Sam
New member
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2008
- Messages
- 6,081
- Reaction score
- 0
Now that we have seen this year’s team play let’s compare it to Capel’s first team.
(NOTE: I would really like to keep this as a hypothetic exercise . Just discussing and comparing the players. FOR FUN. Yes I know little progress has been made/none at all since Capel’s first season but we have enough threads and topics covering this fault of Capel. So if you just want to turn this into another bash Capel thread please don’t, we have a fair share of those already. I was bored and wanted to see how they match up since I feel they’re both very similar teams.
Thank you.)
PG: Austin Johnson 6'3 176 vs. Carl Blair, 6’2 214
23.6 mpg, 7.0 ppg, 35% 3, 1.8 rpg, 2.8 apg, 1.4 tpg, vs. 22.1 mpg, 6.3 ppg, 36% 3, 2.3 rpg, 3.7 apg, 2.8 tpg
On paper these players are very similar, both true sophomores with very similar averages. Since this game is only being played on paper that should count for something right?
In reality if you have watched both players play they’re quite different in their styles. Blair is more of a true point guard than Johnson was as a sophomore. A.J. was more of a converted combo/two type at this point in his career who was battling injuries and had to play point by default.
Blair is more aggressive then A.J. when it comes to running and in the half court and it shows with more turnovers but he also produces more assists. In some ways A.J. was in the caretaker role of the 07 offense. Johnson with his length and build is also an upgrade over Blair as a defender. Given the advantages and disadvantages each player give and take this position is a wash.
My take: Push
SG: Mike Neal, 6’3 198 vs Steven Pledger, 6’4 206
28.9 mpg, 10.0 ppg, 31% 3, 2.6 rpg, 1.7 apg, 1.0 spg vs. 29.3 mpg, 11.6 ppg, 32% 3, 2.7 rpg, 2.2 apg
The main difference in these two players is age with Neal being a juco transfer senior and “Bird” as a true sophomore. Neal’s senior campaign was hampered by a hand injury and less open shots then he enjoyed as a junior due to the lack of Taj Gray and Kevin Bookout in the post.
Neal was a better defender than Pledger was but both are comparable attacking the basket. Neither were great drivers and Pledger is on pace to have comparable free throw attempts to Neal.
Given Neal’s age advantage and being a better defender he has to be given the edge over Bird.
My take: Edge, Neal
SF: Tony Crocker, 6’6 190 vs. Cameron Clark 6’6 190
23.3 mpg, 8.6 ppg, 36% 3, 3.7 rpg, 1.8 apg vs. 30.8 mpg, 7.2 ppg , 27% 3, 4.6 rpg,
Both are skinny true freshman who are being asked to take on more responsibly than they should have at this stage in their careers. Crocker is a better three point shooter than Clark but Clark has a huge edge in explosiveness. Clark is also a better rebounder and grinder type for the smaller 2011 edition. On defense both are classic true freshmen trying to adjust to the speed and strength of the college game but given Cam’s natural gifts (quickness, length and leaping ability) he holds an edge over Tony.
While Tony is a little better half court offensive threat given his shooting ability over Cam, Clark is showing why he is deadly in transition with his ability to catch momentum shifting alley oops. Also even though he has an unorthodox shooting form, Clark is starting to become more of a threat in the midrange game.
For natural athletic ability and gifts I have to give Clark a slight edge over Crocker
My take: Edge Clark
Nate Carter, 6’6 220 vs Cade Davis, 6’5 206
23.5 mpg, 11.6 ppg, 5.1 rpg vs 36.3 mpg, 13.8 ppg, 41% 3, 4.3 rpg, 2.3 apg
Nate’s all year stat line doesn’t do him justice for the tear he was on during Big 12 play. After being little more than a role player early on he turned into a deadly player as an undersized 4. Despite his small stature he was able to rebound among the tress while proving to be a mismatch off the dribble forcing many fouls.
In some ways Cade is similar as despite his size he’s willing to bang and play among much bigger players as the 2011 Sooners are starting to go small. Unlike Nate he has a more developed outside game and that could prove to be beneficial in drawing Carter away from the basket and make him assert his energy on defense.
As tough as Cade is and as much effort as he gives out I can’t help but feel that Nate would be too much for Cade to cover on defense. He could also cause Cade to be in foul trouble and the current Sooners would be in trouble if their iron man was forced to the bench.
My take: Edge Carter
Longar Longar, 6’11 220 vs Andrew Fitzgerald 6’8 237
26.2 mpg, 10.4 ppg, 7.1 rpg, 1.4 bpg vs. 31.1 mpg, 14.0 ppg, 6.0 rpg, 1.3 spg
Longar with his length and rebounding was a much more complete player than Fitz. But Fitz’s offensive game is well developed and he finds ways to score down low and also can step and consistently hit 14-18 foot jumpers. Fitz also gives opposing posts trouble as his unorthodox style in the paint leads to fouls and him going to the line where he excels (75% free throw shooter).
