if you can't understand the difference between a person playing their first year of college basketball vs a player who was a senior...
I can understand that difference in theory but it doesn't apply to the two players we're talking about.
Bandoo was a junior. He came to Baylor after playing two years of lower-level collegiate basketball, just as Reynolds, who was a senior, came to OU after playing three years of lower-level (though admittedly not as low as Bandoo) collegiate basketball.
Saying anything else about their respective experience is a mischaracterization. For pete's sake, if Bandoo really was the first-year player you keep pretending he was, then there'd be no advantage in taking him or any other juco transfer. Go get a high school player and you'll have him for four years.
But of course, there is a (theoretical, at least) advantage to signing a juco transfer over a high school senior and that is that the juco guy has played two years of -- wait for it -- collegiate basketball. So just stop with the "first year of college basketball" crap. It's insulting that you think we're that stupid.
And picking a certain part of the season that supports your stance is BS. The entire season matters. And over the course of the season, Bandoo's stats were only marginally better than Reynolds. That's just a fact.
And focusing on Reynolds' three-point shooting is beyond disingenuous -- he averaged less than one shot per game from behind the arc. It wasn't his game. Bandoo, by contrast, averaged nearly 4 deep shots per game. But despite shooting nearly four times as often from deep, he still averaged only 1.5 points more game than Reynolds.
As for Bandoo being the 4th best shooter in the conference, he did rank 4th in 3-pt percentage, but he's not in the top 15 in overall field goal percentage. Cherry-picking and mischaracterizing again -- you simply can't help yourself.
I don't have to agree with you -- there are plenty of posters on this board I don't agree with -- but if you won't play it straight with the facts --and you most definitely don't -- I'm going to call you on it every time.
What I'm not doing is building up Reynolds -- he was a decent player at best. But you were trashing both him and Calixte before they ever arrived in Norman. If you can't grasp why that might rub many OU fans the wrong way, I don't know what to tell you. Especially when, as you're trashing them, you're generally hyping random juco players, most of whom turn out to be average at best.
No, I'm calling you out on your mischaracterizations, your cherry-picked stats, your misstatements, your spin, your constant moving of the goal posts. You get the facts wrong consistently and, worse, seemingly intentionally, and easily 80% of your posts either criticize OU's coaches and players, praise rival programs or both, and it gets old after a while.
Hardly ANYONE on here would argue the fact that Kruger goes after WAY too many projects for our liking lol it’s the fact that you throw out JUCOs as a way to replace those projects 99% of the time, when little to nothing is known whether or not they would really be any better. And at that point you usually only have 2 years instead of 4 with them. If you pointed out another HS player every once in a while that you would take a shot with other than just the best Juco prospect from Arkansas that everyone else is also after, I don’t think you would get a lot of the back lash you do. Just my opinion 
