Depth

[skyvue]

I believe he left because he saw this coming. He knew he was going to be losing minutes to younger players. Maybe even coach told him that he was going to have to fight hard for his limited minutes. I always thought he thought a lot of himself and was a bit of a prima donna. And it looks like he left when he heard that the road ahead was going to be tougher.

Lots of presumptions there. No one will be happier than me if our true freshmen play well enough to steal Booker's minutes, but I can't imagine Coach telling him, "These two freshmen, who aren't even in Norman yet, are going to make it hard for you to get playing time." That just seems unlikely to me.

Especially given there were games last season that we would have lost without Booker's contributions, including the game that got us into the Sweet 16.

 

[Eielson]

Especially given there were games last season that we would have lost without Booker's contributions, including the game that got us into the Sweet 16.

Playing one good game doesn't exempt you from an otherwise awful season. There where only a few games where he was even beneficial this year. He has one of the ugliest game logs I've ever seen. If our incoming freshman can't contribute more than he did, I'm very concerned.

 

[usedtobe1]

From everything I read, Booker leaving OU had nothing to do with incoming competition from the freshmen. He had no choice. OU showed him the door. I don't think it had anything to do with basketball. I don't think he liked to go to class ...... Or other "team rules" violations. Am I wrong?

As far as his game, he was spotty. He played his best late in the season. He was the reason we won a couple of games. He could shoot. He also had games where he made bonehead plays. He wasn't a great or willing passer. I did think he put a lot more effort in defense than he did his first year. He would have gotten minutes if he had stayed.

I wish him good luck in the future. I hope he continues to mature.

 

[sperry]

I am rooting for him wherever he goes. It's just my opinion that he is not much of a loss, from a purely basketball standpont.

 

[BCSooners]

From everything I read, Booker leaving OU had nothing to do with incoming competition from the freshmen. He had no choice. OU showed him the door. I don't think it had anything to do with basketball. I don't think he liked to go to class ...... Or other "team rules" violations. Am I wrong?

This was my understanding as well.

Of course he would have played more than the freshmen if he was allowed to stay. I think that the competition in practice would have motivated him a lot more. He was basically a given to be the 1st guard off the bench this year. I think the loss of his perimeter shooting will be missed at times this year especially in the bigger games when the freshmen will probably struggle at some point.

 

[skyvue]

Playing one good game doesn't exempt you from an otherwise awful season. There where only a few games where he was even beneficial this year. He has one of the ugliest game logs I've ever seen. If our incoming freshman can't contribute more than he did, I'm very concerned.

He didn't play one good game. That's nonsense.

I'm not saying Booker's a great player -- he wasn't and likely never will be. But he contributed to our success over the past two years, and he had a few games (not just one) during his time at OU where he played a vital role in us winning.

The rush on the part of some to write him off as a total bust is revisionist history, and I can't fathom what the motivation for it is.

 

[Eielson]

He didn't play one good game. That's nonsense.

I'm not saying Booker's a great player -- he wasn't and likely never will be. But he contributed to our success over the past two years, and he had a few games (not just one) during his time at OU where he played a vital role in us winning.

The rush on the part of some to write him off as a total bust is revisionist history, and I can't fathom what the motivation for it is.

I didn't say he only had one good game. He had about 3, and for every good performance, he had multiple bad ones. He was pitiful this year, and to say otherwise makes YOU the revisionist.

 

[skyvue]

I didn't say he only had one good game.

A direct quote: "Playing one good game doesn't exempt you from an otherwise awful season."

You certainly implied it. Would anyone take from your post that you felt he played more than one good game last season? It's hard to see how.

Booker was struggling with back trouble last season, but he scored in double digits five times. If he had his head on straight and was ready to work hard (a big if, according to rumors), I'd take him back in a heartbeat. I'd like to see how he'd do over the course of a (hopefully healthy) junior season. That's not going to happen, though, and that's fine.

I still don't like to see posters making the guy out to be worse than he was. He was a decent role player and most teams, including ours, can use those.

 

[Eielson]

A direct quote: "Playing one good game doesn't exempt you from an otherwise awful season."

I'm aware of what I said, and I was clearly referencing the Dayton game. If you read the next sentence, then you know I said he was beneficial in a few other games.

You certainly implied it. Would anyone take from your post that you felt he played more than one good game last season? It's hard to see how.

Booker was struggling with back trouble last season, but he scored in double digits five times.

Yes, and he scored 3 points or less 15 times.

I still don't like to see posters making the guy out to be worse than he was. He was a decent role player and most teams, including ours, can use those.

What use was he? He wasn't a good ball-handler, wasn't a good defender, wasn't a good rebounder, and didn't have his head screwed on straight. I suppose you'll try to call him a shooter, but he barely shot 30% from 3 this year, so there goes that.

The only reason he got to play is because there was nobody else. I can't remember a worse group of perimeter players off the bench for us. We've had better groups on teams with losing records. I'm not just saying Booker had a terrible season because he left. I said it while he was still here, and I wasn't impressed with Dinjiyl, either. Dinjiyl was in double figures 5 times as well.

 

[WTSooner]

What use was he? He wasn't a good ball-handler, wasn't a good defender, wasn't a good rebounder, and didn't have his head screwed on straight. I suppose you'll try to call him a shooter, but he barely shot 30% from 3 this year, so there goes that.

What a silly post.

His ball-handling and rebounding were more than adequate for a SG off the bench.

And his defense was MUCH better this year, to the point I'd call him average at it at worst.

His shooting was hot and cold, sure, but when he got hot, he could carry us. Needed to happen more, and I think it would have had he stuck around.

But bashing this kid with what we've had coming off the bench in past seasons is ludicrous.

