A Ramble and a Question

[Sooner04]

DISCLAIMER: This is just for the sake of conversation. My family usually goes ape when I first bring this up, but just here me out. It's just for conversation during a slow BBall news cycle.



OK, onward.


I was chatting with my cousin one day after another OU BBall win and we covered a range of topics. We threw a few theories up against the wall to see what would stick. Little of this and a little of that.

Anyhow, one of my final talking points nearly got me killed. He came around to see my side of the story, but he still didn't necessarily agree with me. But here it is: Is Hollis Price the most overrated player in the history of OU Basketball?

Now, another disclaimer. I'm a huge Hollis Price fan. I'm not sure we've ever had a better ambassador for our program than Hollis. If your daughter brought him home, you'd be begging HIM to marry HER. I was in school at the same time as Hollis, and all the stories you heard about him were true. He was that nice. He was that sincere. He was just one hell of a dude.

But I think he's overrated.

Here's why. A lot of times when I see lists of all-time OU this or that I invariably see Hollis as one of the all-time 2-Guards. Let me set one thing straight. If OU ever set up a HOF for basketball, I don't think Hollis Price goes in. HOF induction is for the best of the best: the great. I think Hollis Price belongs in the Hall of the Very, Very Good, but I don't think he belongs with our greats.

Another disclaimer. I watched A LOT of Hollis Price at OU.

The three free throws against Missouri in 2000.
The first half from the Gods against Arizona in 2002.
The shooting clinic in Ames in 2003.
The shot against Tech in 2003.

I saw all of that, but here's why I think he was overrated. In today's world, a world over-saturated with media, we get what just happened shoved down our throats constantly. How many times did we see LeBron's shot from Game 2 against Orlando? I bet I saw it 50 times in the 24 hours following the shot. I think that's why so many people list Hollis on these all-time OU teams. I think he gets credit for being the best player on the best team of the last 20 years at OU (and I'm not sure that's accurate because the 2002 team became a juggernaut when the light went on for Ace McGhee in late December).

Hollis was marvelous at what he did well. He was a good spot-up shooter. Either he or Ryan Minor can shoot my crunch time free throws whenever they want. Money. But Hollis was undersized, and when he couldn't make up for that fact with his speed he struggled.

In 2003, Hollis should've been THE MAN. Ace was gone and it was Price's team. The buck stopped with him. Problem was, that 2003 team was offensively inept. You had a senior at PG (Quannas), but they couldn't score nor could they create. To be a great player at OU you can't be the star on a team that fails to score more than 50 points in a game four times. They failed to crack 65 in regulation 12 different times.

I submit to you now the guy I feel is the most underrated Sooner ever: Tim McCalister. You never hear about T-Mac anymore, but here's what he did compared to Hollis Price.

Points - 2,275 (454 more than Hollis)
Rebounds - 529 (165 more than Hollis)
Assists - 628 (166 more than Hollis)
Turnovers - 237 (33 less than Hollis)
Steals - 319 (95 more than Hollis)
Big 8/12 Championships - 2 (2 more than Hollis)
Big 8/12 Tournament Championships - 1 (2 less than Hollis)
NCAA Wins - 6 (2 less than Hollis)

I think T-Mac was a better player on a lesser team. Remember that T-Mac put up these points and averages playing his first three seasons without a shot clock or three-point line. The guy was a great player and he's never talked about any more.

To put Hollis on the list of all-time greats is no crime. Far from it, I just think to put him on there is to overrate him. He was a very, very good player, but I think T-Mac was better. T-Mac out averaged Hollis in points, rebounds and assists in every comparative season of their careers at OU.

We've had some studs come through at the 2-Guard position. Nate Erdmann, Lester Lane, John McCullough, Raymond "The Juice" Whitley, David Little, Brent Price, Ryan Minor and Corey Brewer. All of those guys were really, REALLY good. More often than not, though, when I see fans make up an all-time list I see Hollis Price at 2-Guard. He was really good, but not that good.

And that's why I think he's the most overrated player in the history of OU Basketball.






Like I said, it's just a conversation starter on a slow day. Don't shoot me. :OUbball-logo:

 

[thebigabd]

Perhaps his value is not found in production, numbers, stats, etc... Perhaps it is found in his leadership, image, sportsmanship, and competitiveness.

As a player, I agree he is a little overrated...

