Frank Booker

[sooner 1234]

Davis shot around 35% from 3 his jr and sr years which is pretty good and just about what Booker is averaging.
I called davis a pure shooter because he was ,he had a great stroke/pure shoot. I didn't call him a spot up shooter , which means that's all he can do, big difference.If you remember anything about davis's sr year he was anything but a slow white guy that could only shoot threes.
Ive watched him since highschool, would have played d 1 (and made an impact ) at ANY sport . Football, baseball, track and field, you name it , he would have been a stud. So when you insinuate Im down playing him because hes white, I find that funny because Ive seen him play more then you ever have, Perryj 74

 

[dahldennsull]

His role was a pure shooter but I don't think he played that role very well

problem was he couldn't play that role. I'm not Cade Davis protector, but it was sad that he had to be the go-to guy because the overall talent on those teams was awful. If he was on a team like this or the next couple of years, he wouldn't have to be the go to scorer, and heck even play PF every now and then and try to be our second rebounder at 6'5.:facepalm

 

[WTSooner]

Davis was not a pure shooter.

 

[sooner 1234]

Davis was not a pure shooter.

Yes he was. Mid 30ties to low 40ties is about as good as shooting percentage as you could hope for guards who play a lot of mintues/defense. If you consider pledger a pure shooter, then so is davis(both shot around same %)

 

[AdaSooner]

Booker reminds me of more of Cade Davis , of the more recent players. Both are pure shooters, and both have deceptive speed/moves. Both are very smooth , and always seem to be in control and make heady plays.
Davis did a ton of the little things that maybe not be in the box score, same with Booker.Its obvious hes a coaches son.

I agree with most of what you said, but not all. I wouldn't call Cade a pure shooter. He was a good shooter in college. He was at his best on short-range jumpers and he was great at taking the ball to the hole where he could use his unique hops. He was as steady from behind the arc with a 34.09 career average. Pure shooters to me are guys who average higher than that, closer to 40% than 35%.

I think Booker has a chance to be a better three point shooter than Cade. After a rough start, he has already improved his average to just under 37%. The best season Cade ever had was 35.8% his senior season.

Their games are similar in that they are/were both heady players with a good sense of awareness that puts them in a position to make plays, on offense as well as defense. Frank doesn't have Cade's hops nor is he as good at driving with the ball right now. Maybe in time he will be. But I think he has a chance to be one of the best three point shooters to ever wear a Sooner uniform, one of those guys who has the potential to average 40% or better from behind the arc.

 

[WTSooner]

Yes he was. Mid 30ties to low 40ties is about as good as shooting percentage as you could hope for guards who play a lot of mintues/defense. If you consider pledger a pure shooter, then so is davis(both shot around same %)

If only it were that simple.

 

[WTSooner]

Cam Clark is currently shooting 40% from three for his career. Does anybody want to argue that he is a pure shooter based on that percentage?

 

[sooner 1234]

Cam Clark is currently shooting 40% from three for his career. Does anybody want to argue that he is a pure shooter based on that percentage?

you are comparing him to guys that attempted 125 + 3s a season. Davis MADE more 3s a year them cam has ever attempted in a season.

 

[sooner 1234]

you are comparing him to guys that attempted 125 + 3s a season. Davis MADE more 3s a year them cam has ever attempted in a season.

Im telling you those % are pretty good for guys who shoot it that much.Davis was a pure shooter by his jr year.

 

[WTSooner]

you are comparing him to guys that attempted 125 + 3s a season. Davis MADE more 3s a year them cam has ever attempted in a season.

Where is the line on how many attempts is enough?

And you do realize 2-3% is fairly significant in this discussion, no? Davis shot 34% for his career. Very similar to David Godbold. And Austin Johnson. Were either of those guys "pure shooters"?

On the flip side, Pledger was a career 37% shooter. Mookie and Brent Price were both at 38%. Crocker and Terry Evans were at 37%.

Just looking at the OU career stats, what we know of certain guys, etc, there seems to be a natural cutoff, for a career, right between where Cade ended up, and the guys that were 2-3% better. Again, I realize 2-3% doesn't sound like much, but it is quite a bit over the course of a season, at a high volume (shot attempts). Then you get the freaks like Hollis, Raymond, Heskett, and Erdmann.

Just my opinion, but I wouldn't lump Cade in the same shooting group as anybody I mentioned in this post, other than AJ and Godbold.

 

[Swans]

Cade was a good shooter who should have taken it to the rim more often......but his real value to us was on defense where he frequently covered, and shut down, the opposing teams best shooters. He had one heck of an arc on that shot of his. If Frank ever plays defense like Cade, he'll be getting a ton of minutes.

 

[perryj74]

I like Cade Davis and loved the way he played at OU but he was NEVER a pure shooter. He developed into a good shooter but that wasn't his game in HS, I saw him a few times myself, and that wasn't his game when he got to OU. Cade was a good athlete that made the most of his abilities.

 

[sooner 1234]

Where is the line on how many attempts is enough?

And you do realize 2-3% is fairly significant in this discussion, no? Davis shot 34% for his career. Very similar to David Godbold. And Austin Johnson. Were either of those guys "pure shooters"?

On the flip side, Pledger was a career 37% shooter. Mookie and Brent Price were both at 38%. Crocker and Terry Evans were at 37%.

Just looking at the OU career stats, what we know of certain guys, etc, there seems to be a natural cutoff, for a career, right between where Cade ended up, and the guys that were 2-3% better. Again, I realize 2-3% doesn't sound like much, but it is quite a bit over the course of a season, at a high volume (shot attempts). Then you get the freaks like Hollis, Raymond, Heskett, and Erdmann.

Just my opinion, but I wouldn't lump Cade in the same shooting group as anybody I mentioned in this post, other than AJ and Godbold.

Davis averaged 3.58 his sr year compared to pledger at 3.64 his sr year. I would call both of them pure shooters. Secondly if you look at conference play only for davis his sr year its probably close to 40%(really shined that end of his sr year)

I will say % are for losers sometimes when talking about shooters. Quannis white average like low 40ties for his career at ou , but he would pick his spots , top of the arc , wide open, while price and company were getting all the attention.
Same way with goldbold, he was like 3rd or 4th option (see AJ too) never really had pressure, game plan was never geared to stop them. Got a TON of open looks.
Davis was THE MAN his sr year, game plans were made to stop him. A bad team and not to mention no pg what so ever.

 

[campbest]

%'s are for losers.

 

[WTSooner]

 

[DenverSooner]

%'s are for losers.

Loser ignore percentages and just let anyone shoot the ball.

 

[Soonerborn03]

I would not call Cade Davis a pure shooter.

His role was to be a shooter for us, but no pure shooter's shot would come in with as little touch as Cade's His shot landed as softly on the rim as it would if it was dropped from the rafters. With the amount of arc he'd put on his shot, it's not a bad comparison.