Cade davis

[Big Old Booger]

Apparently you do.

Do you have amnesia?

Wow your a moron!! A Center...where did I say he would start at center. I have cleared it up in 2 threads where he would start and you continue to say Center.

In your original post you posted the following:

97 over Evan

I took that to mean Evan Wiley, or did you mean Bobby Joe Evans? Regardless, he wouldn't have started over either player. Bobby Joe played the 4 and 5 and Evan just played the 5.

Stop using soonerstats.com to build your argument.

Oh, and your comment that Cade is a better ball handler than our current PG means nothing because Blair is the worst ball handling PG I've ever seen. He wouldn't even make the team if Kelvin were the coach.

I'm done with this argument. You continue to spout out where you think he would start over very good players just because you have stats from soonerstats that you think mean something. I was a season ticket holder in the 90's and 00's and I saw those teams with my own eyes multiple times per season. Cade is a nice player, but he's not good enough to play any position other than the 3 on a good team which Kelvin had every year, and Kelvin's 3's most years were dynamic.

 

[StoopsBros]

in 98...If you wanted Brewer at the 2...then M. Johnson would have started at the point..but if you wanted more scoring than Brewer would have started at the PG and Davis at the 2. You would also get more rebounding and defense with Cade out there.

Allison should have been the guy you brought up in 98. Cade's not starting over Johnson.

 

[Big Old Booger]

For Bob. Position he would have started.
95 - 2
96 - 2
97 - 2
98 - 2 if Brewer runs the point, if not then he wouldn't start
99 - 2
00 - 3
01 - would not start
02 - would not start, unless Price ran point
03 - would not start
04 - 2
05 - 3
06 - 3

One more post...the post goes against your original post on the topic:

95 would start over Fowler
96 over Barnes
97 over Evan
98 over Johnson
99 over Spaulding
00 over Johnson
01 over Heywood/Newton
02 would not start
03 would not start
04 over Mckenzie/Alexander
05 over Williams/Godbold
06 over Godbold

97 -- Evan Wiley was a 5, Bobby Joe Evans was a 4
98 -- Johnson was not a 2, he was a PG.
00 -- Nolan was not a 2, he was 3.
01 -- Heywood was a 4, not a 2.

Dang dude, you change more than the wind.

 

[StoopsBros]

Stop using soonerstats.com to build your argument.

Oh, and your comment that Cade is a better ball handler than our current PG means nothing because Blair is the worst ball handling PG I've ever seen. He wouldn't even make the team if Kelvin were the coach.

I'm done with this argument. You continue to spout out where you think he would start over very good players just because you have stats from soonerstats that you think mean something. I was a season ticket holder in the 90's and 00's and I saw those teams with my own eyes multiple times per season. Cade is a nice player, but he's not good enough to play any position other than the 3 on a good team which Kelvin had every year, and Kelvin's 3's most years were dynamic.

:clap

This is exactly it. Is bgrch and Klegg related?

 

[Big Old Booger]

Allison should have been the guy you brought up in 98. Cade's not starting over Johnson.

Exactly, except Allison played the 4 after Bobby Joe went down and played some 3.

 

[bgrch1350]

I took that to mean Evan Wiley, or did you mean Bobby Joe Evans? Regardless, he wouldn't have started over either player. Bobby Joe played the 4 and 5 and Evan just played the 5. I am going to list the starters for this group. Brewer, Davis, Erdmann, Najera and Wiley/Evans...take your pick...the 2 combined for 11 ppg.

Stop using soonerstats.com to build your argument.

Oh, and your comment that Cade is a better ball handler than our current PG means nothing because Blair is the worst ball handling PG I've ever seen. He wouldn't even make the team if Kelvin were the coach. Here we go again...Brewer...would have ran PG, not Cade...the ball was in his hands the majority of time anyways. Like I said, if you want more scoring than you would have started Cade over Johnson...not positions(b/c you can drop brewer to the PG...following me) If you want a true PG, than start Johnson.

I'm done with this argument. You continue to spout out where you think he would start over very good players just because you have stats from soonerstats that you think mean something. I was a season ticket holder in the 90's and 00's and I saw those teams with my own eyes multiple times per season. Cade is a nice player, but he's not good enough to play any position other than the 3 on a good team which Kelvin had every year, and Kelvin's 3's most years were dynamic.

