Gump of college basketball coaches. He was a walkon that Deano took under his wing and then was hired as an assistant coach. at UNC. Then, Deano put him into the nearly impossible to fail Kansas job. Then, Forest got the job at UNC while they were cheating to keep their player eligible.

If he had to have started at Appalachian or even St. Joe's, his record would likely be mediocre at best. Forest is a terrible game coach and few players really improve under his coaching.
 
He is the Forest Gump of college basketball coaches. He was a walkon that Deano took under his wing and then was hired as an assistant coach. at UNC. Then, Deano put him into the nearly impossible to fail Kansas job. Then, Forest got the job at UNC while they were cheating to keep their player eligible.

If he had to have started at Appalachian or even St. Joe's, his record would likely be mediocre at best. Forest is a terrible game coach and few players really improve under his coaching.

I am not a fan; but, he is not a terrible coach either in preparation or in game. He is not the best, by any stretch; but he is better than most. Yeah, he gets exceptional talent but managing talent requires a certain expertise in and of itself. My problems with Roy have more to do with his persona and his people skills than his skills as a coach.
 
Are you seriously comparing Manning to Williams who is a HOF coach? That is like trying to compare Childress to Jordan, come on!

Isn't that how every comparison works? Lol first of all I said "similarities" and second, it's not any different from comparing a high school players playing style to a professional athlete. I said there are similarities in coaching style. Get the stick out of your ass.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Isn't that how every comparison works? Lol first of all I said "similarities" and second, it's not any different from comparing a high school players playing style to a professional athlete. I said there are similarities in coaching style. Get the stick out of your ass.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah, I am just going to let you believe what you want and not even try to debate. Debating those comments is like playing a stupid game, you win stupid prizes.
 
He is the Forest Gump of college basketball coaches. He was a walkon that Deano took under his wing and then was hired as an assistant coach. at UNC. Then, Deano put him into the nearly impossible to fail Kansas job. Then, Forest got the job at UNC while they were cheating to keep their player eligible.

If he had to have started at Appalachian or even St. Joe's, his record would likely be mediocre at best. Forest is a terrible game coach and few players really improve under his coaching.

I don't know how a terrible game coach wins a national championship or two with his own players. You've forgotten far more basketball than I ever knew, RJ, so I am interested - who do you consider to be the top eight or ten basketball coaches presently coaching in the college game [I figure if I say eight to ten you have to name at least someone outside of Philly and LA]
 
The only Philly coaches who would be Top 10ish coaches are Jay Wright and D2 Herbie Magee.

In no order and off the top of my head:

Izzo
Wright
K
Pitino
Self


Then take a couple of these:

Cal
Huggins
Bennett
Marshall
Boeheim
S. Miller
Few

There are several others I'd take over Forest.

His first championship was cheated with 4 leftover NBA lottery picks. One of whom admits not being eligible to play. When you take one Burger Boy out and put another one in, you don't need to be able to coach.
 
What do you mean by reliable? In many ways the accuracy of the talent data is irrelevant as long as it is consistent.

If the data is accurate then Manning is going to be a hell of a coach. If it is inaccurate then Manning is a hell of a talent evaluator, which at the college level can lead to you being a hell of a coach.

A lot of good stuff in this thread from RC107.

IMO, obviously Buzz's tenure was the most disastrous thing a program could endure, but I do want to plug something that I think doesn't get enough attention/attribution for the hole we've had to climb out of the last few years. The number of transfers, and therefore lack of experienced senior classes has absolutely killed us. A list of seniors (and PPG/RPG) by year since 09-10:

10-11: Gary Clark - 10.9/2.2,
11-12: Nikita Mescheriakov - 8.0/3.9, Ty Walker - 4.2/4.6
12-13: CJ Harris - 15.4/2.3
13-14: Travis McKie - 10.7/4.1, Coron Williams (GT) - 10.2/2.2
14-15: Darius Leonard (GT) - 5.7/2.5,
15-16: Thomas - 15.6/10.2, CMM - 9.4/4.5
16-17: Arians (GT) - 8.8/2.1, Trent Van Horn - .3/.1

Meanwhile, transfers out have included: JT Terrell, Ari Stewart, Tony Chennault, Carson Desrosiers, Melvin Tabb, Chase Fischer, Daniel Green, Anthony Fields, Bill Moto, Tyler Cavanaugh, Madison Jones, Aaron Rountree, Andre Washington, Miles Overton, Rondale Watson, Cornelius Hudson.

