Perspective

[Strickland33]

lol. Just saying if the OP is trying to compare this team to two years ago, why not go back 4 or 5 years and compare it to those teams that were awful. Its not like being #1 in the polls is our historical standard.

...because that would be the smart thing to do.

 

[Say Hey Deac]

Good thing Moon took a break from the hilarious unwiped ass posts and tags for a second to start this thread, as otherwise I don't think most of us would have remembered that we were really good for a few weeks a couple of seasons ago and now we're not very good. "THOSE WHO CANNOT REMEMBER THE PAST ARE CONDEMNED TO REPEAT IT." Words to live by. Thanks, Moon.

 

[TwentyONE]

You're talking 06-07? That team would smoke this one, Visser would pwn. And, of course, Skip >>>>>>>>> Bzzz.

And this years team would smoke last years team...

To look back at our most talented team in recent memory and say, "see we still suck," is just asinine. Thats my point. All that matters is if we are getting better and/or more talented right now.

And I was talking more about the 05-06 team. This team will probably win the same amount of conference games (3) as that team.

 

[Strickland33]

And this years team would smoke last years team...

To look back at our most talented team in recent memory and say, "see we still suck," is just asinine. Thats my point. All that matters is if we are getting better and/or more talented right now.

And I was talking more about the 05-06 team. This team will probably win the same amount of conference games (3) as that team.

+1

 

[IrishSlim]

And this years team would smoke last years team...

To look back at our most talented team in recent memory and say, "see we still suck," is just asinine. Thats my point. All that matters is if we are getting better and/or more talented right now.

And I was talking more about the 05-06 team. This team will probably win the same amount of conference games (3) as that team.

That's silly, shallow thinking. Our basketball program doesn't exist in a vacuum, you can't just discount past successes and failures, no matter how much Bzzz and Wellman would like to.

Are we getting better? Obviously. Are we getting better quickly enough and substantively enough? That's the big question.

And 05-06 would crush this team, even with Joe Dukes starting. Not all 3-ACC win seasons are created equal. (Again, our program doesn't exist in a vacuum.)

 

[wake20]

The 05-06 team started like four seniors and still sucked.

 

[HowardDeanSux]

You're talking 06-07? That team would smoke this one, Visser would pwn. And, of course, Skip >>>>>>>>> Bzzz.

I think Skip was a great man, a good-great recruiter and a great motivator who made basketball fun to watch when we had outstanding talent. However, I always thought his style of play was to roll the ball onto the court and hope for the best. As a strategist with a true offensive and defensive plan, he was average at best.

 

[liveanddiedeac]

I think Skip was a great man, a good-great recruiter and a great motivator who made basketball fun to watch when we had outstanding talent. However, I always thought his style of play was to roll the ball onto the court and hope for the best. As a strategist with a true offensive and defensive plan, he was average at best.

I think that's a very fair assessment of Skip.

 

[IrishSlim]

I think Skip was a great man, a good-great recruiter and a great motivator who made basketball fun to watch when we had outstanding talent. However, I always thought his style of play was to roll the ball onto the court and hope for the best. As a strategist with a true offensive and defensive plan, he was average at best.

Concur on all fronts. All those things go into being a head basketball coach, though. Bzzz was the assistant Skip never had but needed. As a head coach himself? Meh.

 

[IAppreciateIt]

I think Skip was a great man, a good-great recruiter and a great motivator who made basketball fun to watch when we had outstanding talent. However, I always thought his style of play was to roll the ball onto the court and hope for the best. As a strategist with a true offensive and defensive plan, he was average at best.

Yup, but that's what Roy Williams is too, save the great man part.

 

[deaconson]

The 05-06 team started like four seniors and still sucked.

that team was shell shocked most of the year. they also got it together for the acc tourney and made the final losing to duke. they had the potential to be a pretty good team.

 

[Skip]

I think Skip was a great man, a good-great recruiter and a great motivator who made basketball fun to watch when we had outstanding talent. However, I always thought his style of play was to roll the ball onto the court and hope for the best. As a strategist with a true offensive and defensive plan, he was average at best.

Ouch!

 

[BabyDeac75]

I don't get why everyone feels the need to come here after wins or losses and play reality police.

I think most rational folks see the wild swings expressed on the boards as a source of dark humor amusement, especially in the face of disappointing losses. Go back and read the ASU game thread for a great example of this phenomenon.