I am glad to hear that you don't consider Cade to be a shooting Guard when the rest of the world does.

 

[bgrch1350]

97 -- Evan Wiley was a 5, Bobby Joe Evans was a 4
98 -- Johnson was not a 2, he was a PG.
00 -- Nolan was not a 2, he was 3.
01 -- Heywood was a 4, not a 2.

Dang dude, you change more than the wind.

If i start Cade over a PG or a Post...that doesn't mean thats where he would play. That means a lineup would be adjusted.

 

[Big Old Booger]

I am glad to hear that you don't consider Cade to be a shooting Guard when the rest of the world does.

I didn't realize you constitute as "the rest of the world". Notice nobody else is jumping on here to defend your argument that Cade is a 2G. He's not...he's a 3.

I am going to list the starters for this group. Brewer, Davis, Erdmann, Najera and Wiley/Evans...take your pick...the 2 combined for 11 ppg.

Thank goodness you aren't the coach because Najera didn't start on that team. He came off the bench. That team only had 3 players that started every game: Erdmann, Brewer, and Wiley. Evans would have started the entire season had he not had back problems. I think Cade could have gotten some playing time, but certainly not over either Brewer or Erdmann. Those 2 players played the 1 and 2 spots, maybe Cade gets some starting time at the 3. You originally said he would start over "Evan", which I guess you meant Bobby Joe Evans, but then you backtracked and said he would start at the 2G, which we all know he's not a better player than Erdmann or Brewer. We played a 3 guard offense that year because we had too. We won games but it hindered us.

 

[bgrch1350]

Now there is a difference between Wiley as a JR and Wiley as a SR. Theres also a difference between M.Johnson as a JR and as a SR. I know that I would take Wiley and Johnson as seniors over Davis as a senior...but I definatly would not take Wiley as a JR over Davis as a SR. And like I said, if you wanted more outside shooting other than Brewer in your starting rotation...than I would have started Davis over Johnson and let Brewer run the pg position. I loved Johnson as our PG.

And your probably right..the 98 Johnson would have started....You won me over on that...but I'm just saying that Cade would have given us more height and defense if he started...but hell bring him off the bench.

 

[Big Old Booger]

Now there is a difference between Wiley as a JR and Wiley as a SR. Theres also a difference between M.Johnson as a JR and as a SR. I know that I would take Wiley and Johnson as seniors over Davis as a senior...but I definatly would not take Wiley as a JR over Davis as a SR. And like I said, if you wanted more outside shooting other than Brewer in your starting rotation...than I would have started Davis over Johnson and let Brewer run the pg position. I loved Johnson as our PG.

And your probably right..the 98 Johnson would have started....You won me over on that...but I'm just saying that Cade would have given us more height and defense if he started...but hell bring him off the bench.

I won't argue this point because this is true. I know he could have helped and I believe Kelvin would have found a place for him to play a lot of minutes, I'm just not ready to concede that Kelvin would have played him at any other position than the 3 unless we were in some kind of junk offense, which was not out of character for Kelvin. :ez-laugh:

 

[Shooterms]

95 over Fowler - Sure why not let Cade start
96 over Barnes - Nope
97 over Evans - You start the 6'9 guy
98 over Johnson - No way
99 over Spaulding - No Cade wouldn't start. Cade>Spaulding but not Heskett or Stone.
00 over Johnson - Nope
01 over Heywood/Newton - Sure let Cade start, though I'd probably start Newton over Cade myself.
02 would not start - Cade wouldn't even be the first guy off the bench, Detrick would be.
03 would not start - you're right
04 over Mckenzie/Alexander - No way
05 over Williams/Godbold - Push
06 over Godbold - Push

I count on my board, at most, 4 teams I'd start Cade on. So I still stand by my statement of him not starting on most Sampson teams.

Your memory is very short-sighted. Like Cade starting over DeAngelo. I've played in a tourney with D and he would...oh man...he'd demolish Cade. It's easy to dismiss a guy's talent just because he ended up not being a 4 year OU guy or unwarranted cult hero...DeAngelo was a whole lot better of a player than Cade. To me, it's not really even close.

