Early Projected 2024 Starting Lineup

[cowboysooner]

Point: McCullom, Milo
Wing: Milos, Soares
Wing: Douthard, Cooper
4: Oweh, Moore and Cole
5: Hugley, Goodwin, Keita and Northweather

No inside information, but I just believe Oweh will start and platoon at the 4.

Seen very little on McCullom, Soares, Cooper, Cole, Moore, Hugley, Keita and Northweather, so could change when I have had a chance to check them out a little more.

Just going by what I have read and from watching a little highlight film on the new guys, I think we will be improved defensively overall. Otherwise, I have no idea what to expect from the team offensively or on the glass. No prediction regarding our record yet.

Hoping for the best. I like Porter and hope he is successful. Tough start to his OU career though.

 

[pnkranger]

Better defenders and rebounders and athletes overall. Offense will be a major question mark.

 

[WichitaSooner]

Los will be our starting PG. I am not confident of much with this team, but I will be stunned if he isn't. Moser moved Grant off the ball and let Los handle most the ball handling midway through his freshman year. He is clearly the single biggest building block we have. I can't imagine he will take Los off the ball for more than short stretches.

I expect McCollum to start, and certainly Hugley. Less sure on the other two spots. I am high on Oweh, although his shot obviously needs work. And it's hard to know what to expect from Darthard.

I just hope he plays Cooper early and often. Would hate to see him stuck on the pine like Oweh was till the last 10 games or so. If the kid is as good as everyone expects, let him play and develop through the usual mistakes and growing pains that all freshmen experience. It was so frustrating watching is lose games due to glaring lack of talent last season, all while Oweh watched from the bench.

 

[thebigabd]

The key is Hugley... if he is in form from two years ago (14/8 guy in the ACC), OU will be pretty good. Hugley, Milos, and McCollum will be the trio with the rest role players. If Hugley isn't in that form, the team is in big trouble. I feel like the other two are going to be good, but Hugley is the key.

Going to be interesting to see!

 

[CoachTalk]

The key is Hugley... if he is in form from two years ago (14/8 guy in the ACC), OU will be pretty good. Hugley, Milos, and McCollum will be the trio with the rest role players. If Hugley isn't in that form, the team is in big trouble. I feel like the other two are going to be good, but Hugley is the key.

Going to be interesting to see!

I tend to agree with this. 3 potential really good players and have to have guys excel in their roles.

We will be fine at the 4.

 

[WichitaSooner]

I tend to agree with this. 3 potential really good players and have to have guys excel in their roles.

We will be fine at the 4.

I will will the lotto tomorrow and marry a supermodel. As long as we are trying to speak things into existence, I figured I’d give it a try.

 

[CoachTalk]

I will will the lotto tomorrow and marry a supermodel. As long as we are trying to speak things into existence, I figured I’d give it a try.

What part bothers you?

I am 100% sure we could liam mcneeley tomorrow and him reclass and you and 3 others would say the 5 star isnt what we need or fits here.

 

[WichitaSooner]

What part bothers you?

I am 100% sure we could liam mcneeley tomorrow and him reclass and you and 3 others would say the 5 star isnt what we need or fits here.

We don’t have an actual four on the roster. The guy who will presumably start at that position is better suited for the three, but he can’t shoot and couldn’t keep his starting spot at a horrible program last season. So I’d say the “we’ll be fine at the four” talk is nothing more than silliness. If you can’t admit that we are in trouble at that spot, it would seem that you will just blindly defend every move the program makes. Even if we were rock solid at every other position, that spot would be a concern. When you consider how many other unknowns we have, and how bad a team we were last season, it just adds to the worry.

 

[CoachTalk]

We don’t have an actual four on the roster. The guy who will presumably start at that position is better suited for the three, but he can’t shoot and couldn’t keep his starting spot at a horrible program last season. So I’d say the “we’ll be fine at the four” talk is nothing more than silliness. If you can’t admit that we are in trouble at that spot, it would seem that you will just blindly defend every move the program makes. Even if we were rock solid at every other position, that spot would be a concern. When you consider how many other unknowns we have, and how bad a team we were last season, it just adds to the worry.

What’s wrong with 6’6/6’7 athlete at the 4? Position less basketball.

Soares and jalon will be fine. Would I love Cam? Absolutely.

We aren’t running a HL offense. Yes I think it will be our biggest weak spot. Both can be true.

 

[steverocks35]

Looks like a team that might be able to defend but will struggle to score. That will be something new! Woohoo!

 

[WichitaSooner]

What’s wrong with 6’6/6’7 athlete at the 4? Position less basketball.

Soares and jalon will be fine. Would I love Cam? Absolutely.

We aren’t running a HL offense. Yes I think it will be our biggest weak spot. Both can be true.

So by your theory, there is no scenario where the four would truly be a concern unless we play someone shorter than 6’6” there? First of all, let’s see how athletic they actually are. Second, you also need skill and basketball ability. Otherwise we could just stick a defensive end out there and feel good because we have an athletic, reasonably tall guy. And third, positionless basketball works if you have guys who can shoot. If you are giving away size and strength, you need to be able to make up for it by spacing the floor and creating issues for the other team’s defense.

However athletic they are, the same was true at their previous schools, yet it didn’t translate into their play. Every team in the country has guys who are very athletic (can run and jump, etc.), but can’t figure out how to get their athleticism into the game. We had a guy on last year’s roster who is probably more athletic than either of them. He spent 90 percent of the time on the bench.