On the flip slide Longar is the type of player with his length who could bother Fitzgerald down low. Also Andrew has had trouble staying out of foul trouble with 7 games where he has picked up 4 fouls and 1 foul out already this year. Longar attacking him on offense to force Drew into foul trouble may be Longar’s best form of defense.
One factor is from what I remember about the 2007 edition of Longar was inconsistency/tentativeness. There were a few times (Tech at home for example) he looked like a finish product who could go for 15 and 8 everynight. Other times he looked tentative and unready for the prime time.
Because Fitz is becoming a complete weapon on offense (low post, midrange game and free throws) I give him then edge over Longar (baring foul trouble of course,
).
Advantage: Slight edge Fitz
Bench
David Godbold, 6’5 221
27.9 mpg, 7.4 ppg, 4.6 rpg 33% 3
Bobby Maze, 6’3 190
18.6 mpg, 5.6 ppg, 2.1 apg, 22% 3
Taylor Griffin 6’7 238
23.4 mpg, 6.3 ppg, 5.2 rpg
vs.
Calvin Newell, 6’0 205
14.8 mpg, 5.5 ppg, 2.2 apg, 37% 3
Nick Thompson, 6’9 212
20.6 mpg, 5.4 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 1.6 apg, 47% 3
C.J. Washington 6’7 210
10.1 mpg, 1.8 ppg, 3.3 rpg
Unless this is a three point shooting contest I think the 2007 bench is obvious winners. There is more experience and toughness to be had with them. Newell is the only player who would beat most likely beat his counterpart (Maze). Thompson while proving to be a good shooter and a good passer leaves a lot to be desired with the rest of his game. While Godbold wasn’t the most skilled guy his toughness and defense wins out over Nick. Then Griffin is a bigger better version of C.J.
Edge 2007 Sooners
In the end I see a lot of similarities in the teams. Neither one has a great amount of talent but both are scrappy and will continue to fight. I think the 2010 team is a better shooting team even though they are streaky. In the half court set though an inside out combo of Carter and Longar is better then what the 2010 Sooners can produce.
Another advantage is the 2007 Sooners have a lot more experience. There are only 2 newcomers (Crocker and Maze) in the 8 man rotation while there are 5 new faces for 2010. That gives a mental and a more cohesive edge to the 2007 Sooners. The 07 team also strikes me as more of a complete ball club with players with more defined roles.
I think in a 10 game series the 2007 Sooners would win 6-7 games while the 2010 team struggles to keep it close when they’re not on fire from deep.
For a score prediction between the two I would go something along the lines of the average score being 68-62 2007 Sooners.
(NOTE: I would really like to keep this as a hypothetic exercise . Just discussing and comparing the players. FOR FUN. Yes I know little progress has been made/none at all since Capel’s first season but we have enough threads and topics covering this fault of Capel. So if you just want to turn this into another bash Capel thread please don’t, we have a fair share of those already. I was bored and wanted to see how they match up since I feel they’re both very similar teams.
Thank you.)
PG: Austin Johnson 6'3 176 vs. Carl Blair, 6’2 214
23.6 mpg, 7.0 ppg, 35% 3, 1.8 rpg, 2.8 apg, 1.4 tpg, vs. 22.1 mpg, 6.3 ppg, 36% 3, 2.3 rpg, 3.7 apg, 2.8 tpg
On paper these players are very similar, both true sophomores with very similar averages. Since this game is only being played on paper that should count for something right?
In reality if you have watched both players play they’re quite different in their styles. Blair is more of a true point guard than Johnson was as a sophomore. A.J. was more of a converted combo/two type at this point in his career who was battling injuries and had to play point by default.
Blair is more aggressive then A.J. when it comes to running and in the half court and it shows with more turnovers but he also produces more assists. In some ways A.J. was in the caretaker role of the 07 offense. Johnson with his length and build is also an upgrade over Blair as a defender. Given the advantages and disadvantages each player give and take this position is a wash.
My take: Push
SG: Mike Neal, 6’3 198 vs Steven Pledger, 6’4 206
28.9 mpg, 10.0 ppg, 31% 3, 2.6 rpg, 1.7 apg, 1.0 spg vs. 29.3 mpg, 11.6 ppg, 32% 3, 2.7 rpg, 2.2 apg
The main difference in these two players is age with Neal being a juco transfer senior and “Bird” as a true sophomore. Neal’s senior campaign was hampered by a hand injury and less open shots then he enjoyed as a junior due to the lack of Taj Gray and Kevin Bookout in the post.
Neal was a better defender than Pledger was but both are comparable attacking the basket. Neither were great drivers and Pledger is on pace to have comparable free throw attempts to Neal.
Given Neal’s age advantage and being a better defender he has to be given the edge over Bird.
