• 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!

Steve Forbes credibility watch

Some confusing line ups recently and not promising to struggle against app at home. Injuries now making things worse.

See another potential NIT bid in our future as the goal for this group this season.

NCAAT bid in Forbes year 4-5??
 
If only we had hired Wes Miller after high school. God dammit Ron!
 
inspectah said:
Forbes took the job at a really weird and difficult time. I consider his first season a total write-off and said when he was hired that it wouldn't be fair to judge him before the end of the current season. Let's see where we are in March. I'm definitely scratching my head over a few of the losses last year and this year but am okay with the trajectory of the program right now. Even John Wooden couldn't have quickly or easily fixed the mess Wellman/Bz/Manning left behind.
Click to expand...
You left off the main name...Gaudio started this mess.
 
WFUBarber said:
You left off the main name...Gaudio started this mess.
Click to expand...
Gaudio's worst season (2008) ranks as the third best overall Wake team has had in Torvik since that season. We made the tournament his last year and have made it to one NCAA Tournament sense. Perhaps Dino's teams were "poor" relative to Odom and Prosser's, but...I don't think it's fair to point a finger at Dino for on the court results.
 
Shake said:
This is a good thread and I enjoy the differing opinions. One thing that we just don't mention is when does Forbes get us to the NCAA tournament. I don't count a play in game as making the tournament so for Wake this is year 13 since we made the dance. Unlike football college basketball is about the NCAA tournament, make it good year, miss it bad year.

I'm interested to know when most of you believe we'll make the dance again. I like the energy and personality Forbes brings but I see no chance of making the tournament this year in a very weak ACC. Mike Young figured it out at VT very quickly; can Forbes?
Click to expand...
When Mike Young took over VT they were coming off of three consecutive NCAAT trips under Buzz Williams. Completely different.
 
I’m not concerned about the lineups on the floor — the guys who have been playing the most are those who should be based on what I’ve seen. I am worried about the overall level of talent on our roster.

Minutes per team game through 11 games (includes all games, calculated as % of total minutes played/40 min per game):
Core stalwarts:
Appleby - 34
Hildreth - 30
Carr - 28

Core w lost time to injury/other —
Williamson - 24
Klintman - 20 (I wish he could be like 7th rather than 5th but who takes these?)
Monsanto - 17 (Needs to be higher for us to be any good, but also need to be better minutes).
Keller - 13 (not ready yet, but needs to play)
Marsh - 12 (16 per over last 5, hopefully continues to tick higher).

Deep Bench:
Bradford - 9 (10th man?)
Taylor - 6 (11th man, has been declining)
Ituka - 4 (has been increasing a little, 2nd worst O-Rtg and not great on D even aside from being the only player without a single steal so far this year)

Hopefully Monsanto, Marsh, Ituka see their minutes increase because they deserve them (and not just because Appleby is out)?

As to building a program, you’ve got to start somewhere. I don’t mind multi-year transfers plus freshman starting to build the base up. We have gone from 1 returning contributors to 2 (Williamson, Mucius) to now 4 that were on the roster last year (Williamson, Hildreth, Marsh, Monsanto), only two of which were in our 7 man core rotation last year. I’m sure Laravia was expected to be on that list but he turned out to be too good. Hopefully that number is 6-7 next year and then we have a base to work with going forward.
 
I see players that have improved in their time under Forbes (Hildreth and Marsh), which indicates to me that the longer we keep Forbes around the better the program should become. Unfortunately, with the resources we have relative to other programs and this era of NIL, he's carrying a knife to a gunfight. I'm sure he knew that when he signed up for this job.
 
We should be 10-1 and likely ranked (or getting votes at least) heading into ACC play. The only criticism of Forbes that I think is legitimately in question (because frankly, you mess around with lineups early in the season, not later in the season - although I agree that some of them have been more than questionable and frustrating) is his in-game adjustments. There have been so many times where we seemingly do something stupid because we weren’t prepared coming out of a time out or we break down defensively/offensively and we don’t adjust quickly enough. He also preaches that we need to win the middle 8 minutes of the game, but I don’t feel like we do that well at all.