 

[Krugerfan52]

Sooner,
I totally agree with you.

 

[mattham4]

I love Hollis as well, but I agree with pretty much everything you wrote. I especially agree with your sentiments regarding Tim McAlister...I loved that dude's game and was in school while he was there so I witnessed it first hand.

 

[elmocarp]

04, I think I agree with you and at the very least I don't think anyone can find fault in the reasoning that brought you to your conclusion. I think all your points are very fair and I tend to agree with the whole post.

I had a series of posts about T-Mac prior to last season where I talked about how he and Choo are totally overlooked as great OU players. I think the thing that makes evaluating them hard is that they played Billyball, and its really hard to know how good a guy is when he plays in that style. And I think style is the main thing that Hollis has going for him in his case for being an OU All-Timer.

I also feel this way about Eduardo, and he and I were friends. I just never thought Eddie was quite the guy he was made out to be. Loved him and always will, I'm just not sure he was as good a player as we talked him up.

One more thing...wasn't Hollis an All-American? That would be a pretty compelling point in his favor.

 

[Smash Williams]

Sooner04, there is a huge hole in your argument when you try to compare them statistically. During McCalister's four years, OU averaged about 70 field goal attempts per game. For Price's first three seasons, the team averaged about 60 FGA, and in his senior season, the one for which you criticize the team's offensive production, they took 51.4 shots per game. In McCalister's senior season, the team took 69.7 shots per game. Price (1.34 points per FGA) was a more efficient scorer than McCalister (1.14 points per FGA), although the 3-point line wasn't instituted until McCalister's senior year, which makes the career comparison less than fair. However, comparing senior seasons only, Price (1.43 points per FGA) was still a much more efficient scorer than McCalister (1.19 points per FGA).

I'm not old enough to have watched McCalister play; however, statistics suggest that his numbers benefitted in playing in Tubbs' uptempo system in comparison to Price playing in Sampson's system.

 

[Krugerfan52]

I don't feel the same way about Najera as Price. I don't think Najera was overrated at all. In fact, if anything I think he was underrated by OU fans and college basketball as a whole. I think his long NBA career is proving how valuable he was/is as a player. In college he was a rebounding force, a defensive stopper as well as the go-to guy on the offensive side of the ball. He worked his way into an inside-out player and turned into a guy that was trusted on the floor in the NBA.

But in college I felt like Najera was the heart and sole of OU and we would have been lucky to make the NIT without him. But take Hollis off the team with Ace Mcghee, Jason Detrick, Quannis White and Ebe Ere and you still have a pretty darn good team.

 

[Sooner04]

Elmo and Smash,

Like I said in my posts, this isn't some slack-jawed theory I drummed up this morning while dreaming of Charlize Theron ( ). I've been thinking about it for a while. The thing I couldn't put into words is how to quantify the differences in pace of play between Billy's teams and Kelvin's teams. Obviously the three-point line and shot clock sent Billy's late 80s teams into orbit, but it was a vastly different ballgame in '84, '85 and '86.

Maybe the average discretions between T-Mac and Hollis as juniors and seniors cancel each other out when you factor in the pace theories between the two coaching staffs. Maybe it brings T-Mac down a couple of points his junior year when he outaveraged Hollis by nearly two points a game.

The worst shooting year of McCalister's career was his senior year, '87, when he only shot 41% from the field. He still averaged nearly 20 a game, but he obviously had to work. As a matter of fact, that poor shooting season is the only reason Hollis outranks him on the career FG% list because T-Mac out shot him his first three seasons.

What I can't discount is how much better T-Mac was out of the gate than Hollis. He averaged 16 points and four rebounds a game on a team that went 13-1 in the Big 8. That's stout. That's a point and a half more than WW with no shot clock and no three-point line.

I think his immediate greatness is definitely another feather in the cap of T-Mac.

 

[SoonerBounce13]

I think Hollis Price belongs in the Hall of the Very, Very Good

Is that you berry trammel?

 

[Sooner04]

Is that you berry trammel?

Two things:

1. I'm much better looking than Berry Tramel.
2. I think I heard that line from Peter King.

Oh, one more.

