Kruger says "2 or 3" of last year's starters may not start this year

[seniorsooner]

Kruger says "2 or 3" of last year's starters may not start this year

Guerin Emig ‏@GuerinEmig

Lon Kruger told me today of 5 returning starters, "2 or 3 may not start this time around." Loves his depth. #Sooners

 

[bgrch1350]

Re: Kruger says "2 or 3" of last year's starters may not start this year

Grooms, Clark and Fitz are in jeopardy.

 

[KBaden145]

I think everybody expected 1 of last years starters to move to the 2nd unit but 2-3? That is a really good sign, if it happens. Would love to see a real solid 9-10 man rotation, definitely 9 by postseason.

 

[garyeb2]

Re: Kruger says "2 or 3" of last year's starters may not start this year

Grooms, Clark and Fitz are in jeopardy.

Wrong. Cousins doesn't look ready to move in quite yet. Fitz is out- M'Baye is in. It is only a matter of time till Heild gets in. And it won't be Cam sitting down.

 

[Stikboy]

Re: Kruger says "2 or 3" of last year's starters may not start this year

So,

Grooms, Hield, Clark, MBaye, and Osby by conference?

 

[WTSooner]

Re: Kruger says "2 or 3" of last year's starters may not start this year

Wrong. Cousins doesn't look ready to move in quite yet. Fitz is out- M'Baye is in. It is only a matter of time till Heild gets in. And it won't be Cam sitting down.

Are you really going to start this again? Come on.....Pledger isn't losing his job to a true freshman that wasn't even a top 100 kid. Not as a senior he isn't. I don't care "how much quicker" Hield is. It isn't a foot race. It's basketball.

If Hield is ready to play, he'll get plenty of minutes off the bench spelling both the 2 and 3 positions.

 

[WTSooner]

Re: Kruger says "2 or 3" of last year's starters may not start this year

I think everybody expected 1 of last years starters to move to the 2nd unit but 2-3? That is a really good sign, if it happens.

Actually, I think it is a terrible sign. To me it doesn't mean the new guys are that good, it means LK has given up on the old guys, and we're not Dancing this year.

If the old guys start the season, and somehow we end up in a position with 5-8 games left and we're not in the postseason hunt, by all means, let the young guys play. But you'll never convince me a group of non-top 100 guards have any business coming in and STARTING over guys like Pledger. That simply doesn't happen in college basketball.

 

[bocabull]

Re: Kruger says "2 or 3" of last year's starters may not start this year

You do have to wonder about Pledger. He's not named a captain and now Kruger says this. If the focus is totally on defense and Pledger can't keep up with his guy defensively he could become the scoring punch off the bench.

 

[NorthCarolinaSooner]

Re: Kruger says "2 or 3" of last year's starters may not start this year

Actually, I think it is a terrible sign. To me it doesn't mean the new guys are that good, it means LK has given up on the old guys, and we're not Dancing this year.

If the old guys start the season, and somehow we end up in a position with 5-8 games left and we're not in the postseason hunt, by all means, let the young guys play. But you'll never convince me a group of non-top 100 guards have any business coming in and STARTING over guys like Pledger. That simply doesn't happen in college basketball.

Surely people on here are smart enough to know the rankings mean very little. Do you honestly belive there is a world of difference between the 50th ranked guy in one ranking as opposed to the 120th ranked guy?

Also......werent 2 of them actually ranked in the top 100? Or very near it?

I guess every school that doesnt have a top 100 player should quit playing?

You know that half the tourney teams every year probably dont have a single top 100 guy on their whole roster right?

Sometimes we, as fans, get hung up on the dumbest things.

How many top 100 guys go to college and dont even contribute much their entire career? Does that mean they were always better than the guys ranked below them because some guy with a pen and computer ranked them that way?


News flash....we have sucked for three years......it isnt inconceivable that a couple young guys could come in and earn minutes. A lot of basketball guys with knowledge have said this group of guards is very talented.

Geez.


I dont care WHERE they were ranked as long as they can play.....and if they outplay returners I will be thrilled.

 

[cvangild]

Re: Kruger says "2 or 3" of last year's starters may not start this year

Actually, I think it is a terrible sign. To me it doesn't mean the new guys are that good, it means LK has given up on the old guys, and we're not Dancing this year.

If the old guys start the season, and somehow we end up in a position with 5-8 games left and we're not in the postseason hunt, by all means, let the young guys play. But you'll never convince me a group of non-top 100 guards have any business coming in and STARTING over guys like Pledger. That simply doesn't happen in college basketball.