I also agree with BOB, Cade would have to be a 3 on Sampson's teams. I keep hearing Cade is a great shooter...no he really isn't comparatively speaking. 35% is not a great 3pt%.

I get it guys, Cade's your hero. I like the kid too but he wouldn't be a 13.0 ppg guy on a good team.

Here's an exercise...Would Cade start on these teams?

Baylor - if you say yes, you're wrong.
Texas - Cade's a better player than Balbay but Cade's not a PG. And JCovan Brown is more talented so he'd start over Cade IMO.
Kansas - No not IMO. Basically, Cade is OU's Brady Morningstar except Cade has to play a role not fitting of him because he doesn't have TALENT on his team ala Morris, Little, Selby, Tyshawn...no way in hell he starts at Kansas and if he did, he'd score 5 ppg.
The rest of the Big 12?


I'll just bow out. You can't argue with people who are wrong but won't admit it. Cherish your marginal talent.

How often do you have to replace your "I" key?

 

[Shooterms]

Here let me use it four times - Ignored Individual

:clap :ez-roll:

 

[bgrch1350]

I didn't realize you constitute as "the rest of the world". Notice nobody else is jumping on here to defend your argument that Cade is a 2G. He's not...he's a 3.



Thank goodness you aren't the coach because Najera didn't start on that team. He came off the bench. That team only had 3 players that started every game: Erdmann, Brewer, and Wiley. Evans would have started the entire season had he not had back problems. I think Cade could have gotten some playing time, but certainly not over either Brewer or Erdmann. Those 2 players played the 1 and 2 spots, maybe Cade gets some starting time at the 3. You originally said he would start over "Evan", which I guess you meant Bobby Joe Evans, but then you backtracked and said he would start at the 2G, which we all know he's not a better player than Erdmann or Brewer. We played a 3 guard offense that year because we had too. We won games but it hindered us.

Actually Najera started 16 of 30 games. And he was 3rd on mpg.

Evans 2.3 rpg and 5.9ppg was really missed.

 

[StoopsBros]

Actually Najera started 16 of 30 games. And he was 3rd on mpg.

Evans 2.3 rpg and 5.9ppg was really missed.

This is dumb, really dumb.

 

[Big Old Booger]

Actually Najera started 16 of 30 games. And he was 3rd on mpg.

Evans 2.3 rpg and 5.9ppg was really missed.

Don't be deceived by Evans low averages. He was a force inside and would have at the minimum been an all conference type player, and possibly an all american. He was the #1 player out of Texas when he signed with OU and a lot of Kelvin bashers that complained about the 4 straight 1 and done's in the tourney forget that we had a huge hole in the lineup due to Evans injury.

I don't think he helps us in the Stanford game because that was just a bad matchup for us and if I remember correctly, that Stanford team went to the Final 4 or elite 8.

I do, however, think with him we beat Indiana in 98, possibly beat Michigan State in 99, and probably advance to the final 4 in 2000 because we would have beaten Purdue and then beaten Gonzaga and Wisconsin for sure.

He was probably the most skilled big man of the Sampson era other than Ace McGhee and Taj Gray, although I think Evans was a better shooter with a plethora of good post moves whereas Gray was an above the rim type player who also had some good moves.

 

[bgrch1350]

Your memory is very short-sighted. Like Cade starting over DeAngelo. I've played in a tourney with D and he would...oh man...he'd demolish Cade. It's easy to dismiss a guy's talent just because he ended up not being a 4 year OU guy or unwarranted cult hero...DeAngelo was a whole lot better of a player than Cade. To me, it's not really even close. If it wasn't for the fact that Mckenzie started most of those games at the 2...I would have considered Alexander starting over Cade...but I guess theres a reason why Alexander transfered.

I also agree with BOB, Cade would have to be a 3 on Sampson's teams. I keep hearing Cade is a great shooter...no he really isn't comparatively speaking. 35% is not a great 3pt%.

I
Baylor - if you say yes, you're wrong.
Texas - Cade's a better player than Balbay but Cade's not a PG. And JCovan Brown is more talented so he'd start over Cade IMO.
Kansas - No not IMO. Basically, Cade is OU's Brady Morningstar except Cade has to play a role not fitting of him because he doesn't have TALENT on his team ala Morris, Little, Selby, Tyshawn...no way in hell he starts at Kansas and if he did, he'd score 5 ppg.
The rest of the Big 12?