1. I'm much better looking than Peter King too.

 

[DSMok1]

Well, a fairly good way of comparing them would be to look at their wins produced each year, which is easily calculated from the box score statistics. The only thing I can't do is adjust for the level of the competition. I'll assume they played a schedule about as tough as OU's this year. I calculated approximate pace (OU's teams in '86 and '87 played about as fast as VMI does now, miles above anyone else currently) and adjusted each player's totals accordingly to compare with current players.

		Hollis Price		Tim McCalister	
Year		WP40	Wins	WP40	Wins
Freshman	0.18	4.1	0.19	4.8
Sophomore	0.18	4.9	0.18	5.5
Junior		0.24	7.0	0.25	8.0
Senior		0.27	7.8	0.22	6.9
Total		0.22	23.9	0.21	25.2

Over their careers, McCalister did produce more wins. His best season was slightly better (he seemed to struggle some his last year). Per minute, though, Hollis was a little better. I'd say they were about even.

I might add that they weren't spectacular players according to the stats... good, but not able to truly carry a team. They tended to shoot a bit too low a percentage... Similar players this year: Alex Ruoff, Greivis Vasquez, Ben Uzoh among the more recognizable names.

Incidentally I calculated the Wins Produced for the 2002 team (slightly different than the above analysis, hence the difference for Hollis):

Player		Wins	WP40
Aaron McGhee	8.132	0.322
Hollis Price	8.085	0.277
Ebi Ere		7.612	0.288
Quannas White	5.940	0.221
Jabahri Brown	4.601	0.280
Daryan Selvy	4.165	0.197
Jason Detrick	3.610	0.192
Blake Johnston	1.270	0.223
Johnnie Gilbert	0.740	0.207
Jozsef Szendrei	0.682	0.118
Richard Ainooson0.045	0.058
Michael Cano	-0.118	-0.080
Michael Liggett	-0.163	-0.327

For comparison:
Player		Wins 	WP40
Blake Griffin	21.768	0.747
Austin Johnson	7.225	0.257
Taylor Griffin	6.325	0.234
Willie Warren	6.307	0.224
Tony Crocker	3.875	0.149
Cade Davis	2.708	0.212
Juan Pattillo	1.362	0.202
Omar Leary	0.964	0.113
Ray Willis	0.580	0.225
Ryan Wright	0.210	0.032
Beau Gerber	0.164	0.253
Orlando Allen	0.065	0.030
Kyle Cannon	0.054	0.035
T.J. Franklin	-0.332	-0.492

The 2002 team wasn't better than this year's team, according to the stats. the 2009 team should have been a little better. Much shallower, though. Above 0.15 wins per 40 is a good player; OU was stacked with them in 2002. They went 7 deep with ease and 10 deep as necessary. Last year's team was barely 5 deep and 8 was a stretch. Of course, Blake was so much better than anybody on the '02 team it isn't even close.

But that's an aside: back to the original question.... is Hollis overrated? Yes, I think so. As a player. But not as a leader! And he wasn't a half-bad player; he would have been the second best player on this year's team. He would have been about 10th best in the Big XII about even with Craig Brackins.

Price = McCalister
Price = Leader
Price = Overrated
McCalister = rated about right, I think.

There, another ramble for you all!

EDIT: I see everyone discussing pace. OU averaged about 80 possessions per game in '86 and '87; '02 averaged about 70.5, and '03 averaged about 68. The current NCAA average is about 66.5; OU last year was about 68.5.

 

[MsProudSooner]

I think if Hollis had been 20 pounds or 30 pounds heavier, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

I also think that Tim might be underrated because not as many people got to see him on a regular basis because not as many games were on TV when he was in school. I lived in Tulsa and had little kids so I didn't get to make it to many games while he was in school. I listened on the radio as much as I could, but it's just not the same. People are just more familiar with Hollis than they are with Tim.

 

[elmocarp]

Elmo and Smash,

Like I said in my posts, this isn't some slack-jawed theory I drummed up this morning while dreaming of Charlize Theron ( ). I've been thinking about it for a while. The thing I couldn't put into words is how to quantify the differences in pace of play between Billy's teams and Kelvin's teams. Obviously the three-point line and shot clock sent Billy's late 80s teams into orbit, but it was a vastly different ballgame in '84, '85 and '86.

Maybe the average discretions between T-Mac and Hollis as juniors and seniors cancel each other out when you factor in the pace theories between the two coaching staffs. Maybe it brings T-Mac down a couple of points his junior year when he outaveraged Hollis by nearly two points a game.

