juco PG please
- Thread starter pnkranger
- Start date
Yes, but I would wish for Grooms as the Senior and not the Junior.
DenverSooner
New member
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2008
- Messages
- 11,099
- Reaction score
- 0
I don't get this comment. Grooms was a very solid pg. He was not an All-conference level player but he was at a minimum an average Big XII pg. Having him come off the bench would be huge for this team.
I would love to have Grooms for one more season.
ousooners1baby
Active member
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 788
- Reaction score
- 58
Grooms as a Junior was decent but as a Senior was pretty darn good. I'd take him any day. He was pretty dern tough to handle.
WTSooner
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2011
- Messages
- 12,010
- Reaction score
- 1,112
Any advantage we get be signing a "true backup pg" (I'm thinking JUCO here), is probably negated by the fact that it will likely take him a season to adapt. That seems to be the MO on a lot of the pg types we've signed from there.
If that is the case, I think Hornbeak would probably be the better option. He isn't a great pg, but he is more than adequate in a backup role, IMO.
If that is the case, I think Hornbeak would probably be the better option. He isn't a great pg, but he is more than adequate in a backup role, IMO.
WTSooner
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2011
- Messages
- 12,010
- Reaction score
- 1,112
I wouldn't say that. He was pretty good for about a 10 game stretch. Heck, I don't think he was even starting for most of the season.
He probably scored more points in his top 4-5 games than he did the rest of the season combined.
That is a really good description of Grooms contribution. The few games that he did make big impacts were the times the defenses just turned him loose.
Grooms is good kid and was a big upgrade over the previous point guard. He was a contributor to a turn around season and I'm glad we had him.
But, we are still far from the point that would allow Kruger to just gather up a body to fill a back up role. OU still needs a couple of rounds of talent upgrades.
BoulderSooner
Owner/Operator
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2008
- Messages
- 16,722
- Reaction score
- 8,327
hornbeak is a solid backup .. and he will be back soon
He was sick with a stomach bug.
Grooms was a solid Big XII starting PG. If that's your back up, you are in fantastic shape.
I would say that I would even take Omar Leary, as he's a much more fringe player, but was capable of providing backup minutes.
nikebasketball
New member
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2013
- Messages
- 236
- Reaction score
- 0
You are right. Cousins started the first 10 games at Pg. then when Buddy was inserted into the the starting line up Hornbeak was moved to starting PG for the next 13 games tell Buddy broke his foot. Cousins started the next 4 games and thats when Grooms caught fire scoring and he started the final 5 games of the year. He was a solid back up most of the year and Awesome for that 10 game stretch.
AdaSooner
Admin Emeritus
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2008
- Messages
- 16,092
- Reaction score
- 83
I'm not in favor of bringing in a juco point guard. For one thing, I can't imagine that a juco player at any position, who is worth a valuable scholarship, is still available in the spring signing period. I would rather go with a proven commodity in Je'lon Hornbeak next year than to take a chance on a juco transfer.
And, for the record, I'm not nearly as high on juco players as I used to be. You can chalk that up to too experience. For every juco transfer who has turned out okay in the last few years, I'd dare say that I can name two or more who were complete busts or never even made it on campus. Sorry, I can't wrap my head around the idea of bringing in another one.
If a high school point or combo guard worth his salt is still out there, I see that as a better option, especially if he is a scoring guard who can also knock down shots from behind the arc. With the players we have coming back next season and the three bigs we signed last month, we can finally, for the first time in three years or more, be selective with the players we bring in to fill specific needs. We don't have to go the juco route anymore, and I see that as a good thing.
And, for the record, I'm not nearly as high on juco players as I used to be. You can chalk that up to too experience. For every juco transfer who has turned out okay in the last few years, I'd dare say that I can name two or more who were complete busts or never even made it on campus. Sorry, I can't wrap my head around the idea of bringing in another one.
If a high school point or combo guard worth his salt is still out there, I see that as a better option, especially if he is a scoring guard who can also knock down shots from behind the arc. With the players we have coming back next season and the three bigs we signed last month, we can finally, for the first time in three years or more, be selective with the players we bring in to fill specific needs. We don't have to go the juco route anymore, and I see that as a good thing.
WTSooner
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2011
- Messages
- 12,010
- Reaction score
- 1,112
Yep.
That is also why I don't want a JUCO. It hinders our ability to go find a good HS kid, if not this year, than next year. That would be three pg's on the roster, and it would create some issues with the offers we have out.
Getting Nairn would have been nice though, for sure.
Similar threads
