Lauren Cox

[SoonerNorm]

http://espn.go.com/espnw/news-commentary/article/13886576/game-no-1-prospect-lauren-cox-here-win

 

[BlackwellSooner]

I hope that she chooses anybody but Baylor.

 

[SoonerNorm]

Cox is taking her final official visit this weekend at Baylor.

 

[sybarite]

I would be disappointed in Lauren if she were to go to Baylor.

 

[BigT14]

Commited to Baylor.

 

[SoonerNorm]

Commited to Baylor.

I thought that was going to happen. I'm glad that we get to see her play for 4 years. The bad news is, we may not beat them for 4 years.

 

[Sweetest OU Girl]

I thought that was going to happen. I'm glad that we get to see her play for 4 years. The bad news is, we may not beat them for 4 years.

I know you really wanted us to sign her Norm, but it is not possible to sign every recruit in the country. There is a scholarship limit and kids make decisions for lots of reasons. Given a choice I would take Nancy Mulkey over Cox every time.

There are two obvious reasons for that:

1. Cox has not been able to produce a true winning team (up to this point) at the high school level. Nancy did. And it is MUCH easier for a great player to dominate in high school than it is in college. Cox's team didn't just get beat in the state playoffs last year. Her team got destroyed. By the same team Nancy's team beat rather easily. Who knows? This year may turn out different, but that is just speculation. Better to recruit a known rather than an unknown.

2. Cox wants to be the main star on her team. Nancy does everything possible to make her teammates better.

Now I wish we could have gotten both. But we have known for months that when we got Nancy's commitment, Cox did not want to have to compete with her, so she took us off her list. I can understand that.

I'm excited about our future. And I have not given up on us ever beating Baylor again. I don't exactly understand that kind of thinking. Perhaps it is just your disappointment coming out. But we have known for months Cox was not signing a scholarship with us. At some point everyone needs to get past that.

If Baylor could not win 3 or 4 National Championships with Griner, you have to question lots about their program and their likelihood of winning 6 or 7 over the next several years. It is not going to happen. Could they win 1 or 2? Sure. So could lots of other teams.

 

[SoonerNorm]

I know you really wanted us to sign her Norm, but it is not possible to sign every recruit in the country. There is a scholarship limit and kids make decisions for lots of reasons. Given a choice I would take Nancy Mulkey over Cox every time.

There are two obvious reasons for that:

1. Cox has not been able to produce a true winning team (up to this point) at the high school level. Nancy did. And it is MUCH easier for a great player to dominate in high school than it is in college. Cox's team didn't just get beat in the state playoffs last year. Her team got destroyed. By the same team Nancy's team beat rather easily. Who knows? This year may turn out different, but that is just speculation. Better to recruit a known rather than an unknown.

2. Cox wants to be the main star on her team. Nancy does everything possible to make her teammates better.

Now I wish we could have gotten both. But we have known for months that when we got Nancy's commitment, Cox did not want to have to compete with her, so she took us off her list. I can understand that.

I'm excited about our future. And I have not given up on us ever beating Baylor again. I don't exactly understand that kind of thinking. Perhaps it is just your disappointment coming out. But we have known for months Cox was not signing a scholarship with us. At some point everyone needs to get past that.

If Baylor could not win 3 or 4 National Championships with Griner, you have to question lots about their program and their likelihood of winning 6 or 7 over the next several years. It is not going to happen. Could they win 1 or 2? Sure. So could lots of other teams.

Cox and Mulkey would never have competed against each other as they play different positions. Cox will be a 4 in college. Cox's stats were a lot better than Mulkey's. Mulkey's team didn't win because of just her, they won because they had the best 5 players. You could switch Cox and Mulkey and Cox's team would have won the state championship, I'm fairly certain. My point has always been, we could have used both Mulkey and Cox which would have given us a great inside advantage against just about anyone we would have played.

 

[Mac]

I know you really wanted us to sign her Norm, but it is not possible to sign every recruit in the country. There is a scholarship limit and kids make decisions for lots of reasons. Given a choice I would take Nancy Mulkey over Cox every time.

There are two obvious reasons for that:

1. Cox has not been able to produce a true winning team (up to this point) at the high school level. Nancy did. And it is MUCH easier for a great player to dominate in high school than it is in college. Cox's team didn't just get beat in the state playoffs last year. Her team got destroyed. By the same team Nancy's team beat rather easily. Who knows? This year may turn out different, but that is just speculation. Better to recruit a known rather than an unknown.

2. Cox wants to be the main star on her team. Nancy does everything possible to make her teammates better.

Now I wish we could have gotten both. But we have known for months that when we got Nancy's commitment, Cox did not want to have to compete with her, so she took us off her list. I can understand that.

I'm excited about our future. And I have not given up on us ever beating Baylor again. I don't exactly understand that kind of thinking. Perhaps it is just your disappointment coming out. But we have known for months Cox was not signing a scholarship with us. At some point everyone needs to get past that.