The worst shooting year of McCalister's career was his senior year, '87, when he only shot 41% from the field. He still averaged nearly 20 a game, but he obviously had to work. As a matter of fact, that poor shooting season is the only reason Hollis outranks him on the career FG% list because T-Mac out shot him his first three seasons.

What I can't discount is how much better T-Mac was out of the gate than Hollis. He averaged 16 points and four rebounds a game on a team that went 13-1 in the Big 8. That's stout. That's a point and a half more than WW with no shot clock and no three-point line.

I think his immediate greatness is definitely another feather in the cap of T-Mac.

Great points...this made me remember something about that year...the three point line really messed with Timmy. I remember hearing Billy talk about it in later years, that T-Mac had trouble adjusting and was always thinking too much out on the floor. I think the three point line is actually the reason that his efficiency took a hit that year.

I tend to think that just based on talent and productivity, if you had brought McCallister to Norman as a freshman the year that Hollis came and swap them out, I think he would have been a more productive player. He was just a really, really good player.

The thing I think is important to remember about Hollis is that he was just a very, very unique player anyway. It is hard to try to compare him to anyone because he was so unique. And I disagree with anyone that says the 02 team was Ace's team. Ace, Ebi ad Selvy were always freelancing and going off the script (something that Hollis never did) but when it came down to it you always knew Hollis was the guy on that team.

I think I am in the middle...I don't think he is the best off-guard to ever play at OU. I still think that's McCallister. But I do think he is one of the best players OU has ever had and is a guy who should be honored at some point.

BTW...can anyone confirm or deny that he was an AA?

 

[Cheno]

04 you bring up some valid points. Hollis Price is by far my favorite Sooner of all-time. What he brought to the teams he was on was immeasurable on and off the court.
Strictly talking about one's basketball game though and you bring some good points. Hollis probably was a little overrated which is why as an individual player he never made the NBA and such. You put Hollis on the '88 team and he quite possibly doesn't start. You put Mookie on the '02 team and they might have won it all. Or not, it's hard to tell but I do think there were better individual players at OU...quite a few probably...but as a team player Hollis was invaluable.

 

[Darwin]

I think the most overrated player in modern times was not Hollis, far from it, it was Jeff Webster. The Tubbs system was good but it does skew the numbers.

 

[elmocarp]

I think the most overrated player in modern times was not Hollis, far from it, it was Jeff Webster. The Tubbs system was good but it does skew the numbers.

+1

 

[NickZepp]

Mookie Blaylock is the best 2 guard at OU. The PG those teams were Ricky Grace. But I think Hollis is right up there with any guard ever at OU. The efficiency numbers say a lot but also he just made big plays and was 100% heart. He may be the best OU player ever per pound.

 

[cowboysooner]

Well, I don't know who is right, but Smash wins the debate hands down. Great analysis even if you are wrong.

I saw both play their entire careers. Completely different players, and I thought both were very good. Neither compared in any way to Mookie, who is hands down the best guard to ever wear an OU uniform. During one telecast, Billy Packer stated that he thought mookie was the best guard that had ever played the college game. Well, I don't know about that, but he is the best off guard I have ever seen.

 

[sanguinetti]

interesting thread. i agree there was something "missing" about the career of Jeff Webster. lot of stats, but overall i don't know. he reminds me of Ron Mercer in the NBA, he gets his 25 points but you still lose by 10. i overstate for effect, obviously.

i remember at the Olympic Festival something or other hosted in Norman the summer before Webster's FR year...and he drove his coach Jud Heathcote insane in the basketball tournament at LNC. Jud was yelling at him constantly when he was on the floor, exasperated by his play, utterly beside himself.

to the original post, i don't think you can put Ray Whitley in that group. he was a really talented player but injury would keep out of an OU HOF. Chucky Barnett and depending where he played from game to game and how you want to terminologize positions David Little are in over Juice, easy. and those two guys i think you could argue are two of the more important players in OU history the last 30 years. not best, but among the most important in their contribution to getting Billy's program on the map.

 

[Arkboysooner]

All I know is that he lead OU to a final four and an elite 8 with tough defense and a sweet stroke. He may not have been the complete package physically, but his hustle and heart defined an era of OU basketball. If you want to call that overrated then so be it.