• 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

birdman said:
Odom can coach defense. Odom didn't miss the post season once after the first couple years recovering from Staak, even when Josh Shoemaker was his best post player. Winning the NIT was a joke, but Odom would have a much better run team.

JC, without Dinos, Arians and with an injured Key and hero ball Crawford playing for the NBA scouts, would not be as effective as the previous year, is my prediction. He'd still dominate but we would not win as many games as the previous season, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Amen regarding Odom...his effectiveness as a defensive-minded coach who was able to make lesser teams better (more with less) is downplayed way too much on these boards. Or folks just don't like "living in the past" because it is a niggling reminder of how consistently good we used to be (ahem, historically competitive).

On point 2, I agree. Certain folks conveniently like to forget that we blew several games we could have won (not sure you can say we *should* have won considering how lousy we were defensively) and we're fortunate to hold onto other close game leads and escape with a win. IOW, we weren't exactly dominant against anyone aside from BC and Pitt. Perhaps margin of victory isn't as important in BB, but it speaks to how we struggled to assert control of a game after a scoring burst. So many times I remember we'd go on a 12-2 run, then just start jacking up 3's in the middle of the half thinking all we had to do was hit 1 or 2 to put the dagger in. Not so fast...that sloppiness often resulted in closer games down the stretch than they should / could have been.
 
birdman said:
Odom can coach defense. Odom didn't miss the post season once after the first couple years recovering from Staak, even when Josh Shoemaker was his best post player. Winning the NIT was a joke, but Odom would have a much better run team.

JC, without Dinos, Arians and with an injured Key and hero ball Crawford playing for the NBA scouts, would not be as effective as the previous year, is my prediction. He'd still dominate but we would not win as many games as the previous season, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

1. Josh Shoemaker was never the best post player on a Wake Forest basketball team.

2. The quality of Crawford’s play changed (typical of a #2 option transitioning to the #1 option, and the drop off wasn’t actually that large), his style of play didn’t. Crawford wasn’t playing for NBA scouts any more than he was the year before.

Maybe we don’t have the 6th best offense without Dinos and Arians shooting, but it’s not like either were the driver’s of our offense. Hard to see us falling out of the top 15 on that end with one of the best offensive players in college basketball.

To WTDN’s point below, we lost a ton of close games in 16-17, part of that is a worrying trend associated with Manning, part of it is experience level, and part is simply stochastic, if you will. We played more like a 21 or 22 win team in 16-17, meaning you think we’d actually be about 4-5 games worse, against an easier schedule, if Collins had stayed. Again, did y’all watch him play basketball last year?
 
RChildress107 said:
1. Josh Shoemaker was never the best post player on a Wake Forest basketball team.

2. The quality of Crawford’s play changed (typical of a #2 option transitioning to the #1 option, and the drop off wasn’t actually that large), his style of play didn’t. Crawford wasn’t playing for NBA scouts any more than he was the year before.

Maybe we don’t have the 6th best offense without Dinos and Arians shooting, but it’s not like either were the driver’s of our offense. Hard to see us falling out of the top 15 on that end with one of the best offensive players in college basketball.

To WTDN’s point below, we lost a ton of close games in 16-17, part of that is a worrying trend associated with Manning, part of it is experience level, and part is simply stochastic, if you will. We played more like a 21 or 22 win team in 16-17, meaning you think we’d actually be about 4-5 games worse, against an easier schedule, if Collins had stayed. Again, did y’all watch him play basketball last year?
Click to expand...

1) The Shoemaker reference was another joke, but the point remains Odom was a credible coach.

2) Ok, so you think my model is wrong. It is entirely possible that Crawford would continue to play hero ball as teams throw double and triple teams at JC since out 3pt shooting threat is vastly diminished. I get the sense that Manning is especially bad at managing personality conflicts on a team, and I still see those issues arising this past season even with JC. That's just, like, my opinion, man. Thanks for insisting that I respond to your irrelevant hypotheticals and then saying my response was wrong.
 