If Baylor could not win 3 or 4 National Championships with Griner, you have to question lots about their program and their likelihood of winning 6 or 7 over the next several years. It is not going to happen. Could they win 1 or 2? Sure. So could lots of other teams.

Cox had a better chance o start at OU then at Baylor. At Baylor she will be going up against all upper classmen for playing time... I agree with Norm it just got that much harder to Knock off Baylor.

 

[sybarite]

Mulkey didn't win because the players around her were better. She won because she made the players around her better. If you watched the state tournament last year, Cypress Woods was not very good with Mulkey on the bench. They had two D-1 players, but they are not Big Twelve quality D-1 players, probably reserves where they went. Mulkey took the team from losing by ten to twenty to winning by ten to twenty. Just her presence was enough. They lost two starters to graduation, and they will be the favorites to win it again.

I find the fascination with all of the 6-4 players around Dallas to be curious. As noted by Sweetest OU Girl a week or so ago, it seems that there are few Texas kids on the All-Big Twelve teams. We suddenly have about five 6-4 players, probably seven or eight over two years. Yet, only one of those has ever been on a state tournament team. Are all of the other players on their teams that bad? I think there are about four in the top twenty of the Prospect Nation type services. Yet, only Cox has been in a tournament, and she went out very badly in the first round.

Cox is good. But, none of the DFW prospects will cause a team to win a national title.

Mulkey just might if we can get a rebounder (EJ,, Vivi, Treece?) and some more guards.

 

[Sweetest OU Girl]

Cox and Mulkey would never have competed against each other as they play different positions. Cox will be a 4 in college. Cox's stats were a lot better than Mulkey's. Mulkey's team didn't win because of just her, they won because they had the best 5 players. You could switch Cox and Mulkey and Cox's team would have won the state championship, I'm fairly certain. My point has always been, we could have used both Mulkey and Cox which would have given us a great inside advantage against just about anyone we would have played.

As is often said: "Stats are for losers". What are the stats you are thinking about anyway?

Cox should have been able to make her teammates better. But she could not. If you watched them play much you know she liked being the "main player". When you have a player who gets lots of attention from opponents, it is pretty easy to get other players easier shots. How did Cox do on the International team this past summer?

I am not suggesting that Cox is not an outstanding player, but she has not shown the ability to "change the game". My expectation is that Nancy will be able to do that. I certainly hope so. There are lots of 6-4 girls around the country. Not so many 6-9 girls. Given a choice I prefer Nancy.

And Cox hopes to be a 4. How that will actually play out is not certain. It was more likely at OU than at Baylor. But she wants to be the star. That is what she would have had to share at OU. Maybe at Baylor too, but not nearly as obvious.

 

[SoonerNorm]

As is often said: "Stats are for losers". What are the stats you are thinking about anyway?

Cox should have been able to make her teammates better. But she could not. If you watched them play much you know she liked being the "main player". When you have a player who gets lots of attention from opponents, it is pretty easy to get other players easier shots. How did Cox do on the International team this past summer?

I am not suggesting that Cox is not an outstanding player, but she has not shown the ability to "change the game". My expectation is that Nancy will be able to do that. I certainly hope so. There are lots of 6-4 girls around the country. Not so many 6-9 girls. Given a choice I prefer Nancy.

And Cox hopes to be a 4. How that will actually play out is not certain. It was more likely at OU than at Baylor. But she wants to be the star. That is what she would have had to share at OU. Maybe at Baylor too, but not nearly as obvious.

I have never heard Cox say she wants to be the star. If I were her high school coach, I would have insisted she be the star just like I would have told Mulkey the same thing. Any time you have a player of that caliber, you are crazy if you don't take advantage of that talent.

How do you know Mulkey made her teammates better but Cox didn't? Do you not agree Mulkey had the best supporting cost?

 

[Sweetest OU Girl]

I have never heard Cox say she wants to be the star. If I were her high school coach, I would have insisted she be the star just like I would have told Mulkey the same thing. Any time you have a player of that caliber, you are crazy if you don't take advantage of that talent.

How do you know Mulkey made her teammates better but Cox didn't? Do you not agree Mulkey had the best supporting cost?

I get the impression you have not watched them play very often. Go to 8 to 10 games for each this year and evaluate what is happening on the court. It is apparent.

My hope is that Cox's coach will demand she support her teammates at getting better. That will be necessary if they are going to win the state championship this year.

 

[SoonerNorm]

I get the impression you have not watched them play very often. Go to 8 to 10 games for each this year and evaluate what is happening on the court. It is apparent.

My hope is that Cox's coach will demand she support her teammates at getting better. That will be necessary if they are going to win the state championship this year.

If you have seen Cox play that many games, how come you don't have an idea what her stats were?