I don't know which player rankings you live by, but both Hield and Hornbeak we ranked in to the top 100 last year according to Rivals...which as good as any other site at doing the impossible job of ranking HS players. They were both 4 star players according to rivals. Take that for what it's worth.


It doesn't really matter who starts....who does Kruger have in at the end of the game...that is what I'm looking to see.

 

[luckyc1423]

Re: Kruger says "2 or 3" of last year's starters may not start this year

I bet this will upset the crowd that always says "no way a two year starter will have his place taken" or "no way a senior with starting experience in the big 12 will be benched"

 

[garyeb2]

Re: Kruger says "2 or 3" of last year's starters may not start this year

Are you really going to start this again? Come on.....Pledger isn't losing his job to a true freshman that wasn't even a top 100 kid. Not as a senior he isn't. I don't care "how much quicker" Hield is. It isn't a foot race. It's basketball.

If Hield is ready to play, he'll get plenty of minutes off the bench spelling both the 2 and 3 positions.

This isn't just Heild. Let me give you the facts. All three of those freshmen relative to Pledger right now are quicker, more athletic, better ball handlers, better in transition, better able to take a defender off the dribble, and better defenders. That same claim can not be made relative to Cam.

Now, Pledger is a better shooter and has real Big 12 game experience. You may think that those two things alone tip the scales heavily in Pledger's favor. They don't.

Kruger was quoted as saying 2 or 3 of last years starters might be replaced. One of them is Fitz. That is already showing up. But, my guess that he is still in for big minutes. Right now, this year, Pledger is not in the same league as Cam as an all around ball player. If in fact 2 or 3 go, that leaves Grooms and Pledger. If it is 2, Pledger may hold on. He has a valuable skill. If it is 3, Pledger is gone.

Kruger has been saying about the same thing for months. And you want to just continue to ignore him. At the end of last season he said he could see a whole new starting 5. Now he has backed it down to 2/3. My advice would be to listen to the coach and take him at his word.

Kruger's statement and my consensus oberservation that of the 3 freshman Heild is currently the most game ready of the group are the basis of my opinion on this topic. Your opinion seems to be coming from an unwillingness to process new information.

I'm going to let Kruger coach the team and play whoever he wants. Then I'll sit back and hope they play well.

 

[McJacknife]

Re: Kruger says "2 or 3" of last year's starters may not start this year

Actually, I think it is a terrible sign. To me it doesn't mean the new guys are that good, it means LK has given up on the old guys, and we're not Dancing this year.

If the old guys start the season, and somehow we end up in a position with 5-8 games left and we're not in the postseason hunt, by all means, let the young guys play. But you'll never convince me a group of non-top 100 guards have any business coming in and STARTING over guys like Pledger. That simply doesn't happen in college basketball.

We need a Jump-To-Conclusions mat.

Not calling you out WT, but it always amazes me how people can extract so much out of so little.

Will the season hurry up and start?

 

[playmakr]

Re: Kruger says "2 or 3" of last year's starters may not start this year

You do have to wonder about Pledger. He's not named a captain and now Kruger says this. If the focus is totally on defense and Pledger can't keep up with his guy defensively he could become the scoring punch off the bench.

Agreed.

And then down the stretch you keep him in if he's on or we are behind or there is obvious scrub he can guard, or sit him if he's off or we are ahead/well ahead.

 

[CoachTalk]

Re: Kruger says "2 or 3" of last year's starters may not start this year

One word. MOTIVATION. Coaches say things like this all the time!!!

 

[TheGimper]

Re: Kruger says "2 or 3" of last year's starters may not start this year

Anyone here is absolutely absurd if they think Pledger isn't starting. A tweet from Emig saying Kruger said there's a CHANCE that might happen is being blown way out of proportion.

 

[Salt City Sooner]

Re: Kruger says "2 or 3" of last year's starters may not start this year

One word. MOTIVATION. Coaches say things like this all the time!!!

x 2. This reminds me of when every spring, you see on the football depth chart a totally unexpected walk-on landing on or near the top of the chart at his position. Now, every once in a while it ends up actually being the truth (i.e. Whaley last year), but for every Dom that you see, you can find 5-10 examples of it being used as motivation for a player that the coaches want to start, but has been lagging behind for whatever reason.

 

[WTSooner]

Re: Kruger says "2 or 3" of last year's starters may not start this year

Surely people on here are smart enough to know the rankings mean very little. Do you honestly belive there is a world of difference between the 50th ranked guy in one ranking as opposed to the 120th ranked guy?

Also......werent 2 of them actually ranked in the top 100? Or very near it?

