• 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 Megathread - Crawford, Moore, & Collins ALL TO WAKE!

Marquee Moon said:
We sure won't know next year.
Click to expand...

Next year is about intensity and style. the reality is we aren't go to be that competitive with the talent we have. Duke and UNC will be better than they were this year. Plus the ACC adds Louisville.
 
TopHat said:
Agree, here is Tulsa's offense broken down by the numbers.

http://www.bloggersodear.com/2014/4/5/5576228/manning-way-offense-Wake-Forest-Basketball-Deacons

Those numbers are extremely concerning, though they were a very young team. They did improve tremendously at taking care of the basketbal, but outside of that they aren't at top 100 offensive team. They did play a very similiar style to what we saw last year in that they get to the foul line a lot and miss A LOT.
Click to expand...

Eh, I don't think I'd call it extremely concerning. As you mentioned, they were incredibly young. Everyone seemed to love Archie Miller, and his defensive efficiencies his first two years were 174 and 162 before improving to 71 in year 3. Michael White's offensive efficiencies his first two years were 173 and 199 before improving to 78 in year 3. Given the make up of his team, Tulsa was set up to have a big year next year.
 
I mean, I get what he's saying, but i think solid fundamentals + chemistry are what allows teams to win on the road.

And talent. That helps too.
 
tiltdeac said:
Eh, I don't think I'd call it extremely concerning. As you mentioned, they were incredibly young. Everyone seemed to love Archie Miller, and his defensive efficiencies his first two years were 174 and 162 before improving to 71 in year 3. Michael White's offensive efficiencies his first two years were 173 and 199 before improving to 78 in year 3. Given the make up of his team, Tulsa was set up to have a big year next year.
Click to expand...

Yeah I don't think it is concerning either. Gregg Marshall's offensive rankings first 4 years Kenpom years at Winthrop (2003-2006) were 253, 206, 176, 160 and his first two years at Wichita were 160, 151. And he has had top 30 offenses the last 4 years.

The only thing that would be concerning would be the lack of offensive rebounding. Tulsa lacks size but 30% OR% both years is bad and offensive rebounding capabilities tend to follow coaches from job to job. So that is something we should monitor closely next year.
 
DeaconBrews said:
what do you mean? because we tried to box out, we allowed offensive boards?
Click to expand...

When an opponent is shooting a FT, if he misses, his team should almost never get the rebound. It's the easiest box out there is. Not only are you set up inside of your opponent, but there is space between your position and the rim. Very, very rarely do missed FTs clang hard off the back rim. Thus you should almost never lose that board.

Unfortunately, he who shall not be named didn't drill this into our players' heads enough. Every year we gave a bunch. This is a very basic practice. If one of guys allows this to happen, yank him.

Hopefully Manning will fix this problem.
 
FckVwls said:
Yeah I don't think it is concerning either. Gregg Marshall's offensive rankings first 4 years Kenpom years at Winthrop (2003-2006) were 253, 206, 176, 160 and his first two years at Wichita were 160, 151. And he has had top 30 offenses the last 4 years.

The only thing that would be concerning would be the lack of offensive rebounding. Tulsa lacks size but 30% OR% both years is bad and offensive rebounding capabilities tend to follow coaches from job to job. So that is something we should monitor closely next year.
Click to expand...

If you are small, many coaches drop the guards back to prevent breakaways. If you take a look at how many FTs Tulsa got, it means they took lots of shots in the lane. When you combine this with their size and trying prevent opponents' fast breaks, your OR % will be low.

This is why raw stats often don't mean as much people think they do.

P.S. Good catch on Marshall. It gives perspective and context to Manning's raw numbers.
 
RJKarl said:
When an opponent is shooting a FT, if he misses, his team should almost never get the rebound. It's the easiest box out there is. Not only are you set up inside of your opponent, but there is space between your position and the rim. Very, very rarely do missed FTs clang hard off the back rim. Thus you should almost never lose that board.

Unfortunately, he who shall not be named didn't drill this into our players' heads enough. Every year we gave a bunch. This is a very basic practice. If one of guys allows this to happen, yank him.

Hopefully Manning will fix this problem.
Click to expand...

My b, I misread your initial statement. Yeah I absolutely agree, you should have those boards 95% of the time. I really like the Tom Izzo rebound drill.
 