I just wish you’d be more willing to acknowledge that this is a glaring hole in the roster.

 

[allday92]

What’s wrong with 6’6/6’7 athlete at the 4? Position less basketball.

Soares and jalon will be fine. Would I love Cam? Absolutely.

We aren’t running a HL offense. Yes I think it will be our biggest weak spot. Both can be true.

Exactly, I'm impressed Porter is building a roster for the modern game. I think he will also need to adapt the playing style as well, but from a roster building standpoint it's best to load up on 6'5-6'9 wings.

 

[WichitaSooner]

Exactly, I'm impressed Porter is building a roster for the modern game. I think he will also need to adapt the playing style as well, but from a roster building standpoint it's best to load up on 6'5-6'9 wings.

So skill is irrelevant? Standing height is all that matters?

Please don't try to spin this as if this was his plan. He desperately wanted Hill to stay, then tried, but failed, to land actual fours to replace him. As a fallback, he settled on a 6'6" reserve who shot 11% from three on a terrible team. I just hope that when we are getting punished on the boards and in the paint next season in conference play, everyone who is so happy to talk about position-less basketball in late May comes back during game threads to discuss how it is working.

 

[BoulderSooner]

So skill is irrelevant? Standing height is all that matters?

Please don't try to spin this as if this was his plan. He desperately wanted Hill to stay, then tried, but failed, to land actual fours to replace him. As a fallback, he settled on a 6'6" reserve who shot 11% from three on a terrible team. I just hope that when we are getting punished on the boards and in the paint next season in conference play, everyone who is so happy to talk about position-less basketball in late May comes back during game threads to discuss how it is working.

Moore is an actual 4 ... he clearly was not option 1 ... but he is a 4 ..

 

[WTSooner]

What’s wrong with 6’6/6’7 athlete at the 4? Position less basketball.

Soares and jalon will be fine. Would I love Cam? Absolutely.

We aren’t running a HL offense. Yes I think it will be our biggest weak spot. Both can be true.

The same things that were wrong with having Hill there last year.

 

[OKURanger]

Los will be our starting PG.

I think the positionless basketball--playing a majority of athletic wings--could work with an excellent PG, which I believe Los will become.

While I would love for Porter to get a bona fide 4, until OU can fully get into the NIL game, I don't think we can pull in the type of players you're asking for.

 

[CoachTalk]

The same things that were wrong with having Hill there last year.

Was it hill or tanner groves?

 

[cowboysooner]

Offensively, I don't think we have a true dedicated point under Moser. Milos and McCullom might both run point on a given possession. I think McCollum guards the opposition point guard. We didn't really have anyone quick enough last year to stay in front of the better quicker points. Supposedly, McCollum has extreme quicks.

I anticipate Oweh, Moore and Soares all being better perimeter defenders than Hill and not as effective in the post. Milos, Douthard, Oweh and Soares will give us better defenders on the wing. Don't know about Cooper but maybe him as well.

Agree with Big, Hugley is the key. Agree with Wichita, McCollum, Hugley and Dothard look like pretty good pieces. Not sure about the rest. But, we will be more athletic and better defensively I think. As I have stated before, I just don't know what to expect offensively and on the glass. I can see arguments for and against, but think it is just hard to predict based upon what little I know about the new kids.

 

[CoachTalk]

So by your theory, there is no scenario where the four would truly be a concern unless we play someone shorter than 6’6” there? First of all, let’s see how athletic they actually are. Second, you also need skill and basketball ability. Otherwise we could just stick a defensive end out there and feel good because we have an athletic, reasonably tall guy. And third, positionless basketball works if you have guys who can shoot. If you are giving away size and strength, you need to be able to make up for it by spacing the floor and creating issues for the other team’s defense.

However athletic they are, the same was true at their previous schools, yet it didn’t translate into their play. Every team in the country has guys who are very athletic (can run and jump, etc.), but can’t figure out how to get their athleticism into the game. We had a guy on last year’s roster who is probably more athletic than either of them. He spent 90 percent of the time on the bench.

I just wish you’d be more willing to acknowledge that this is a glaring hole in the roster.

Not a glaring hole! You couple are doomsdayers everyday.

Last year was too many non athletes, slow footed, blah blah.
We go address that and now they aren’t tall enough. Even though all but 3 will start 4 man the same size as us.

Go look at the other thread. Size at the 4 is fine. Toughness athleticism all factor in.

 

[WichitaSooner]

Not a glaring hole! You couple are doomsdayers everyday.

Last year was too many non athletes, slow footed, blah blah.
We go address that and now they aren’t tall enough. Even though all but 3 will start 4 man the same size as us.

Go look at the other thread. Size at the 4 is fine. Toughness athleticism all factor in.

Tell you what, if we sigh Jalen Wilson to be our four, that’ll be great. You do realize that not all 6’6” guys are the same, right? But it’s super exciting that we got a stud who is athletic, great rebounder, runs the floor, plays great defense, and can leap tall buildings. I’d love to see what the guys who actually started for Georgia Tech can do. They must have had an amazing team if they had enough guys to keep him on the bench.

But I guess now that we have such talent, we can count on fewer posts that Moser is really doing a good job “given the talent we have.” Although I’m sure if we suck again, many will just say he inherited a mess, blame Lon, and say Moser deserves another few years to rebuild.