• 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!

Keyshawn Woods Leaving Basketball Program

Wrangor said:
Agree...He clearly values older players. Wilbekin amd Thompson simply received too much time on the court. When you are rebuilding you simply can’t do that. Have to play the best players and adjust your coaching. It is a Sign of a young game coach that he wasnt able to do that. This is why it is beneficial to hire coaches that have close to a decade of HC experience. There are things that can only be learned by failing at them. Hopefully Danny will learn from his in game coaching failures in the last 4 years at about the same time his excellent work on the recruiting trail comes to fruition.
Click to expand...

+1. Drove me crazy all year with the amount of time they got. Play was better when Wilbekin was out for those few games. Things flowed better and lineups made more sense.
 
I thought Wilbekin had a nice season. Unfortunately, those minutes came at the expense of Childress and Chaundee but I don't blame Manning for playing him.
 
Wilbekin had the highest 3 pt % on the team of those who took more than 50. Danny values shooters. Hence Wilbekin's minutes.
 
Deaconblue said:
Wilbekin had the highest 3 pt % on the team of those who took more than 50. Danny values shooters. Hence Wilbekin's minutes.
Click to expand...

True, but the team played better when Wilbiken was out. I don't think it was due to Wilbiken hurting the team as much as it prevented Manning from overplaying guards so much.

That is likely the biggest reason for 11 wins instead of respectable number.
 
WFUWaldo said:
It was infuriating how much TT played.
Click to expand...

It was more infuriating that he started.

In conference play he was 8th in total minutes on the team despite starting every game. Sarr got more minutes than he did, and in multiple games Sarr was at the scorer's table before the game was 2 minutes in. All the more evidence that Manning promised he'd start all year barring injury because we were totally fucked at the 4 spot. Output-wise, the Thompson vs. Mitchell argument is fairly close in that they were both awful. Their per 100 stats are both garbage, just in different ways. Sarr got multiple 2nd half "starts" as well over Thompson.

It's easy in hindsight to look at the season and assume there were better outcomes available. I'm still not convinced there were. All our 4 guard lineups were awful. Melo had the worst win share on the team. On any given night there was hardly any way to predict who would be worse out of the Sarr/Thompson/Mitchell trio - they were all good for about 3 points and 3 boards every 15 minutes. All 3 were horrid from deep in conference, locked into our bottom 3 shooting spots. Mitchell shot 32% and Thompson 30%. Woof.

There's this assumption being made every time a poster rails on the 4 guard minutes that if Manning had just picked <insert your favorite 4 here> and stuck with them all year we'd have been better. But there's basically zero evidence to support that conclusion. I'd pick Sarr because he has the biggest upside, but the dude is 7 feet tall and shot like 20% from 1 foot and closer.

I still don't think people recognize how much the 4 spot killed this team.
 
One of my biggest gripes with manning is that Thompson continued to start throughout the season. There is no reason he should’ve started over Mitchell, and he might have not transferred if so. No idea how you don’t make that adjustment as the season progresses.
 
A giant gaping hole at any position is killer at the ACC level. Almost every team has competent or better guys at every position. The collective play of all the people who played the four position for Wake didn't amount to anything useful, whether it was with a big or a fourth guard. Nobody stepped up and took advantage of the opportunity made available when Dinos Mitiglou left.
 
Deaconblue said:
A giant gaping hole at any position is killer at the ACC level. Almost every team has competent or better guys at every position. The collective play of all the people who played the four position for Wake didn't amount to anything useful, whether it was with a big or a fourth guard. Nobody stepped up and took advantage of the opportunity made available when Dinos Mitiglou left.
Click to expand...

Well, our competition certainly did.
 
DCDeac said:
It was more infuriating that he started.

In conference play he was 8th in total minutes on the team despite starting every game. Sarr got more minutes than he did, and in multiple games Sarr was at the scorer's table before the game was 2 minutes in. All the more evidence that Manning promised he'd start all year barring injury because we were totally fucked at the 4 spot. Output-wise, the Thompson vs. Mitchell argument is fairly close in that they were both awful. Their per 100 stats are both garbage, just in different ways. Sarr got multiple 2nd half "starts" as well over Thompson.

It's easy in hindsight to look at the season and assume there were better outcomes available. I'm still not convinced there were. All our 4 guard lineups were awful. Melo had the worst win share on the team. On any given night there was hardly any way to predict who would be worse out of the Sarr/Thompson/Mitchell trio - they were all good for about 3 points and 3 boards every 15 minutes. All 3 were horrid from deep in conference, locked into our bottom 3 shooting spots. Mitchell shot 32% and Thompson 30%. Woof.

