• 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!

Doral Moore

When I think of the term project I think of a player who is not able to contribute in any meaningful way without a couple of years of development. Doral Moore scored 19 and 13 points in his two games against ACC competition where he played 20 or more minutes.
 
Deaconblue said:
There are multiple facets to the "players leaving" circumstances.

1.Player comes to Wake, develops so much so fast that he leaves to take multi million dollar pro contract
2. Player comes to Wake, and it fairly quickly becomes obvious that the player was "reach" recruit and really would never contribute and player transfers
3. Player comes to Wake, fails to embrace the "student" part of student-athlete and doesn't go to class/turn in required academic work. Player transfers
4. Player has or develops disciplinary issues and is "asked" to leave.
5. Player comes to Wake, is a significant contributor. Player transfers.

Category 1 guys, well that is the way the NCAA/NBA situation is today. Can't fault either player or coach when the player has an opportunity for life-changing money and takes it.

Category 2 guys- most coaches have some "project" guys. Too many are a problem. Usually they transfer to lower level schools. Some have success there, some don't. The forced redshirt year is helpful for many of these guys. They need the year to mature.

Category 3 guys. Wake is not for everybody, especially academically. Some guys don't realize what they are getting into at Wake, even when told.

Category 4 guys, who have and/or develop enough disciplinary issues are not good. From both the recruiting and the coaching standpoint.

Category 5, guys who come to Wake, contribute on the court and then leave are most concerning. They have a place on the team, and a role within the team. Losing them hurts the team and the staff.
Click to expand...

Number one reason to leave......sick of losing.
 
BC was a rec league team that year. Doral had a nice game.

As others have said, he had problem with fouls that year. In his last three ACC games his frosh year, he had - 4 fouls in 8 minutes, 2 fouls in 2 minutes and 2 fouls in 4 minutes.
 
Doral Moore is the living embodiment of the term "project". No where near ready to play big minutes as a freshman, but with enough skills and physical attributes to make a coach think that he can get significantly better by junior and senior years. Moore is a project success story.
 
ChrisL68 said:
When I think of the term project I think of a player who is not able to contribute in any meaningful way without a couple of years of development. Doral Moore scored 19 and 13 points in his two games against ACC competition where he played 20 or more minutes.
Click to expand...

How was he able to score without going up and down the court?

Moore was a Top 100 player. I have a tough time calling a Top 100 kid a “project.”
 
"Project" it is a poorly defined descriptive word. Doral needed some work on some aspects of his game as a freshman, especially fouling rate and stamina, and less work than other aspects of his game. Manning under utilized him, probably, but not by a whole hell of a lot, because freshman year he was third on the depth chart and the 5 and sophomore, he was 2nd.
 
PhDeac said:
How was he able to score without going up and down the court?

Moore was a Top 100 player. I have a tough time calling a Top 100 kid a “project.”
Click to expand...

Moore's on court time had to be managed so he only played in short stints. He had stamina issues that have been well documented and discussed ad nauseum on the boards. He also fouled a lot. A lot in his limited minutes his first two years. He could make a few trips up and down the court, and could score, especially against second units. But then he had to come out and rest. Both of these combined to make him a spot minutes player his first two years.

That is why he was something of a project. There was no assurance, based on his HS record, that he would be able to play major minutes.
 
Doral was a consensus 4-star recruit, right? one of the pieces that show Manning is an "above average" recruiter? he can't be both of those things while also being a project
 
It's ridiculous that people keep quoting the 19 point Doral freshman game as some kind of meaningful metric.

BC was a high school team that year. After having to go to overtime to beat New Hampshire they lost their next 19 consecutive games to close out the season.

Then again, this year Doral played 14 minutes against Georgia Southern and scored 2 points and pulled down 4 boards while getting owned by a 6'8" guy.

Doral has elite size and dunking ability. He's a solid shot blocker. He was a project on arrival which everyone knew because he didn't even start in high school. He's made huge strides, particularly on defense and conditioning, but I'd be absolutely shocked if leaving early ends up working out well for him. It'd be hard not to assume that the team chemistry or the coaching chemistry is a complete disaster if he'd rather go scratch and claw through the D-League or coming off the bench in Europe for the minimum than be the starting center for an ACC team with some nice talent on the way.

That or he's getting just horrible advice from someone.
 
DCDeac said:
Then again, this year Doral played 14 minutes against Georgia Southern and scored 2 points and pulled down 4 boards while getting owned by a 6'8" guy.

Doral has elite size and dunking ability. He's a solid shot blocker. He was a project on arrival which everyone knew because he didn't even start in high school. He's made huge strides, particularly on defense and conditioning, but I'd be absolutely shocked if leaving early ends up working out well for him. It'd be hard not to assume that the team chemistry or the coaching chemistry is a complete disaster if he'd rather go scratch and claw through the D-League or coming off the bench in Europe for the minimum than be the starting center for an ACC team with some nice talent on the way.