Why the Deac Not said:
Amen regarding Odom...his effectiveness as a defensive-minded coach who was able to make lesser teams better (more with less) is downplayed way too much on these boards. Or folks just don't like "living in the past" because it is a niggling reminder of how consistently good we used to be (ahem, historically competitive).

On point 2, I agree. Certain folks conveniently like to forget that we blew several games we could have won (not sure you can say we *should* have won considering how lousy we were defensively) and we're fortunate to hold onto other close game leads and escape with a win. IOW, we weren't exactly dominant against anyone aside from BC and Pitt. Perhaps margin of victory isn't as important in BB, but it speaks to how we struggled to assert control of a game after a scoring burst. So many times I remember we'd go on a 12-2 run, then just start jacking up 3's in the middle of the half thinking all we had to do was hit 1 or 2 to put the dagger in. Not so fast...that sloppiness often resulted in closer games down the stretch than they should / could have been.
Click to expand...

? Not counting his first year, his only team without at least two future NBA players on it finished 16-14, 50th in the country, and lost to Florida State and Clemson by 24 and 25, respectively.


And I never cease to be baffled by this board’s obsession with one half of the game of basketball.
 
And I’m calling bullshit on Odom as a great defensive coach (as y’all are determined to define that word). His teams without Tim Duncan (arguably the greatest defensive player of all time) or Josh Howard (9th all time in ACC defensive win shares) were meh to downright bad on defense. His pace of play and 20 years are leading to some major revisionist history on here.

And yet he was still a great coach, arguably the best we’ve ever had, because he put great players on the floor.
 
RChildress107 said:
And I’m calling bullshit on Odom as a great defensive coach (as y’all are determined to define that word). His teams without Tim Duncan (arguably the greatest defensive player of all time) or Josh Howard (9th all time in ACC defensive win shares) were meh to downright bad on defense. His pace of play and 20 years are leading to some major revisionist history on here.

And yet he was still a great coach, arguably the best we’ve ever had, because he put great players on the floor.
Click to expand...

Feel free to start a Dave Odom credibility thread. All I said was, he could coach defense, not that he was a "great defensive coach".
 
birdman said:
Feel free to start a Dave Odom credibility thread. All I said was, he could coach defense, not that he was a "great defensive coach".
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone has any inclination to either define what a "great" defensive coach is nor is anyone arguing that Odom was necessarily a great coach of D. However, when we start removing players from the equation, such as Tim Duncan, who was absolutely the biggest defensive game-changer in Wake BB modern history, then do you remove CP3 from the equation and dismiss Skip's average of 21 wins per season?? But considering Skip's teams were probably the anomaly (since 1985), who would you rather have?

Coach A - Avg Def Rank of 136; Avg # of Wins = 11.3
Coach B - Avg Def Rank of 266; Avg # of Wins = 12.75
Coach C - Avg Def Rank of 217; Avg # of Wins = 20.3
Coach D - Avg Def Rank of 54; Avg # of Wins = 20.0
Coach E - Avg Def Rank of 76.5; Avg # of Wins = 17.9
Coach F - Avg Def Rank of 256; Avg # of Wins = 21.0
Coach G - Avg Def Rank of 291; Avg # of Wins = 13.5

Just goes to show you can win lots of CBB games with either a serious commitment to defense or superior offensive talent. However, WF rarely seems fortunate enough to combine the two at the same time. If only some of our best offensive teams could have been, at the very least, in the Top 80, maybe even 100, it could have made a world of difference at the end of a season come Tourney Time, ACC or otherwise.




One thing is clear to me in looking at this, I am disinclined to want any of Coach A (Staak), Coach B (Bzdoofus) or Coach G (D-Man).
 
birdman said:
Feel free to start a Dave Odom credibility thread. All I said was, he could coach defense, not that he was a "great defensive coach".
Click to expand...

Dave Odom was a great defensive coach. I never saw any evidence that he was great, or even good, at teaching players how to play defense or implementing complex defensive schemes. But he was still a great defensive coach.
 
