PhDeac
PM a mod to cement your internet status forever
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2011
- Messages
- 155,456
- Reaction score
- 22,476
Of course.
Danny Manning Credibility Watch
- Thread starter RaleighTriad
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
Of course.
RChildress107
Well-known member
After reading more carefully I agree with 1 and 4. The rest are demonstrably false.
Deacsfan27
Well-known member
There is no way that anybody can disagree with the statement that "Wake Forest has been horrible at defense under Danny Manning". It is also going backwards according to KenPom rankings.
Wake has gone:
2015 - 125th (4th worst in ACC)
2016 - 128th (3rd worst)
2017 - 176th (2nd worst)
2018 - 178th (worst)
It is likely that our defense is worse than last year's unless if something changes. Obviously this is a small sample size, but it makes no sense that we were 176th last season and 128th two years ago because we irrefutably had more talent and athleticism on the team last year than we did two years ago.
Wake has gone:
2015 - 125th (4th worst in ACC)
2016 - 128th (3rd worst)
2017 - 176th (2nd worst)
2018 - 178th (worst)
It is likely that our defense is worse than last year's unless if something changes. Obviously this is a small sample size, but it makes no sense that we were 176th last season and 128th two years ago because we irrefutably had more talent and athleticism on the team last year than we did two years ago.
To what extent does KenPom factor in the defensive efficiency rating the SOS? For example, if Tulsa's conference was down offensively in Manning's second year, would the Tulsa defensive ranking shoot up tens of places?
You know more about basketball than to take numbers without context. But I'll ask a simple question- How would our outcomes have changed if JC and probably Bryant been in foul trouble much more?
Last season was a clear choice. The players we had were never going to be even an average defensive team. JC was called for touch fouls. Dinos, Austin and Key try hard but aren't good defenders. Wilbekin is too small and too slow to cover any decent guard in the ACC. However, we had extremely good offensive players that ended up ranked in the Top 10 offensively and made The Dance.
Would you rather have had us be 130th or 120th on D and 50th or lower on O for the season?
Like Danny or not, he made the right choice last year. He got results that exceeded all expert predictions.
Last season was a clear choice. The players we had were never going to be even an average defensive team. JC was called for touch fouls. Dinos, Austin and Key try hard but aren't good defenders. Wilbekin is too small and too slow to cover any decent guard in the ACC. However, we had extremely good offensive players that ended up ranked in the Top 10 offensively and made The Dance.
Would you rather have had us be 130th or 120th on D and 50th or lower on O for the season?
Like Danny or not, he made the right choice last year. He got results that exceeded all expert predictions.
Deacsfan27
Well-known member
Right, so what does it say that we are still worse defensively even with all those "slower" guys gone. I don't disagree with you that those guys were never going to be very good defensively. They lacked lateral foot speed, finesse required to play defense well without fouling, and that showed up.
What I am saying is that these numbers are atrocious for ACC teams defensively. If you were to look at the worst ACC defensive teams in the past 20 years then the past three years for Wake would likely be included in the bottom 15. That's bad. Not to mention that this year will likely be similar, if not worse than those three years based on what we have seen so far.
I think that there was certainly a tradeoff made last year that stressed offense over playing defense, but there is no reason that we cannot do both as a team. Several other teams have found that balance, and Wake needs to do so as well. That starts at the top with coaching and getting the players to commit to playing hard nosed defense. For whatever reason that is not occurring under Manning so far, by design or not.
What I am saying is that these numbers are atrocious for ACC teams defensively. If you were to look at the worst ACC defensive teams in the past 20 years then the past three years for Wake would likely be included in the bottom 15. That's bad. Not to mention that this year will likely be similar, if not worse than those three years based on what we have seen so far.
I think that there was certainly a tradeoff made last year that stressed offense over playing defense, but there is no reason that we cannot do both as a team. Several other teams have found that balance, and Wake needs to do so as well. That starts at the top with coaching and getting the players to commit to playing hard nosed defense. For whatever reason that is not occurring under Manning so far, by design or not.
RChildress107
Well-known member
Devin and Codi were better defenders at their positions than Collins and Crawford were last year. I think last years defensive slide can be chalked up to Manning being unable or unwilling to get consistent defensive effort out of his guys, starting at the top.
You could argue that it was unwillingness last year (not wanting to mess up a top 10 offense), though I’m not sure that argument will fly this year. The lack of defensive talent on the wing is still an issue though, and one that Manning has apparently solved through recruiting.
If our defense finishes worst than last year I will share y’alls concern, but I don’t think it will.