Might be a stretch, but this needs to be our guy

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/player/_/id/51309/matt-carlino

Starting Lineup
Shelton
Codi
Moto
Cav
DT

2nd Unit
Madison/CMM
Carlino
Tree
McClinton
Andre

I think that team could be very competitive in the ACC next year, with Carlino potentially winning the ACC 6MOY. DM will need to manage minutes to have some combination of Tree/Greg at the 3 ande Moto/Cav at the 4. Would also like to see him experiment with Devin and Andre on the court at the same time. Hoping Overton, Danny Green, Watson, and possibly Madison continue their careers elsewhere(best of luck to them). However, it wouldn't do much good for this year unless we can somehow snag Haas. Does anybody know how Wake can go about recruiting the '15 class with only one scholarship, but knowing a few more will open up after this season?
 
Can't stand Coach Cal but ESPN talked about how during the summer he has a "Fantasy camp" where current recruits come out and play for a weekend with ex-players such as D Rose, John Wall, etc. Have we had anything like this in the past? Sounds like a great way to recruit and display tradition.
 
TopHat said:
Can't stand Coach Cal but ESPN talked about how during the summer he has a "Fantasy camp" where current recruits come out and play for a weekend with ex-players such as D Rose, John Wall, etc. Have we had anything like this in the past? Sounds like a great way to recruit and display tradition.
Click to expand...

I think Dino works that camp.
 
Carlino already has offers from UCLA, Pitt, Okla St., Memphis. He would be an awesome pull but it's probably a long shot. 5th year guys are competitive because there is zero downside for any program with an extra scholarship for a year.
 
TopHat said:
Can't stand Coach Cal but ESPN talked about how during the summer he has a "Fantasy camp" where current recruits come out and play for a weekend with ex-players such as D Rose, John Wall, etc. Have we had anything like this in the past? Sounds like a great way to recruit and display tradition.
Click to expand...

Imagine being a high school junior going up against a team of Paul, Teague, Aminu, Johnson, Duncan. :eek:
 
RChildress107 said:
Imagine being a high school junior going up against a team of Paul, Teague, Aminu, Johnson, Duncan. :eek:
Click to expand...

Ish Smith too! I know right, plus the guys Danny Manning knows. Parents would eat that up just as much. You have a guy like Chris Paul out there mentoring your son, that's gonna go a long way.
 
FckVwls said:
The only thing that would be concerning would be the lack of offensive rebounding. Tulsa lacks size but 30% OR% both years is bad and offensive rebounding capabilities tend to follow coaches from job to job. So that is something we should monitor closely next year.
Click to expand...
Lack of offensive rebounding would be more of a concern if it went along with bad defense, but Tulsa was #30 in adjusted D in KenPom. That's pretty good given their situation....around Mich St/Pitt levels. They were 137 the previous year so that was probably the biggest area of improvement year over year. I expect a pretty big improvement for us next year given our situation.
 
pourdeac said:
Lack of offensive rebounding would be more of a concern if it went along with bad defense, but Tulsa was #30 in adjusted D in KenPom. That's pretty good given their situation....around Mich St/Pitt levels. They were 137 the previous year so that was probably the biggest area of improvement year over year. I expect a pretty big improvement for us next year given our situation.
Click to expand...

I guess, I'm sure Tulsa emphasized getting back on defense over crashing the boards which helped their eFG% defense. And you can win without offensive rebounding very well. But most of the teams that get away with it have bigs that shoot 3s and spread the court (Wisco, Creighton, etc), which wasn't Tulsa's game at all.

I'll be very interested in how we do on the boards next year given our similar inside personnel to this year. If we don't see a nice bump off the Bz years I would be concerned.
 
pourdeac said:
Lack of offensive rebounding would be more of a concern if it went along with bad defense, but Tulsa was #30 in adjusted D in KenPom. That's pretty good given their situation....around Mich St/Pitt levels. They were 137 the previous year so that was probably the biggest area of improvement year over year. I expect a pretty big improvement for us next year given our situation.
Click to expand...

I guess, I'm sure Tulsa emphasized getting back on defense over crashing the boards which helped their eFG% defense. And you can win without offensive rebounding very well. But most of the teams that get away with it have bigs that shoot 3s and spread the court (Wisco, Creighton, etc), which wasn't Tulsa's game at all.

I'll be very interested in how we do on the boards next year given our similar inside personnel to this year. If we don't see a nice bump off the Bz years I would be concerned because there are coaches that consistently O-rebound poorly and it's a bad flaw.
 
One would hope, since [name redacted]'s teams were the worst rebounders I have seen in almost 50 years of watching college basketball.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top