• 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

Deacsfan27 said:
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.
Click to expand...

It’s almost like the last 5 games were an aberration and abomination that need to be fixed immediately. Glad we could settle that.
 
RChildress107 said:
It’s almost like the last 5 games were an aberration and abomination that need to be fixed immediately. Glad we could settle that.
Click to expand...

Look man, I’m glad that you are easy to take a big picture look after every single game, but it’s assuredly not clear that It is going to be fixed. Based on Manning’s track record I would say that you are actually taking the side that is not backed up by what we already know about him.

I’m surprised that our defenses weren’t ranked in the bottom of the 15 over the past 20 years (I assume we are using KenPom). To that I admit I am wrong. I would suggest, however, that “not ranking in the bottom 25 in the past 20 years” is not exactly a great goal to strive for.

Hopefully Manning can turn It around.
 
wfupdx said:
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?).
Click to expand...

This, I think, is the $1M question right now. Maybe he just thought that our strength was in our guards and so he wanted to maximize that. It ain't working though.
 
Also, I would be interested to hear why the past five games were an aberration. They seem to fit right in with the defensive efficiencies that Manning’s defenses have allowed the past three years. Just a brief eyeball of the past few years tells me that these don’t even rank as some of the worst performances defensively.
 
wfupdx said:
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?).
Click to expand...

I think it's because we don't have others ready yet. Doral is up to almost 19 mpg. If he can get up to 23-26 mpg and Sarr's hand heals and he can get up to 22-25 mpg. We'll do it less.

It would really help if Donovan can play 12-15 mpg.
 
Using the lineups played so far, WF is 128th in the country and 13th (out of 15) in the ACC in average height (i.e., the height of the players that see time on the floor). WF is 15th and 2nd in the ACC in average height at the 5 spot where Doral Moore at 7-1 and Olivier Sarr at 7-0 have played 70% of the minutes. It's at the other 4 spots on the lineup where WF lacks size compared to almost everyone in the country.

According to KP, this is how WF has broken down the minutes at the 5 spots on the floor:

1: Brandon Chilldress (6-0) 62%; Bryant Crawford (6-3) 37%
2: Mitchell Wilbekin (6-2 - which is generous) 51%; Bryant Crawford 27%; Key Woods (6-3) 18%
3: Key Woods 39%; Chaundee Brown (6-5) 34%; Bryant Crawford 18%; Melo Egg (6-8) 9%
4: Terrence Thompson (6-7) 39%: Chaundee 30%; Donovan Mitchell (6-8) 19% and I love this one Key Woods 10%

So, more than half the time, WF has played a 6-0 PG; a 6-2 SG; 6-3 (Woods or Crawford) SF, and 6-7 or shorter PF. In major college basketball, WF is very small at 4 of the 5 spots on the floor the vast majority of the time, meaning WF will get routinely out-rebounded and WF will be easy to score inside against. Understand that the guards have the most ability to generate offense, but the small lineup is just a massive liability on the defensive end of the floor. Really would like to see WF try to play Moore and Sarr together.
 
Last edited:
Pilchard said:
Using the lineups played so far, WF is 128th in the country and 13th (out of 15th) in the ACC in average height (i.e., the height of the players that see time on the floor). WF is 15th and 2nd in the ACC in average height at the 5 spot where Doral Moore at 7-1 and Olivier Sarr at 7-0 have played 70% of the minutes. It's at the other 4 spots on the lineup where WF lacks size compared to almost everyone in the country.

According to KP, this is how WF has broken down the minutes at the 5 spots on the floor:

1: Brandon Chilldress (6-0) 62%; Bryant Crawford (6-3) 37%
2: Mitchell Wilbekin (6-2 - which is generous) 51%; Bryant Crawford 27%; Key Woods (6-3) 18%
3: Key Woods 39%; Chaundee Brown (6-5) 34%; Bryant Crawford 18%; Melo Egg (6-8) 9%
4: Terrence Thompson (6-7) 39%: Chaundee 30%; Donovan Mitchell (6-8) 19% and I love this one Key Woods 10%

So, more than half the time, WF has played a 6-0 PG; a 6-2 SG; 6-3 (Woods or Crawford) SF, and 6-7 or shorter PF. In major college basketball, WF is very small at 4 of the 5 spots on the floor the vast majority of the time, meaning WF will get routinely out-rebounded and WF will be easy to score inside against. Understand that the guards have the most ability to generate offense, but the small lineup is just a massive liability on the defensive end of the floor. Really would like to see WF try to play Moore and Sarr together.
Click to expand...

What a post. This is what brings me here.
 
So, did I miss something about Keyshawn Woods and Manning getting into it? I thought I saw a mention of DNP for Woods last game.

The news I have been getting comes from this board, and I've tried to limit that as well.