That or he's getting just horrible advice from someone.
Click to expand...

He started for his HS team didn't he? Just didn't get much PT when he went to Monteverde prep? Then again, he may not have had much competition starting for his HS team in Locust Grove as a 15 y/o 6'10" giant.

ETA: looks like he didn't transfer to Montverde till his senior year. Was thinking he may have been there two years. According to Rivals, he was as high as 38 in the early 2015 class rankings. And early on, he seemed to have the most interest in tOSU, Tech and Maryland. A lot changed in the coaching landscape between 2013 and 2015 though. I bet if Doral had it to do over again, he might've chosen a different prep school to get more minutes his senior year. But it helped put him on a path to Wake and a great degree. Another year of improvement and he should get a serious look by NBA scouts next year.
 
Last edited:
thatguy2016 said:
Doral was a consensus 4-star recruit, right? one of the pieces that show Manning is an "above average" recruiter? he can't be both of those things while also being a project
Click to expand...

This really goes to show you have no idea how rankings are made. Sometimes players are rated highly because they have the size and/or athleticism to play at a high level in college even though their current play doesn't merit the high ranking. Other players are very good players but are shorter or less athletic but don't project as well.
 
MichDeac25 said:
This really goes to show you have no idea how rankings are made. Sometimes players are rated highly because they have the size and/or athleticism to play at a high level in college even though their current play doesn't merit the high ranking. Other players are very good players but are shorter or less athletic but don't project as well.
Click to expand...

interesting

so when evaluating a college roster, one shouldn't just count up the number of 4-stars, 5-stars, etc. to determine which roster is better right now?
 
Moore had some fouling issues and some stamina issues. Neither of those were the main reasons he played so little his first 2 years.

Manning was not going to play him along side of Thomas or Collins as Manning wants 4) 3-point shooters in the game at all times.

In regards to fouls, use them up. You can't save them for next game. In regards to stamina, play him 4 or 5 3-minute stretches if need be. Moore was pretty productive in his limited minutes. If Manning valued defense as much as shooters, Moore would have played much more his first 2 years.
 
good god, people. Doral Moore was a top 100 recruit yes. A four star guy yes. But for one reason only, he hit the genetic basketball lottery and was 7 feet tall and was moderately coordinated. Everyone who watched play in high school knew that he was miles away from being a starter on a ACC level team, but everyone who watched him had the same thought..."hmmm, in a couple of years, with the right coaching and the right weight room, this guy could be pretty good." It is completely understandable that you are a top 100 recruit and a project at the same time- it happens every fucking year. If you are 7 feet tall, athletic, and have actual basketball skills, then you know what you are? A top 10 player and Mcdonald's all american.

Anybody who is using Moore as a way to criticize Manning doesn't know what the hell they are talking about. Moore is one of the best things that Manning has accomplished since he has been here (a low threshold, I know). If you want to criticize Manning if Moore leaves after his junior year then go ahead from that angle, but revisionist history about how Moore should have been playing more minutes as a freshmen is just stupid.
 
SC DEAC said:
good god, people. Doral Moore was a top 100 recruit yes. A four star guy yes. But for one reason only, he hit the genetic basketball lottery and was 7 feet tall and was moderately coordinated. Everyone who watched play in high school knew that he was miles away from being a starter on a ACC level team, but everyone who watched him had the same thought..."hmmm, in a couple of years, with the right coaching and the right weight room, this guy could be pretty good." It is completely understandable that you are a top 100 recruit and a project at the same time- it happens every fucking year. If you are 7 feet tall, athletic, and have actual basketball skills, then you know what you are? A top 10 player and Mcdonald's all american.

Anybody who is using Moore as a way to criticize Manning doesn't know what the hell they are talking about. Moore is one of the best things that Manning has accomplished since he has been here (a low threshold, I know). If you want to criticize Manning if Moore leaves after his junior year then go ahead from that angle, but revisionist history about how Moore should have been playing more minutes as a freshmen is just stupid.
Click to expand...

so again, what you are saying is, when evaluating a roster, one should not assume all 4-stars are the same?
 
I thought moore could be pretty good when he had 8 pts 7 rbs and 2 blocks in 9 minutes in Raleigh.
 
So have we gotten so old as a board that no students post here and let us know if he's on campus?
 
thatguy2016 said:
so again, what you are saying is, when evaluating a roster, one should not assume all 4-stars are the same?
Click to expand...

I've said what I've said. You are welcome to read it and either agree, disagree, or be indifferent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top