Your talking about Cade starting on a team that is ranked 2 or 3 nationally. As for Baylor. I would start Cade over Jones b/c Cade works 10 times harder than that kid. Baylor might not make the tournament b/c their pg sucks and A.Jones is nothing more than 6'9 kid who is afraid of contact. Not to mention...We beat Baylor with Cade. So you decide if you want Cade on that team or not.

 

[bgrch1350]

Don't be deceived by Evans low averages. He was a force inside and would have at the minimum been an all conference type player, and possibly an all american. He was the #1 player out of Texas when he signed with OU and a lot of Kelvin bashers that complained about the 4 straight 1 and done's in the tourney forget that we had a huge hole in the lineup due to Evans injury.

I remember Evans' game...I like him but I would have had him coming off the bench. I don't need him and Wiley both starting. I would have had Najera starting at the 4. But again..this is one of those things...do you want more scoring or more height. His presence was felt but his rebounding was lacking.

 

[DenverSooner]

I think virtually all of you are nuts. First Cade Davis is better than average as a college player. He stars in the Big XII and is 13th in 3 point shooting. There are 36 starters in the Big XII that should have a respectable three point shot (12 pg, 12 2g and 12 wings) as well as a bunch of bench players. Obviously Cade is above average in the Big XII.

Second the Big XII is one of the better conferences in college basketball. There are over 300 teams with 13 scholarship players each or over 3,900 players. Jesse's stats suggest Cade ia bout in the Top 10% of 3 point shooters in college basketball. That is way better than average.

Those that think Cade starts on virtually every single Sampson team are also wrong. There is simply no way Cade Davis starts over Nolan Johnson. He might start with him but not in place of him. If you will recall Nolan individually took over games and won them for OU his senior year (and he did a lot). The spread the floor and Nolan took his man to the whole for a bucket. In multiple games that was the offense in the last 5 or so minutes.

Those that think Cade doesn't get significant minutes on those teams are wrong. Cade would get minutes on virtually any team simply because he is Cade Davis. The guy works hard and he would play his role. If that role was to be the lock down defender and never shoot, he would smile and do it without complaint. He would also do it effecively.

 

[Big Old Booger]

I remember Evans' game...I like him but I would have had him coming off the bench. I don't need him and Wiley both starting. I would have had Najera starting at the 4. But again..this is one of those things...do you want more scoring or more height. His presence was felt but his rebounding was lacking.

I disagree. Najera as a frosh, in 97, was very raw. He was an undersized post player because he hadn't yet developed an outside shot. He didn't start to develop his outside shot until the next season or his jr. year, but he was a tough son of a gun and one of my favorite all time sooners.

Evans was the best offensive big man on the team but was not the force on defense and rebounding as Wiley.

Evans was a lot like Fitz except he was taller (not wider) and was a better defensive presence but their offensive games are very similar.

 

[StoopsBros]

Your talking about Cade starting on a team that is ranked 2 or 3 nationally. As for Baylor. I would start Cade over Jones b/c Cade works 10 times harder than that kid. Baylor might not make the tournament b/c their pg sucks and A.Jones is nothing more than 6'9 kid who is afraid of contact. Not to mention...We beat Baylor with Cade. So you decide if you want Cade on that team or not.

P.Jones, Dunn and Acy are significantly better/more talented than Davis. He wouldn't start over ANY of those guys. I like Davis better than Walton because Walton is nothing but a turnover machine. Point is obviously Baylor's Achilles heel. Shift Dunn to PG? That won't work, he's also turnover prone...So you have to have a true point. So now it's between A.Jones and Cade....Anthony is a 6'10 SF and Cade is a 6'5 SF. I'd take Jones. Yeah Jones, only averages 8 ppg in Baylor's system but Dunn, PJones and Acy get the bulk of the shots. AJones would average 15 for OU. Cade would average 6-9 for Baylor. So at best, it's a wash. I'd take the size.

If Cade is as great as this board thinks he is, why couldn't he start for a top 2-3 team? It's you're by the way and you're proving the point. Cade is the best we have and that's not a good thing.