I guess every school that doesnt have a top 100 player should quit playing?

You know that half the tourney teams every year probably dont have a single top 100 guy on their whole roster right?

Sometimes we, as fans, get hung up on the dumbest things.

How many top 100 guys go to college and dont even contribute much their entire career? Does that mean they were always better than the guys ranked below them because some guy with a pen and computer ranked them that way?


News flash....we have sucked for three years......it isnt inconceivable that a couple young guys could come in and earn minutes. A lot of basketball guys with knowledge have said this group of guards is very talented.

Geez.


I dont care WHERE they were ranked as long as they can play.....and if they outplay returners I will be thrilled.

Where did THAT come from? I didn't say any of that.

I simply said that if you expect guards that are ranked outside the top 100, or even near the top 100, to come in and start over basically a 4 year starter in Pledger, you are wrong. I don't see it. Not anytime soon at least.

I have nothing against guards like Hield/Cousins/Hornbeak. I'm one of Hield's biggest supporters. I think he has a chance to be really special. But guards like those three don't come in and start in the Big 12 during their freshmen year, on solid teams. They just don't. I'm sure somebody will dig up an example of one or two that did, but 95% of them don't. I'm simply playing the odds.

I don't care how much Grooms worked on his shot this offseason. I don't care how many shots Cam took this offseason with new mechanics. Pledger is the only guard we have that is going to consistently make shots from day 1. In time Hield might join him. At times Cam might get hot. But guards win college basketball games, not b/c you can stick 3 great defensive guards on the court and win, but b/c you need guards that can score. And that is what Pledger does. He scores the basketball at a good clip.

Good teams play guards like Hield and the other two off the bench. They work them in slowly, let them adjust. They don't give them big roles, b/c when they fail, and they will, b/c they are young, it hurts the team. You give them small roles. You let them come off the bench. And by the end of the year, you have pretty good players coming off the bench for you.

But to suggest Hield is going to "beat out" Pledger anytime in the next couple of months is silly. Defense is important, but you can't just stick your five best defenders on the court, regardless of offense, and win many games. You still have to be able to score it. And with Grooms and Cam being unknowns, a known like Pledger isn't going to lose his job. Unless there is off the court stuff going on.

 

[WTSooner]

Re: Kruger says "2 or 3" of last year's starters may not start this year

One word. MOTIVATION. Coaches say things like this all the time!!!

Exactly.

I meant to say that above. Coach speak. Nothing more. Of course if Pledger stops working hard, gets in trouble off the court, or something like that, all bets are off. But if Pledger does basically what he did last year, and the team is winning enough games to keep us in the hunt for the Dance, I'd be shocked if Pledger didn't start every game this season.

So LK is trying to motivate guys. That is what good coaches do. He knows a quote like that will get back to the guys. It'll make the starters work harder to keep their jobs. And it'll make the young guys keep working hard b/c they think they can start if they do.

Great job of coaching by LK. I wouldn't expect him to say anything else at this time. :clap

 

[garyeb2]

Re: Kruger says "2 or 3" of last year's starters may not start this year

Uh, WT, you keep referencing what good teams do. How is what good teams do applicable to OU's current situation? I'm just trying to follow the arguement.

I don't follow recruit rankings. But, I do follow along with the conversation on the message board. I'm pretty sure the conversation was that Heild was a #75 player and Hornbeak just inside or outside of the top 100. And most everyone thought that getting players ranked like that was a pretty good deal.

On the other hand, if memory serves, wasn't Pledger ranked 120 something. If someone took much stock in rankings, wouldn't it be pretty hard to dismiss a gap like that.

Oh, when Pledger was a freshman, wasn't Willie Warren the starter. Then as a Soph, he didn't have anyone to beat out. Calvin started the season as a point guard and it was just Pledger at the #2. Then as a junior, Calvin, his only competion other than walkons was gone after 5 games.

If you want to claim that Pledger has gained some valuable experience and is a consistantly good shooter that is fine. But saying that he was a starter for TWO years as something meaningful is silly. He started by default and didn't earn anything.

Argueing defense vs offense is fine. Pick a side. Last season OU ,statistically, was one of the two worst defenses in the conference. The 5-13 record seems to validate those stats. I believe that Kruger will do everything in his power to keep that from happening again. It is a matter of pride for a guy like him. If Pledger can be a participant in a much improved defense, I'm sure that would be fine with Kruger. If a much improved defense doesn't include Pledger, I'm sure that would be fine too. It is fine with me either way. But, if defense isn't much improve, they will get smoked again no matter how many points Pledger scores. Haven't we already seen that?