• 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!

BBall Recruiting Thread 2k19 - Charles Coleman de-commits to Wake. :(

scooter84 said:
You know what supports him being a stiff? Watching him play at that time. He could do certain things. He could take up space, he could block and alter shots, he could catch the ball and he could dunk. He was not mobile, he had no conditioning, and he often looked lost on offense and defense. He had no discernible ability to make any kind of move with the ball or shoot outside of 3 feet. He looked really good every once in a while - I assume because of certain match-ups. But any attempt now to paint him as some great player who was only held down because of Manning not playing him is revisionist history, pure and simple.
I'm just as down on Manning as a coach as anyone but, if anything, Manning deserves some credit for getting Doral from where he was to where he is today. Or maybe Doral did it all on his own, I can't say for sure. In any event he was much better when he left than he was when he came in.
Click to expand...

Manning really doesn't deserve any credit for anything. The nuance of how much Doral did or did not improve is really meaningless when it comes to the big picture of Manning's suckage.
 
PhDeac said:
It's not "revisionist history" when people were arguing at the time he should get more playing time.

But sure, if you want to argue that Manning is some great coach because he only played Moore when he could be productive, go right ahead.
Click to expand...

It is revisionist history if it is inconsistent with the facts at the time - despite what a few fans might have been saying. Fans are always clamoring for the guy on the bench to play more or to put in the back-up QB - it is a known phenomenon and proves nothing. For every online post you can find asking for Doral to play more you could find 5 posts making fun of how slow and stiff he was and how he couldn't even run up the floor without bending over to catch his breath or fouling someone.
Please feel free to show me where I said anything about Manning being any kind of great coach.
 
Ryan Horn probably deserves more credit for Doral's improvement than Manning.
 
 
Strickland33 said:
That is not what revisionist history means, scooter.
Click to expand...

Okay. What does it mean then? To me, revisionist history means what you are saying now about something that happened in the past is not consistent with what really happened back then. So you are revising history. Please enlighten me.
 
scooter84 said:
Okay. What does it mean then? To me, revisionist history means what you are saying now about something that happened in the past is not consistent with what really happened back then. So you are revising history. Please enlighten me.
Click to expand...

Yeah. The bold is what revisionist history is. What you said before wasn't revisionist history. If 10 years ago people said 2+2 = 5 and now I say 2+2 = 4, I'm not engaged in revisionist history.
 
PhDeac said:
Yeah. The bold is what revisionist history is. What you said before wasn't revisionist history. If 10 years ago people said 2+2 = 5 and now I say 2+2 = 4, I'm not engaged in revisionist history.
Click to expand...

Unless, in fact, 2+2 WAS =5 10 years ago.

I don't know what you are talking about or what you thought I said. I have interpreted what you are saying as Doral was a good player right off the bat and should have been playing much more - and was held back because of Manning's stupid substitution patterns. Is that not what you were saying?
Assuming that is what you are saying, I am saying that is revisionist history because Doral was not a very good player off the bat, for the reasons I have stated, and was not held back by Manning's stupid substitution patterns (even though said patterns were stupid for other reasons).
You also said that people were clamoring for Doral to play more back then - I think that is also revisionist because, even though I don't doubt there were some people saying that, it is not an accurate reflection of the majority opinion at the time. Doral wasn't playing more because of his non-existent stamina, his fouling frequency, and the limited nature of his game.
 
Seven footers that can block shots and rebound really shouldn't have to do much else in order to get playing time. He wasn't playing more because Manning was and is an idiot and couldn't figure out a way to get his most talented players on the floor at the same time
 
Last edited:
]
PhDeac said:
Yet the two times he played 20 minutes (exactly 20 minutes) in ACC games, he had 19 pts, 7 reb, 2 stl, 3 blk vs. BC and 13 pts, 8 reb, 3 blk vs. ND.

Not only that, he played 10 to 13 minutes in 5 other games. He averaged 6 pts, 2.6 reb, 1 blk in 11 mpg. Per 30, that's 16.4 pts, 7.1 reb, 2.7 blk.

There's nothing to support this idea that Doral was a stiff aside from the fact Manning didn't play him. When he played, he was very productive, so clearly he wasn't a stiff.
Click to expand...
I seen plenty of stiff big men over the year's in the ACC. none of them put up those kind of stats as a freshman jn league games
 
All of these things can be true.