In seven seasons, we've had just 11 senior scholarship players on our teams and just five were significant contributors who averaged double figures. And during that same span we have had 16 transfers. Having that few seniors on the roster, which may very well be the fewest in CBB during that timeframe, is an absolute killer.

The simple fact that, after releasing a few guys during his first year, Manning has pretty much stopped the attrition from the program is building towards a huge positive impact for the on-court results. Other than the real one-and-done programs (Kentucky, dook, etc.), most programs that are in the top 25-50 right now are relying on upperclassmen-laden rosters. Clemson, Notre Dame, VT, Miami all come to mind.

Looking at some of the graphs that birdman has included in this thread, the "x" axis during Manning's tenure has been unfairly skewed to the left, mainly because of the lack of experienced players on his rosters. Given that he's gotten this team to 43 in KP with virtually no senior presence during his two and a half seasons is pretty impressive to me. I think if we consider the fact that he will have actual senior classes the next few years (Dinos/Mitch in '17, potentially BC/JC/Doral in '18, and Key/Chill/SJM in '19), that alone should make a significant difference in the win-column.
 
If DM sat both Childress and Mitch the rest of the season, I would be alright with that. If he also used some timeouts, that would be nice too.
 
The biggest knock on his credibility is that he has only recruited four ACC quality players in three classes.

Even worse, he doesn't seem to realize he only has four ACC quality players.

Worse than that, he gives his non-ACC quality players way more minutes than necessary and compounds that by playing them together in rag tag lineups that often kill first half momentum.

He does that because he doesn't seem to realize you can carry over a first half lead into the second half.
 
Data is data, but I'm not sure how much more of this I can watch. He may pull a [Redacted] and beat UNC or Duke this year, but Manning just isn't cut out for this job. We've seen how this plays out. I'm not sure how many fans are willing to wait and see it play out again.
 
Data is data, but I'm not sure how much more of this I can watch. He may pull a [Redacted] and beat UNC or Duke this year, but Manning just isn't cut out for this job. We've seen how this plays out. I'm not sure how many fans are willing to wait and see it play out again.

Yet you have guys like CharlotteDeac1 who think Manning is the second coming of Roy Williams! Even though we beat them, Boston College is looking good and I think they might actually surpass in rebuilding next year. I hope that I am wrong about BC getting better, but DM cannot go a game without putting overplaying bad players and refusing to call a timeout when things feel like they are getting out of hand. Even the blood fart before Danny at least tried to act like a competent coach!
 
Yet you have guys like CharlotteDeac1 who think Manning is the second coming of Roy Williams! Even though we beat them, Boston College is looking good and I think they might actually surpass in rebuilding next year. I hope that I am wrong about BC getting better, but DM cannot go a game without putting overplaying bad players and refusing to call a timeout when things feel like they are getting out of hand. Even the blood fart before Danny at least tried to act like a competent coach!

To each their own. There were [Redacted] apologists until the end and there will be Manning apologists until his tenure comes to an end. I think I'm finally at the point where I've just had enough.

A good comparison for our program is USC.

They have a relatively small budget for recruiting, second rate facilities, and play in a competitive basketball conference with teams that have a lot of resources and tradition. They also had a [Redacted] in Kevin O'Neill, hired after Tim Floyd's sketchiness prompted the AD to call for a culture change. That's not hyperbole. They then hired a novice coach in Andy Enfield who hadn't proven much outside of a unlikely run in March. It took him two years to rebuild (logging 11-21/2-16 and 12-20/3-15 records in the process). He recruited a 4-Star and three starters in his first summer, two 4-stars in his second summer, two in his third, two in his fourth, and two on the way next year. Last year, USC finished 6th in a competitive PAC-12, compiled a 21-13 (9-9) record, and went to the NCAA Tournament. They're 15-2 right now, ranked in the top-25.
 
Yet you have guys like CharlotteDeac1 who think Manning is the second coming of Roy Williams! Even though we beat them, Boston College is looking good and I think they might actually surpass in rebuilding next year. I hope that I am wrong about BC getting better, but DM cannot go a game without putting overplaying bad players and refusing to call a timeout when things feel like they are getting out of hand. Even the blood fart before Danny at least tried to act like a competent coach!

You really can't be this dumb can you? Are you really this bad at reading comprehension? You are laughable. I said they had SIMILARITIES, such as poor in game coaching but good player development and recruiting. Never said he was going to be the next Roy Williams. You know how in the NFL Draft they compare players in the draft to current NFL stars? Yeah, they say "this player has a lot of similarities to Aaron Rodgers" not "this player is going to be the next Aaron Rodgers." It is honestly dumbfounding how dense you are.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Back
Top