I have tuned out Wake basketball for the time being...but it's kinda like a car wreck: I am still compelled to look.
 
He was out for the Quinnipiac game as a decision by Manning. It was not released why.
 
College athletics is all about marketing the school to new students and pride for existing students and Alumni. So, when your school loses to a wildly substandard opponents it is a matter of pride not a matter of statistics and defensive efficiency. When you lose 4 out of 5 games to wildly substandard opponents, what pride is left? Of course the fan base is upset and some of them are even calling for firing the coach, because our pride is hurt and we are embarrassed. How the fuck am I supposed to talk sports with my asshole, Duke-alumni, brother-in-law on Thursday? "Well, sure Mike, we lost to Drake, but our defensive ratings aren't as bad as they were under [Redacted], and one our top players left school early to go pro in Greece, so I'm not all that embarrassed."
 
Pilchard said:
Using the lineups played so far, WF is 128th in the country and 13th (out of 15) in the ACC in average height (i.e., the height of the players that see time on the floor). WF is 15th and 2nd in the ACC in average height at the 5 spot where Doral Moore at 7-1 and Olivier Sarr at 7-0 have played 70% of the minutes. It's at the other 4 spots on the lineup where WF lacks size compared to almost everyone in the country.

According to KP, this is how WF has broken down the minutes at the 5 spots on the floor:

1: Brandon Chilldress (6-0) 62%; Bryant Crawford (6-3) 37%
2: Mitchell Wilbekin (6-2 - which is generous) 51%; Bryant Crawford 27%; Key Woods (6-3) 18%
3: Key Woods 39%; Chaundee Brown (6-5) 34%; Bryant Crawford 18%; Melo Egg (6-8) 9%
4: Terrence Thompson (6-7) 39%: Chaundee 30%; Donovan Mitchell (6-8) 19% and I love this one Key Woods 10%

So, more than half the time, WF has played a 6-0 PG; a 6-2 SG; 6-3 (Woods or Crawford) SF, and 6-7 or shorter PF. In major college basketball, WF is very small at 4 of the 5 spots on the floor the vast majority of the time, meaning WF will get routinely out-rebounded and WF will be easy to score inside against. Understand that the guards have the most ability to generate offense, but the small lineup is just a massive liability on the defensive end of the floor. Really would like to see WF try to play Moore and Sarr together.
Click to expand...


Good info. It's not hard to maximize height/talent/depth with this roster.

PG Crawford/Childress
SG Woods/Wilbekin
SF Brown/Melo
PF Thompson/Mitchell
C Moore/Sarr/SJM

It's clear what Manning is doing now has failed. Play a more traditional lineup.
 
birdman said:
College athletics is all about marketing the school to new students and pride for existing students and Alumni. So, when your school loses to a wildly substandard opponents it is a matter of pride not a matter of statistics and defensive efficiency. When you lose 4 out of 5 games to wildly substandard opponents, what pride is left? Of course the fan base is upset and some of them are even calling for firing the coach, because our pride is hurt and we are embarrassed. How the fuck am I supposed to talk sports with my asshole, Duke-alumni, brother-in-law on Thursday? "Well, sure Mike, we lost to Drake, but our defensive ratings aren't as bad as they were under [Redacted], and one our top players left school early to go pro in Greece, so I'm not all that embarrassed."
Click to expand...

lol this is a very good post.
 
I am guessing that the difference in what we think Danny should do lineup wise and what Danny is doing with the lineups is because Manning is at every practice. I think that just stands to reason. Danny isn't coaching based on what he sees in games but rather what he sees in practice plus what he sees in games. Our bigs must be an absolute mess (especially defensively) in practice.
 
Deacsfan27 said:
Look man, I’m glad that you are easy to take a big picture look after every single game, but it’s assuredly not clear that It is going to be fixed. Based on Manning’s track record I would say that you are actually taking the side that is not backed up by what we already know about him.

I’m surprised that our defenses weren’t ranked in the bottom of the 15 over the past 20 years (I assume we are using KenPom). To that I admit I am wrong. I would suggest, however, that “not ranking in the bottom 25 in the past 20 years” is not exactly a great goal to strive for.

Hopefully Manning can turn It around.
Click to expand...

What evidence do we have of how Manning will handle a team that is vastly underperforming its talent through 5 games of a season? And how is his handling of that situation relevant to how he will perform with what will be the most talented team we have had on paper since 08-09?
 
I also think it's clear that Danny is not coaching to optimize lineups right now and win games, but rather playing the long game. I somewhat disagree with that notion, but it is what it is.

I think we sub way too much and the "best" lineups are clear, but as GuitarDeac says---Danny is at every single coach and probably has a much better grasp on this team than we do.
 
Generating next to nothing from the PF is a big problem, right after terrible defense. Also, Crawford is too undisciplined to pilot the team. No easy answers at this point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top