My take: Edge, Neal
SF: Tony Crocker, 6’6 190 vs. Cameron Clark 6’6 190
23.3 mpg, 8.6 ppg, 36% 3, 3.7 rpg, 1.8 apg vs. 30.8 mpg, 7.2 ppg , 27% 3, 4.6 rpg,
Both are skinny true freshman who are being asked to take on more responsibly than they should have at this stage in their careers. Crocker is a better three point shooter than Clark but Clark has a huge edge in explosiveness. Clark is also a better rebounder and grinder type for the smaller 2011 edition. On defense both are classic true freshmen trying to adjust to the speed and strength of the college game but given Cam’s natural gifts (quickness, length and leaping ability) he holds an edge over Tony.
While Tony is a little better half court offensive threat given his shooting ability over Cam, Clark is showing why he is deadly in transition with his ability to catch momentum shifting alley oops. Also even though he has an unorthodox shooting form, Clark is starting to become more of a threat in the midrange game.
For natural athletic ability and gifts I have to give Clark a slight edge over Crocker
My take: Edge Clark
Nate Carter, 6’6 220 vs Cade Davis, 6’5 206
23.5 mpg, 11.6 ppg, 5.1 rpg vs 36.3 mpg, 13.8 ppg, 41% 3, 4.3 rpg, 2.3 apg
Nate’s all year stat line doesn’t do him justice for the tear he was on during Big 12 play. After being little more than a role player early on he turned into a deadly player as an undersized 4. Despite his small stature he was able to rebound among the tress while proving to be a mismatch off the dribble forcing many fouls.
In some ways Cade is similar as despite his size he’s willing to bang and play among much bigger players as the 2011 Sooners are starting to go small. Unlike Nate he has a more developed outside game and that could prove to be beneficial in drawing Carter away from the basket and make him assert his energy on defense.
As tough as Cade is and as much effort as he gives out I can’t help but feel that Nate would be too much for Cade to cover on defense. He could also cause Cade to be in foul trouble and the current Sooners would be in trouble if their iron man was forced to the bench.
My take: Edge Carter
Longar Longar, 6’11 220 vs Andrew Fitzgerald 6’8 237
26.2 mpg, 10.4 ppg, 7.1 rpg, 1.4 bpg vs. 31.1 mpg, 14.0 ppg, 6.0 rpg, 1.3 spg
Longar with his length and rebounding was a much more complete player than Fitz. But Fitz’s offensive game is well developed and he finds ways to score down low and also can step and consistently hit 14-18 foot jumpers. Fitz also gives opposing posts trouble as his unorthodox style in the paint leads to fouls and him going to the line where he excels (75% free throw shooter).
On the flip slide Longar is the type of player with his length who could bother Fitzgerald down low. Also Andrew has had trouble staying out of foul trouble with 7 games where he has picked up 4 fouls and 1 foul out already this year. Longar attacking him on offense to force Drew into foul trouble may be Longar’s best form of defense.
One factor is from what I remember about the 2007 edition of Longar was inconsistency/tentativeness. There were a few times (Tech at home for example) he looked like a finish product who could go for 15 and 8 everynight. Other times he looked tentative and unready for the prime time.
Because Fitz is becoming a complete weapon on offense (low post, midrange game and free throws) I give him then edge over Longar (baring foul trouble of course,
).Advantage: Slight edge Fitz
Bench
David Godbold, 6’5 221
27.9 mpg, 7.4 ppg, 4.6 rpg 33% 3
Bobby Maze, 6’3 190
18.6 mpg, 5.6 ppg, 2.1 apg, 22% 3
Taylor Griffin 6’7 238
23.4 mpg, 6.3 ppg, 5.2 rpg
vs.
Calvin Newell, 6’0 205
14.8 mpg, 5.5 ppg, 2.2 apg, 37% 3
Nick Thompson, 6’9 212
20.6 mpg, 5.4 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 1.6 apg, 47% 3
C.J. Washington 6’7 210
10.1 mpg, 1.8 ppg, 3.3 rpg
Unless this is a three point shooting contest I think the 2007 bench is obvious winners. There is more experience and toughness to be had with them. Newell is the only player who would beat most likely beat his counterpart (Maze). Thompson while proving to be a good shooter and a good passer leaves a lot to be desired with the rest of his game. While Godbold wasn’t the most skilled guy his toughness and defense wins out over Nick. Then Griffin is a bigger better version of C.J.
Edge 2007 Sooners
In the end I see a lot of similarities in the teams. Neither one has a great amount of talent but both are scrappy and will continue to fight. I think the 2010 team is a better shooting team even though they are streaky. In the half court set though an inside out combo of Carter and Longar is better then what the 2010 Sooners can produce.
Another advantage is the 2007 Sooners have a lot more experience. There are only 2 newcomers (Crocker and Maze) in the 8 man rotation while there are 5 new faces for 2010. That gives a mental and a more cohesive edge to the 2007 Sooners. The 07 team also strikes me as more of a complete ball club with players with more defined roles.
I think in a 10 game series the 2007 Sooners would win 6-7 games while the 2010 team struggles to keep it close when they’re not on fire from deep.
For a score prediction between the two I would go something along the lines of the average score being 68-62 2007 Sooners.