 

[deac04]

The 06-07 team went 15-16. Last year's team went 8-24. That's two different levels of "suck." Even if we have a great year, I don't know that we will get to 15 wins. We may not have a historical record of being #1, but I don't want Wake basketball to be so bad that when we go .500 for the season, the fans are happy because it's an improvement from last year. I expect Wake Forest to put a team and a coach on the floor that every year will play for the ACC championship and the NCAA championship. The historical record doesn't mean anything to me. What matter is Wake winning basketball games, conference titles and championships.

 

[Haros]

Eric Williams would eat this team alive. But whatever.

I don't think a comparison to really any of our past teams is entirely relevant. What we did with different players and different coaches has almost no bearing on our road back, other than our ability or inability to recruit players due to our school's name. Last year has a little merit for comparison only because it's a baseline for the same players and coach.

You've got to look at our team in segments of half or even full seasons to get the proper perspective to judge. Looking at just last night, which was awesome, you'd have a very different impression than if you had only seen the ASU game. I think he's capable of being a very good coach under the right circumstances, but I'm still on the fence with [Redacted] due to a number of unresolved questions, and no single game is going to change that.

Here's the Good, Bad, and unresolved:
The Good:
- Three points on his resume point to his ability to turn things around or rebuild: the Nuggets (turnaround), AF (solid records), and Colorado (turnaround) stints.
- He appears to be able to identify under-the-radar talent that can help his teams (Burks, Fischer, Codi M-M (he's blown up but there could be more than 1 of this type in next year's class; credit for 1 for now).
- One of the lingering questions is around his ability to recruit top 100 players head-to-head. While next year's class isn't full of these guys, landing Moto was both a big surprise and a big statement in favor of his ability to do so.
- The team is playing hard and they're playing together for him this year. The players that remain seem to be on the same page and to have bought into [Redacted]'s system.
- Even with a dearth of talent and very few players that can create their own shot, the offense looks as good as I've seen a Wake offense look. Big plus on X's and O's ledger.
- We consistently score coming out of timeouts and out-of-bounds situations. He seems to have an excellent feel for what's happening within a game, and this is another plus in the X and O department.

The Bad
- Starting right at the top, he inherited a pretty tough situation last year in terms of returning talent, injuries, suspensions, etc. He then proceeded to do about as poorly as possible with that situation. We were going to be bad, and instead ended up with historically bad.
- 1-31 in road games in BCS conference play.
- 0 career NCAA tournament wins.
- Poor history in conference tournaments.
- Very importantly, he lost the interest of the fan base early on. While maybe unrelated to his coaching ability, he's going to have to regain that support and interest to get attendance back up, or his tenure won't be very long. He may have to seriously exceed expectations next year, which will put a lot of pressure on him and the players.
- His teams are historically very poor offensive rebounding teams, generally among the bottom 10-15% of Division 1 in OREB%.

Unresolved Questions:
- The turnover in the program has been a large part of the problem. His VERY high expectations for his players have alienated a few and created the dearth in talent we now have. This happened at Colorado as well. What this shows is that he has the potential to fail magnificently with other's players and that he's not the motivational type of coach that can get every type of player to buy in. Last year and this year are the result. The outstanding question, since he hasn't stayed anywhere longer than 3 years, is whether this is a terminal problem for him where players will always have issues with him, or whether, with his own recruited players, he can attain a stable, successful program over the long term.
- Can he recruit and integrate a front court with the size and ability to man the middle while fitting into his offensive philosophy? He's never had a classic center and maybe he can succeed without one. But his teams have to rebound at a sufficient level to not get manhandled.
- Can he continue on the momentum of landing Arnaud Moto and the 6-man 2012 class by landing 1 or 2 top 50 (or near top 50) type talents like McClinton or Gill? It will take a few of those players (think Mckie on our current roster) to reach the level of success it will take to be considered successful here.
- And the ultimate question: assuming he can build a stable program with some talented experience in most years, what is the peak he can get our program to achieve? Will improved offensive performance result in a consistent tournament team (7 of 10 years)? Will he be able to land 1-4 seeds to set us up for runs? And finally, will he be able to play to or above seed in the tournament for us to make deep runs. Regardless of what he's done to this point, people's vantage point on this question will ultimately guide their view of whether he should be our head coach.