RChildress107
Well-known member
We have been worse in every area imaginable the last 5 games. It’s unacceptable and must be fixed. I don’t think anyone is arguing otherwise.
Deacsfan27
Well-known member
Offensive and defensive efficiency are adjusted, but I'm unsure to what extent he does it as to whether it's individually calculated based on a schedule or loaded as a conference.
Deacsfan27
Well-known member
This is very much still up for debate.
Deacsfan27
Well-known member
If we want to talk "eye test" then I have yet to see anything worse than what I saw out of the first five games defensively this year.
We seem to have (somehow) regressed on pick and roll defense, and you can argue that our scheme with hedging and letting our big man in Doral go bump the guard is a very poor way to use him given what we know he is good at. We go over screens near midcourt and under screens right on the three point line. It seems like we have no idea what to do out there no matter which two guys are the ones trying to defend it.
Our on-ball man defense is absolutely pathetic given the talent advantage we had over the first three opponents. Our guards just can't stay in front of anybody in a one-on-one situation and that's inexcusable.
We seem to have (somehow) regressed on pick and roll defense, and you can argue that our scheme with hedging and letting our big man in Doral go bump the guard is a very poor way to use him given what we know he is good at. We go over screens near midcourt and under screens right on the three point line. It seems like we have no idea what to do out there no matter which two guys are the ones trying to defend it.
Our on-ball man defense is absolutely pathetic given the talent advantage we had over the first three opponents. Our guards just can't stay in front of anybody in a one-on-one situation and that's inexcusable.
mebanedeac
Well-known member
Add to our defensive problems the inability to rebound even though we have larger and supposedly more athletic players. How can that be?
If we manage to force a miss, the other team often gets their own rebound.
Given our size advantage, the inability to rebound the ball must be a combination of poor technique and a lack of effort...both are coaching issues.
If we manage to force a miss, the other team often gets their own rebound.
Given our size advantage, the inability to rebound the ball must be a combination of poor technique and a lack of effort...both are coaching issues.
guitardeac
Well-known member
if you are a poor defensive team and a poor rebounding team, I don't think you have to wonder what the problem is.
Until Sarr is ready and/or Doral can play a lot of minutes, this team was inevitably going to suck on D. Or unless Melo or Donovan step up. Wilbekin is terrible on D and is short. Moving Key to play a SF is a mismatch every time. If we play three of Bryant, Key, Brandon and Wilbekin together, we will be destroyed on the boards as well out of place on D.
You know enough about recruiting to understand that looking at bigs for the 17 class was a low priority during the 15-early 17 timeframe when these decisions are made. No one could have known that we'd lose Dinos and JC. Add Doral, Sam and Donovan and that made sense. We made a run at Bamba, but didn't get him.
We were lucky that Sarr decided to come to America or we would have been totally screwed.
Like several of us said, unless the light came on for Doral or Sam, we were going to killed inside this year. We will be a bit better when Sarr catches.
I fully understand that it's much easier top look at the situation superficially, but it's not that simple.
Deacsfan27
Well-known member
Right, but none of those things indicate why we are getting dominated inside by guys who are 6-7 and play for Liberty and Drake. I buy what you're selling for ACC and "real" competition.
If you have two guys playing a ton of minutes together, who are bad on D it also takes teammates out of position to cover up from them. Our bad defenders are 6-6'2, which means they aren't going to be able to keep too many people off the boards.
I've been very open at opposing the idea of playing four guards together. Barring injuries and protecting a lead with under two minutes left, Key and Wilbekin should never be on the court together.
MichDeac25
Well-known member
No, the problem is that we've been negating our size advantage by playing this 4-guard lineup. Now, that said, their similarly sized players are still pulling more boards than our players. Maybe the guards in those programs are accustomed to rebounding whereas ours relied more on our former big men. But, we still have size to employ that we haven't been.
Last edited:
mebanedeac
Well-known member
I tend to agree about Key and Wilbekin, except that they may be our 2 most "reliable" 3 point shooters...although that is certainly subject to debate.
RChildress107
Well-known member
Just looking at the past 10 years, only last years D is in the bottom 15 (checking in at #12 from the bottom). Manning’s first two seasons barely crack the bottom 25 (Yay!).
Any thought on why Manning continues to play almost the entire game with 3 or 4 guards? We can debate whether the idea was worth trying, but there is now 5 games to show it doesn't work. Its not just that we can't rebound or defend, its also just not that good on offense. They have not been able to push tempo very much and there is very little movement off the ball (presumably by design?).