Why the Deac Not said:
I don't think anyone has any inclination to either define what a "great" defensive coach is nor is anyone arguing that Odom was necessarily a great coach of D. However, when we start removing players from the equation, such as Tim Duncan, who was absolutely the biggest defensive game-changer in Wake BB modern history, then do you remove CP3 from the equation and dismiss Skip's average of 21 wins per season?? But considering Skip's teams were probably the anomaly (since 1985), who would you rather have?

Coach A - Avg Def Rank of 136; Avg # of Wins = 11.3
Coach B - Avg Def Rank of 266; Avg # of Wins = 12.75
Coach C - Avg Def Rank of 217; Avg # of Wins = 20.3
Coach D - Avg Def Rank of 54; Avg # of Wins = 20.0
Coach E - Avg Def Rank of 76.5; Avg # of Wins = 17.9
Coach F - Avg Def Rank of 256; Avg # of Wins = 21.0
Coach G - Avg Def Rank of 291; Avg # of Wins = 13.5

Just goes to show you can win lots of CBB games with either a serious commitment to defense or superior offensive talent. However, WF rarely seems fortunate enough to combine the two at the same time. If only some of our best offensive teams could have been, at the very least, in the Top 80, maybe even 100, it could have made a world of difference at the end of a season come Tourney Time, ACC or otherwise.




One thing is clear to me in looking at this, I am disinclined to want any of Coach A (Staak), Coach B (Bzdoofus) or Coach G (D-Man).
Click to expand...

What are you using for defensive rank?
 
Why the Deac Not said:
I don't think anyone has any inclination to either define what a "great" defensive coach is nor is anyone arguing that Odom was necessarily a great coach of D. However, when we start removing players from the equation, such as Tim Duncan, who was absolutely the biggest defensive game-changer in Wake BB modern history, then do you remove CP3 from the equation and dismiss Skip's average of 21 wins per season?? But considering Skip's teams were probably the anomaly (since 1985), who would you rather have?

Coach A - Avg Def Rank of 136; Avg # of Wins = 11.3
Coach B - Avg Def Rank of 266; Avg # of Wins = 12.75
Coach C - Avg Def Rank of 217; Avg # of Wins = 20.3
Coach D - Avg Def Rank of 54; Avg # of Wins = 20.0
Coach E - Avg Def Rank of 76.5; Avg # of Wins = 17.9
Coach F - Avg Def Rank of 256; Avg # of Wins = 21.0
Coach G - Avg Def Rank of 291; Avg # of Wins = 13.5

Just goes to show you can win lots of CBB games with either a serious commitment to defense or superior offensive talent. However, WF rarely seems fortunate enough to combine the two at the same time. If only some of our best offensive teams could have been, at the very least, in the Top 80, maybe even 100, it could have made a world of difference at the end of a season come Tourney Time, ACC or otherwise.




One thing is clear to me in looking at this, I am disinclined to want any of Coach A (Staak), Coach B (Bzdoofus) or Coach G (D-Man).
Click to expand...

Agree with all this. Probably the reason for little success in the tournament was that the really good offensive teams were not at least mediocre on defense.
 
thatguy2016 said:
this sums it up nicely
Click to expand...

tumblr_inline_oli0qg6REA1qeanlb_540.jpg
 
ImTheCaptain said:
how does that parenthetical fix your problem here
Click to expand...

Each sentence uses a different meaning of �great defensive coach.�

I think being a great defensive coach in college simply means being the coach of great defensive teams. More than half of Odom�s teams at Wake were great defensively, several were transcendent. I think that qualifies him as a great defensive coach. Which is why I called him that in the second sentence.

Y�all seem to have some limited, imprecise, immeasurable, almost mystical definition of �great defensive coach.� It seems to be some guy who can turn Arians into Ariza like water into wine. I�m calling bullshit on Odom being that. As I made fairly obvious in the post thatguy selectively quoted.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top