 

[deac04]

Eric Williams would eat this team alive. But whatever.

I don't think a comparison to really any of our past teams is entirely relevant. What we did with different players and different coaches has almost no bearing on our road back, other than our ability or inability to recruit players due to our school's name. Last year has a little merit for comparison only because it's a baseline for the same players and coach.

You've got to look at our team in segments of half or even full seasons to get the proper perspective to judge. Looking at just last night, which was awesome, you'd have a very different impression than if you had only seen the ASU game. I think he's capable of being a very good coach under the right circumstances, but I'm still on the fence with [Redacted] due to a number of unresolved questions, and no single game is going to change that.

Here's the Good, Bad, and unresolved:
The Good:
- Three points on his resume point to his ability to turn things around or rebuild: the Nuggets (turnaround), AF (solid records), and Colorado (turnaround) stints.
- He appears to be able to identify under-the-radar talent that can help his teams (Burks, Fischer, Codi M-M (he's blown up but there could be more than 1 of this type in next year's class; credit for 1 for now).
- One of the lingering questions is around his ability to recruit top 100 players head-to-head. While next year's class isn't full of these guys, landing Moto was both a big surprise and a big statement in favor of his ability to do so.
- The team is playing hard and they're playing together for him this year. The players that remain seem to be on the same page and to have bought into [Redacted]'s system.
- Even with a dearth of talent and very few players that can create their own shot, the offense looks as good as I've seen a Wake offense look. Big plus on X's and O's ledger.
- We consistently score coming out of timeouts and out-of-bounds situations. He seems to have an excellent feel for what's happening within a game, and this is another plus in the X and O department.

The Bad
- Starting right at the top, he inherited a pretty tough situation last year in terms of returning talent, injuries, suspensions, etc. He then proceeded to do about as poorly as possible with that situation. We were going to be bad, and instead ended up with historically bad.
- 1-31 in road games in BCS conference play.
- 0 career NCAA tournament wins.
- Poor history in conference tournaments.
- Very importantly, he lost the interest of the fan base early on. While maybe unrelated to his coaching ability, he's going to have to regain that support and interest to get attendance back up, or his tenure won't be very long. He may have to seriously exceed expectations next year, which will put a lot of pressure on him and the players.
- His teams are historically very poor offensive rebounding teams, generally among the bottom 10-15% of Division 1 in OREB%.

Unresolved Questions:
- The turnover in the program has been a large part of the problem. His VERY high expectations for his players have alienated a few and created the dearth in talent we now have. This happened at Colorado as well. What this shows is that he has the potential to fail magnificently with other's players and that he's not the motivational type of coach that can get every type of player to buy in. Last year and this year are the result. The outstanding question, since he hasn't stayed anywhere longer than 3 years, is whether this is a terminal problem for him where players will always have issues with him, or whether, with his own recruited players, he can attain a stable, successful program over the long term.
- Can he recruit and integrate a front court with the size and ability to man the middle while fitting into his offensive philosophy? He's never had a classic center and maybe he can succeed without one. But his teams have to rebound at a sufficient level to not get manhandled.
- Can he continue on the momentum of landing Arnaud Moto and the 6-man 2012 class by landing 1 or 2 top 50 (or near top 50) type talents like McClinton or Gill? It will take a few of those players (think Mckie on our current roster) to reach the level of success it will take to be considered successful here.
- And the ultimate question: assuming he can build a stable program with some talented experience in most years, what is the peak he can get our program to achieve? Will improved offensive performance result in a consistent tournament team (7 of 10 years)? Will he be able to land 1-4 seeds to set us up for runs? And finally, will he be able to play to or above seed in the tournament for us to make deep runs. Regardless of what he's done to this point, people's vantage point on this question will ultimately guide their view of whether he should be our head coach.

I assume since it is unrelated to his coaching ability, it must be his dress.

Last night's tie was better. And the WF shirts at the tournament were ok too. Glad to see he improved some in the offseason. We will wait to see what happens in conference play. Lots of big games back to back...that's a lot of pressure. Hopefully he won't fall off the wagon and go for a Looney Tunes tie.

 

[deacphan]

Eric Williams would eat this team alive. But whatever.