There's this assumption being made every time a poster rails on the 4 guard minutes that if Manning had just picked <insert your favorite 4 here> and stuck with them all year we'd have been better. But there's basically zero evidence to support that conclusion. I'd pick Sarr because he has the biggest upside, but the dude is 7 feet tall and shot like 20% from 1 foot and closer.

I still don't think people recognize how much the 4 spot killed this team.
Click to expand...

I think everybody recognizes that. We certainly talked about it enough. The question is whether to fix it with 3 guards or with poor post talent.
 
PhDeac said:
I think everybody recognizes that. We certainly talked about it enough. The question is whether to fix it with 3 guards or with poor post talent.
Click to expand...

No, everyone does not recognize that. Still plenty of posts that Dinos wouldn't have made a significant difference this year, that Mitchell is a good shooter from deep and obviously should have started over Sarr, and my favorite right now that's all over every Manning thread - that Manning LOVES a 4 guard offense and will try to go to it even with better post players available.

Your second sentence just reaffirms my point - "whether to fix it" is a question, but if it could be fixed at all is also a question. The "Manning is a total moron" crowd has all kinds of "should have played Melo" and "should have started Sarr" and "should have played Mitchell" arguments, with this vague idea that we'd have been "much better" or something to that effect had a better coach made those decisions.

I realize I'm the "blame the players" guy on the boards but sometimes you get stuck in a spot where all your options are bad ones. Great coaches fail all the time in those scenarios, so it's no surprise Manning did as well.
 
Yeah. Everybody realizes that we were stuck.

Nobody thinks Melo, Mitchell, or Sarr were magic bullets. People do think it would have been a better investment in the future to play them more over Wilbekin.
 
DCDeac said:
No, everyone does not recognize that. Still plenty of posts that Dinos wouldn't have made a significant difference this year, that Mitchell is a good shooter from deep and obviously should have started over Sarr, and my favorite right now that's all over every Manning thread - that Manning LOVES a 4 guard offense and will try to go to it even with better post players available.

Your second sentence just reaffirms my point - "whether to fix it" is a question, but if it could be fixed at all is also a question. The "Manning is a total moron" crowd has all kinds of "should have played Melo" and "should have started Sarr" and "should have played Mitchell" arguments, with this vague idea that we'd have been "much better" or something to that effect had a better coach made those decisions.

I realize I'm the "blame the players" guy on the boards but sometimes you get stuck in a spot where all your options are bad ones. Great coaches fail all the time in those scenarios, so it's no surprise Manning did as well.
Click to expand...
Recruit better in 2016, and you won't have that problem. Manning's fault.
 
Did we even recruit a true post player besides Giles for 2016?
 
We went after Bolden, who obviously ended up at Duke. Harry Froling from Australia was another guy. I just googled him. Interestingly enough, he decided to leave Marquette a few days ago. Obviously SJM, too. Don't remember anyone else off the top of my head.
 
Thanks. Did we get any real traction with Bolden?

Crazy that our post three post recruits and four of Manning’s five post recruits are European. That’s not even counting Hoard as a tweener.
 
PhDeac said:
Thanks. Did we get any real traction with Bolden?

Crazy that our post three post recruits and four of Manning’s five post recruits are European. That’s not even counting Hoard as a tweener.
Click to expand...
I wanna say Bolden did an unofficial which set off the vibes for a little while, but I don't think we really had much of a shot. This is all from memory, though. Could be wrong. I'm sure you could go sift through the 2016 thread.
 
PhDeac said:
Yeah. Everybody realizes that we were stuck.

Nobody thinks Melo, Mitchell, or Sarr were magic bullets. People do think it would have been a better investment in the future to play them more over Wilbekin.
Click to expand...

Who is everybody? If you're saying it's generally accepted on this board that personnel, not coaching, was primarily responsible for this season's debacle and that a few extra minutes for the younger players would have been better considering we were going to suck anyway... I mean that kind of talk will get you labeled a Manning apologist, AD schill, etc.

I think you might be confused that you're logged into the old boards?
 
Ayo said:
I wanna say Bolden did an unofficial which set off the vibes for a little while, but I don't think we really had much of a shot. This is all from memory, though. Could be wrong. I'm sure you could go sift through the 2016 thread.
Click to expand...

I think that is true about the Bolden unofficial. Was reading that thread the other day.

I also have been keeping up with the Illinois issues, because I have no life and I enjoy their misery... You think Manning likes foreign bigs? Check our what Underwood has left on the roster and signed up for next year.

Samba Kane - Senegal
Giorgi Bezhanishvili - Austria
Matic Vesel - Slovenia
Greg Eboigbodin - Nigeria
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top