 

[citty]

I think Thomas will be the only one missed next season. His stats weren't great but he was a man! I believe we have several talented guys to step up, just not sure any of them have the intangibles Thomas brought every game...

 

[WaymanFan]

What a silly post.

His ball-handling and rebounding were more than adequate for a SG off the bench.

And his defense was MUCH better this year, to the point I'd call him average at it at worst.

His shooting was hot and cold, sure, but when he got hot, he could carry us. Needed to happen more, and I think it would have had he stuck around.

But bashing this kid with what we've had coming off the bench in past seasons is ludicrous.

I agree with this assessment. Also, I wish people would stop diminishing what he did against Dayton as "one game." It was a HUGE game. Anyone who has followed this program for the past 30 years knows all too well our NCAA Tournament history as a #3 or #4 seed (3-6 record prior to last season). Six tournaments as a #3 or #4 without a single Sweet 16...until the 7th time became a charm primarily because of ONE INDIVIDUAL.

 

[garyeb2]

I don't know if Buford will be a wing or a stretch 4 or what. I have not seen much. But I have seen enough tis summer to I ow that Buford is if needed a better shooting guard right now than booker would have ever been. Booker is gone for a reason and will of be missed.

 

[Eielson]

What a silly post.

His ball-handling and rebounding were more than adequate for a SG off the bench.

And his defense was MUCH better this year, to the point I'd call him average at it at worst.

His shooting was hot and cold, sure, but when he got hot, he could carry us. Needed to happen more, and I think it would have had he stuck around.

But bashing this kid with what we've had coming off the bench in past seasons is ludicrous.

I'm just going to have to strongly disagree. His ball-handling, rebounding, etc. were adequate coming off the bench IF he's a lights-out shooter. He wasn't. Call him "hot-and-cold" all you want, but he was simply cold. He shot under 30% for most of the year, and that's not going to get it done.

We can debate all we want about the type of player he is, but it's pointless. He's an FAU-caliber player.

 

[Eielson]

I agree with this assessment. Also, I wish people would stop diminishing what he did against Dayton as "one game." It was a HUGE game.

If that was a huge game, then what would you call the game against MSU where he went 0-4 with 0 points in 21 minutes? He lost us that game more than he won us the game against Dayton.

until the 7th time became a charm primarily because of ONE INDIVIDUAL.

Woah...he single-handedly won the game? Did we just let Blake Griffin get away?

...talk about hyperbole.

 

[WaymanFan]

If that was a huge game, then what would you call the game against MSU where he went 0-4 with 0 points in 21 minutes? He lost us that game more than he won us the game against Dayton.



Woah...he single-handedly won the game? Did we just let Blake Griffin get away?

...talk about hyperbole.

Call it what you want...he won that game for us. We were down by 9 points in the middle of the second half...going nowhere...and he hits this crazy, off-balanced three-point shot which completely turned the game around. We don't win that game without him. PERIOD.

As for the MSU game, that performance showed why he could be equally frustrating to watch. I'm not saying that we lost a great player. I'm saying we lost a role player who was the primary reason we FINALLY made the Sweet 16 in our 7th try as a #3/#4 seed.

 

[usedtobe1]

I don't know if Buford will be a wing or a stretch 4 or what. I have not seen much. But I have seen enough tis summer to I ow that Buford is if needed a better shooting guard right now than booker would have ever been. Booker is gone for a reason and will of be missed.

fify: But I have seen enough this summer to know that Buford is, if needed, a better shooting guard right now than Booker would have ever been.

Thanks Gary. Somehow the words got jumbled, but I think you're saying Buford is a good shooting guard..... I didn't figure that was his forte'. It sounds like you've gone to some of the summer sessions. We would all appreciate your perspective on how all the players are looking so far. I know your in-season practice updates were some of my favorite posts on this board. Many of us looked forward to them.

Please, toss us a bone.

 

[garyeb2]

fify: But I have seen enough this summer to know that Buford is, if needed, a better shooting guard right now than Booker would have ever been.

Thanks Gary. Somehow the words got jumbled, but I think you're saying Buford is a good shooting guard..... I didn't figure that was his forte'. It sounds like you've gone to some of the summer sessions. We would all appreciate your perspective on how all the players are looking so far. I know your in-season practice updates were some of my favorite posts on this board. Many of us looked forward to them.

Please, toss us a bone.

I was typing with my thumbs on the phone after 3 stiff bourbons. I was scolded last summer for posting reports during off season practices.

 

[WTSooner]

He shot under 30% for most of the year, and that's not going to get it done.

Are you just making stuff up now?

He shot 34% from three in conference play. Take away the 0-5 game against ISU, and he shot 37% from three in all other conference games. While that isn't great, it is certainly good, and has value. He also shot 38% from three in our three NCAA Tourney games.

As a comparison, Buddy shot 26% from three in the NCAA Tourney, and 38% from three in Big 12 games. So in Big 12 games, Buddy shot 4% better from three than did Booker.

Cousins shot 28% from three in the NCAA Tourney games.

I'm not saying Booker is better than either guy, even at just shooting, just pointing out that if you take away the slow Booker start which most attributed to a back injury, he was shooting the ball at a similar clip as Buddy starting about the time Big 12 play started. Heck, Booker may have been better, percentage-wise, than Buddy, starting with that first Big 12 game thru the rest of the season.

And trying to compare Booker to Buford is just silly. Buford will likely never play a single minute at the 2 spot. And three point shooting isn't going to be his specialty either. And I say that as somebody that likes Buford as a player. But any comparison here is just silly. Can't compare those two players.

 

[WTSooner]

So curiosity got the best of me. Three point shooting below consisting of all stats from Big 12 games, Big 12 Tourney games, and NCAA Tourney games.

Buddy - 35%
Cousins - 46%
Booker - 34%