That and his stubbornness when it comes to calling time outs are really the only things I can gripe about at this point. He was dealt one of the shittiest hands a coach could have been dealt and he’s done an admirable job, IMHO. Give this thing time. I genuinely believe he will take us to the promised land (not just the dance, but conference championships and deep runs in the tourney).
 
DeacMan said:
Not if he doesn't recruit more effectively.
Click to expand...
Well, I mean sure. But that applies for any coach. Look at the studs we had under Gaudio and look how far we got. I mean, damn, we had a few studs under Manning as well and that didn’t equate to squat either. Recruiting is just one duty of a HC, but ultimately they need to be a really good coach. The recruiting will come, eventually and it’s not bad now.

We also forget how irrelevant WF basketball has become in the eyes of a high caliber b-ball player. It’s just going to take time and some successes along the way. Forbes is doing pretty damn well, IMHO given the entire situation. Putting the team together last year using the portal was impressive, but I generally agree that his ‘high school’ recruiting needs to improve. I’d also argue that he knew we needed experienced players now vs. later. Keller and Klintman will be good for us eventually (same argument being made for Cam and Marsh last year) but can you imagine a roster full of freshmen and sophomores like Keller and Klintman right now? We wouldn’t win many games at all. We are building depth and trying to win games at the same time. Hard thing to do, but Forbes is doing it. The team and program will benefit from it and we will be damn glad he’s here in the years to come. I’ll be the first one to eat crow if that turns out not to be true.
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
Gaudio's worst season (2008) ranks as the third best overall Wake team has had in Torvik since that season. We made the tournament his last year and have made it to one NCAA Tournament sense. Perhaps Dino's teams were "poor" relative to Odom and Prosser's, but...I don't think it's fair to point a finger at Dino for on the court results.
Click to expand...
Yeah you can count me in as one of those posters that kinda thinks we got what we deserved for firing Dino after an NCAA tournament victory.
 
For those that sat in this thread or on twitter saying they were "done with this team" and listing their tickets on StubHub, get your asses to the game against Duke. There are multiple high profile Wake recruits coming into Winston for that game and we need to provide a home court advantage. Can't not show up and then complain when we guys don't want to play for our fanbase. Let's support this program.
 
DeacMan said:
Not if he doesn't recruit more effectively.
Click to expand...
He recruited the ACC player of the year, two guys that are currently playing in the NBA, and the guy that currently leads the ACC in scoring and is second in assists.
 
DeacMan said:
And the outcomes for the team?

Awesome that he can land us a stud or two.

Now he has to recruit a team.
Click to expand...
As I wrote earlier, 25-10, 13-7 in ACC, and 35 in kenpom. A very good resume and should have been in the NCAA tournament, in my opinion. In his first full year.
 
so i got bored last night after the thrilling victory. decided to completely waste my time on something that means absolutely nothing - but i would do it again (have before). ha. no clue why i'm posting it either.