Junior year Doral was much better than frosh and sophomore Doral.

Doral had a couple of very good games as a frosh when we needed him to step up.

Other times, Doral looked completely lost out there.

It was a legit question after Doral’s sophomore season if SJM has passed him on the depth chart.

Sometimes player development isn’t linear. Players can also be wildly inconsistent.

Doral was a highly rated recruit, but came in without much stamina and hadn’t played a ton his final year of high school.

We’ve been over all of this numerous times. I’m more sympathetic to the argument that Collins should have played more as a freshman than I am to the same argument for Doral.

And finally, who gives a shit? Manning is a shitty coach. He’s brought in some decent recruits. He’s even developed a few of them. Admitting that doesn’t change the fact that we need a new coach. Yesterday.
 
scooter84 said:
Unless, in fact, 2+2 WAS =5 10 years ago.

I don't know what you are talking about or what you thought I said. I have interpreted what you are saying as Doral was a good player right off the bat and should have been playing much more - and was held back because of Manning's stupid substitution patterns. Is that not what you were saying?
Assuming that is what you are saying, I am saying that is revisionist history because Doral was not a very good player off the bat, for the reasons I have stated, and was not held back by Manning's stupid substitution patterns (even though said patterns were stupid for other reasons).
You also said that people were clamoring for Doral to play more back then - I think that is also revisionist because, even though I don't doubt there were some people saying that, it is not an accurate reflection of the majority opinion at the time. Doral wasn't playing more because of his non-existent stamina, his fouling frequency, and the limited nature of his game.
Click to expand...

scooter, I'm saying that you're treating your opinion at the time as THE HISTORY when it isn't. The stats don't support that opinion and given that there were people (no not a majority, but actual people) whose opinions lined up with the stats at the time, you can't say their opinions are revisionist history.

As far as the reasons Moore didn't play, he had enough stamina to be productive when he played 10+ minutes so that doesn't support not playing him 10+ minutes. Fouling frequency is probably the biggest coaching canard. Who cares especially if that guy who is fouling is also blocking and contesting shots at the rim? And as people said at the time, a rim protector would have helped DT and Collins and kept them out of foul trouble. As far as the "limited nature" of his game, see CL68's post.
 
DeacsATS said:
All of these things can be true.

Junior year Doral was much better than frosh and sophomore Doral.

Doral had a couple of very good games as a frosh when we needed him to step up.

Other times, Doral looked completely lost out there.

It was a legit question after Doral’s sophomore season if SJM has passed him on the depth chart.

Sometimes player development isn’t linear. Players can also be wildly inconsistent.

Doral was a highly rated recruit, but came in without much stamina and hadn’t played a ton his final year of high school.

We’ve been over all of this numerous times. I’m more sympathetic to the argument that Collins should have played more as a freshman than I am to the same argument for Doral.

And finally, who gives a shit? Manning is a shitty coach. He’s brought in some decent recruits. He’s even developed a few of them. Admitting that doesn’t change the fact that we need a new coach. Yesterday.
Click to expand...

yes to all of this.
 
I remember people wondering if SJM, who was an actual stiff exhibited by the 14/15 consective games he played in without scoring, had passed Moore on the depth chart. I remember opening wondering if these people had ever watched basketball games before.

Moore proceeds to lead the ACC in FG% and finish 3rd in rebounding as a junior.
 
Last edited:
PhDeac said:
scooter, I'm saying that you're treating your opinion at the time as THE HISTORY when it isn't. The stats don't support that opinion and given that there were people (no not a majority, but actual people) whose opinions lined up with the stats at the time, you can't say their opinions are revisionist history.

As far as the reasons Moore didn't play, he had enough stamina to be productive when he played 10+ minutes so that doesn't support not playing him 10+ minutes. Fouling frequency is probably the biggest coaching canard. Who cares especially if that guy who is fouling is also blocking and contesting shots at the rim? And as people said at the time, a rim protector would have helped DT and Collins and kept them out of foul trouble. As far as the "limited nature" of his game, see CL68's post.
Click to expand...

And I'm saying that you are wrong and I am right. I am also saying that I am an idiot for ever engaging with you....But I never learn. Undepheated lives on. Peace.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top