I don't think a comparison to really any of our past teams is entirely relevant. What we did with different players and different coaches has almost no bearing on our road back, other than our ability or inability to recruit players due to our school's name. Last year has a little merit for comparison only because it's a baseline for the same players and coach.

You've got to look at our team in segments of half or even full seasons to get the proper perspective to judge. Looking at just last night, which was awesome, you'd have a very different impression than if you had only seen the ASU game. I think he's capable of being a very good coach under the right circumstances, but I'm still on the fence with [Redacted] due to a number of unresolved questions, and no single game is going to change that.

Here's the Good, Bad, and unresolved:
The Good:
- Three points on his resume point to his ability to turn things around or rebuild: the Nuggets (turnaround), AF (solid records), and Colorado (turnaround) stints.
- He appears to be able to identify under-the-radar talent that can help his teams (Burks, Fischer, Codi M-M (he's blown up but there could be more than 1 of this type in next year's class; credit for 1 for now).
- One of the lingering questions is around his ability to recruit top 100 players head-to-head. While next year's class isn't full of these guys, landing Moto was both a big surprise and a big statement in favor of his ability to do so.
- The team is playing hard and they're playing together for him this year. The players that remain seem to be on the same page and to have bought into [Redacted]'s system.
- Even with a dearth of talent and very few players that can create their own shot, the offense looks as good as I've seen a Wake offense look. Big plus on X's and O's ledger.
- We consistently score coming out of timeouts and out-of-bounds situations. He seems to have an excellent feel for what's happening within a game, and this is another plus in the X and O department.

The Bad
- Starting right at the top, he inherited a pretty tough situation last year in terms of returning talent, injuries, suspensions, etc. He then proceeded to do about as poorly as possible with that situation. We were going to be bad, and instead ended up with historically bad.
- 1-31 in road games in BCS conference play.
- 0 career NCAA tournament wins.
- Poor history in conference tournaments.
- Very importantly, he lost the interest of the fan base early on. While maybe unrelated to his coaching ability, he's going to have to regain that support and interest to get attendance back up, or his tenure won't be very long. He may have to seriously exceed expectations next year, which will put a lot of pressure on him and the players.
- His teams are historically very poor offensive rebounding teams, generally among the bottom 10-15% of Division 1 in OREB%.

Unresolved Questions:
- The turnover in the program has been a large part of the problem. His VERY high expectations for his players have alienated a few and created the dearth in talent we now have. This happened at Colorado as well. What this shows is that he has the potential to fail magnificently with other's players and that he's not the motivational type of coach that can get every type of player to buy in. Last year and this year are the result. The outstanding question, since he hasn't stayed anywhere longer than 3 years, is whether this is a terminal problem for him where players will always have issues with him, or whether, with his own recruited players, he can attain a stable, successful program over the long term.
- Can he recruit and integrate a front court with the size and ability to man the middle while fitting into his offensive philosophy? He's never had a classic center and maybe he can succeed without one. But his teams have to rebound at a sufficient level to not get manhandled.
- Can he continue on the momentum of landing Arnaud Moto and the 6-man 2012 class by landing 1 or 2 top 50 (or near top 50) type talents like McClinton or Gill? It will take a few of those players (think Mckie on our current roster) to reach the level of success it will take to be considered successful here.
- And the ultimate question: assuming he can build a stable program with some talented experience in most years, what is the peak he can get our program to achieve? Will improved offensive performance result in a consistent tournament team (7 of 10 years)? Will he be able to land 1-4 seeds to set us up for runs? And finally, will he be able to play to or above seed in the tournament for us to make deep runs. Regardless of what he's done to this point, people's vantage point on this question will ultimately guide their view of whether he should be our head coach.

:slowclap

 

[TBR]

Great post Haros. Only thing is I wouldn't count Colorado for much of anything since he wasn't there long enough to turn around the program.

Teaching defense also falls in unresolved I think.

 

[SC DEAC]

Prosser as head coach with Buzz as offensive Coordinator and Odom as defensive Coordinator would be pretty awesome, if basketball staffs were like football.

 

[Fuck Your Couch]

Yep, great post Haros.

Bz was known as a defensive guy in the NBA. I've liked our effort on that end this year, and you can see the breakdowns are usually due to one guy missing a rotation. Once they play on a string it will be better, much like when they get more comfortable with the cuts in the motion O.