i charted wake forest basketball over the last 20 years (excluded forbes first year due to pandemic) as if it were a stock. started at $100 per share and adjusted on a per game basis. i used kenpom ratings with quadrant definitions (since the net is new). so a top 30 kenpom home game would be quad one and so forth on rest of the quad definitions.
i then included scoring margin and gave each result a percentage gain/loss. a 20+point quad one victory would get a 5% gain, while a 20+ point quad four loss would have a 5% loss (different "returns" for everything in between - those were the two extremes).
from a peak of $965.71 per share after beating Clemson at home in Dino's final year, buzzdick turned that into $384.88 per share after losing to Pitt in the ACC Tournament (his last game). mannequin said hold my beer and after losing to Pitt in his final game, the share price was $263.41
buzzdicks first two years were atrocious (shocker). rock bottom (or max drawdown from 2010 peak) was losing at home to Georgia Tech (86-79) in mannequins final season.
buzzdick and mannequin didn't have a single 20+ point quad one victory (5% gain) but had several bad losses (ie - losing by 28 to a 10-21 arizona st team)
i have another that excludes margin of victory/defeat (straight quad win/loss) and forbes tenure shows a much larger bounce than this one because the drawdown wasn't as severe. reason being not only were mannequin and buzzdick losing, they were losing by big margins. for example, during a five game losing streak in buzzdicks first year wake lost by an average of 25.6 points per game. not be outdone, during a 1-4 stretch for mannequin (where they did beat pitt by only two) in the four losses wake lost by an average of 28.8 points


1671129287580.png
 
Forbes' ability to recruit will depend on almost exclusively one thing: NIL money. He as much as said so himself.

It may spell the end of college basketball as we know it, and turn college sports into something in between what I used to love (college sports) and what I couldn't care less about (NBA, NFL; I literally cannot name a single Rocket or Texan). But the cat's out of the bag, the rules have changed, and all we can do is try to adapt.

But one thing is for sure. Recruiting now and recruiting then are two very different things.
 
Rafi said:
As I wrote earlier, 25-10, 13-7 in ACC, and 35 in kenpom. A very good resume and should have been in the NCAA tournament, in my opinion. In his first full year.
Click to expand...
Yeah, for as bad as it feels so far this year with the close games and the rough losses, in the last season and a half, we are 33-13 overall, and 13-8 in ACC play. Not world beaters by any stretch, but it's gotta be the best 45-50 game run in the last 13-15 years (extremely low bar). I still have a ton of faith in Forbes. I feel like he was loose with his lineup to start last year and then tightened it up once we got into conference play. This year has been a bit different already due to injuries, but I expect him to do the same thing. He knows you peak in March and that's what he's shooting for.
 
WakeForest Fan said:
so i got bored last night after the thrilling victory. decided to completely waste my time on something that means absolutely nothing - but i would do it again (have before). ha. no clue why i'm posting it either.

i charted wake forest basketball over the last 20 years (excluded forbes first year due to pandemic) as if it were a stock. started at $100 per share and adjusted on a per game basis. i used kenpom ratings with quadrant definitions (since the net is new). so a top 30 kenpom home game would be quad one and so forth on rest of the quad definitions.
i then included scoring margin and gave each result a percentage gain/loss. a 20+point quad one victory would get a 5% gain, while a 20+ point quad four loss would have a 5% loss (different "returns" for everything in between - those were the two extremes).
from a peak of $965.71 per share after beating Clemson at home in Dino's final year, buzzdick turned that into $384.88 per share after losing to Pitt in the ACC Tournament (his last game). mannequin said hold my beer and after losing to Pitt in his final game, the share price was $263.41
buzzdicks first two years were atrocious (shocker). rock bottom (or max drawdown from 2010 peak) was losing at home to Georgia Tech (86-79) in mannequins final season.
buzzdick and mannequin didn't have a single 20+ point quad one victory (5% gain) but had several bad losses (ie - losing by 28 to a 10-21 arizona st team)
i have another that excludes margin of victory/defeat (straight quad win/loss) and forbes tenure shows a much larger bounce than this one because the drawdown wasn't as severe. reason being not only were mannequin and buzzdick losing, they were losing by big margins. for example, during a five game losing streak in buzzdicks first year wake lost by an average of 25.6 points per game. not be outdone, during a 1-4 stretch for mannequin (where they did beat pitt by only two) in the four losses wake lost by an average of 28.8 points


View attachment 2259
Click to expand...
I'd put $$$ in a college basketball stock market that tracked share prices this way. Great work.
 
If Wake basketball has stayed much more valuable than it was 20 years ago, have any programs lost value?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top