 

[skilledserv]

Mulkey didn't win because the players around her were better. She won because she made the players around her better. If you watched the state tournament last year, Cypress Woods was not very good with Mulkey on the bench. They had two D-1 players, but they are not Big Twelve quality D-1 players, probably reserves where they went. Mulkey took the team from losing by ten to twenty to winning by ten to twenty. Just her presence was enough. They lost two starters to graduation, and they will be the favorites to win it again.

I find the fascination with all of the 6-4 players around Dallas to be curious. As noted by Sweetest OU Girl a week or so ago, it seems that there are few Texas kids on the All-Big Twelve teams. We suddenly have about five 6-4 players, probably seven or eight over two years. Yet, only one of those has ever been on a state tournament team. Are all of the other players on their teams that bad? I think there are about four in the top twenty of the Prospect Nation type services. Yet, only Cox has been in a tournament, and she went out very badly in the first round.

Cox is good. But, none of the DFW prospects will cause a team to win a national title.

Mulkey just might if we can get a rebounder (EJ,, Vivi, Treece?) and some more guards.

Mulkey was not the reason why Cy woods won. Cy woods had 5 D1 kids.... Mulkey ( Oklahoma), Williams ( Texas A&M), Ogumike (peperdine), Perez (Tulsa), Reese ( offers from every big 12 school)

Cox is much better than Mulkey, and actually Mulkey didn't have an offer from Baylor and Texas stopped recruiting her. She's a big who doesn't like to play in the post at all.

As far as them being the favorite to win it again this year.....couldn't be more wrong. Cy ranch has beat them twice this year already in fall ball and the favorite this year is Plano west.

 

[sybarite]

Mulkey was not the reason why Cy woods won. Cy woods had 5 D1 kids.... Mulkey ( Oklahoma), Williams ( Texas A&M), Ogumike (peperdine), Perez (Tulsa), Reese ( offers from every big 12 school)

Cox is much better than Mulkey, and actually Mulkey didn't have an offer from Baylor and Texas stopped recruiting her. She's a big who doesn't like to play in the post at all.

As far as them being the favorite to win it again this year.....couldn't be more wrong. Cy ranch has beat them twice this year already in fall ball and the favorite this year is Plano west.

You are absolutely wrong. When Mulkey was on the bench with fouls, Cypress Woods lost both the semi-final and final games by about ten to fifteen points. They don't even come close to winning a title with Nancy. I gave my evaluation of the others. No need to repeat it.

 

[skilledserv]

You are absolutely wrong. When Mulkey was on the bench with fouls, Cypress Woods lost both the semi-final and final games by about ten to fifteen points. They don't even come close to winning a title with Nancy. I gave my evaluation of the others. No need to repeat it.

Cy woods only lost 1 game last year. So what are you talking about lost by 10?

I have no reason to argue with you...i have been watching her since she moved here to Houston back when she was a freshman. She will be good, I'm just saying you need to put some real players around her.

That team was lead by Ogumike and no one else.

 

[SoonerNorm]

Mulkey was not the reason why Cy woods won. Cy woods had 5 D1 kids.... Mulkey ( Oklahoma), Williams ( Texas A&M), Ogumike (peperdine), Perez (Tulsa), Reese ( offers from every big 12 school)

Cox is much better than Mulkey, and actually Mulkey didn't have an offer from Baylor and Texas stopped recruiting her. She's a big who doesn't like to play in the post at all.

As far as them being the favorite to win it again this year.....couldn't be more wrong. Cy ranch has beat them twice this year already in fall ball and the favorite this year is Plano west.

Very good points, thanks!

 

[sybarite]

Cy woods only lost 1 game last year. So what are you talking about lost by 10?

I have no reason to argue with you...i have been watching her since she moved here to Houston back when she was a freshman. She will be good, I'm just saying you need to put some real players around her.

That team was lead by Ogumike and no one else.

I thought it was clear. When she went to the bench against both the semi-final and final games, the Cypress Woods lead evaporated into a deficit. The non-Nancy Cypress Woods team was not adequate to compete in either game. They would have lost both to SA and Flower Mound. They got the lead when she returned in the third quarter, and barely held it in the finals when she fouled out. Ogwumike was just a shooter, and not that high percentage of a shooter. I doubt she starts for Pepperdine. I doubt Perez starts for Tulsa. The only one of interest is that freshman forward.

Of course, Nancy will need people around her. What Nancy brings is something different. She can control a game without scoring. She disrupts the other team. But, I see Nancy as a high post on offense with a power forward. She needs guards, preferably those who can create given the havoc that she will cause. EJ or Vivi may be a perfect fit, McKenna if she can shoot. Having so many shooters around at guard is essential, as well as ball-handlers like Gabbi, Maddie, and Penzo. I think Dungee and Llanusa will be perfect with Nancy.

 

[Sweetest OU Girl]

I thought it was clear. When she went to the bench against both the semi-final and final games, the Cypress Woods lead evaporated into a deficit. The non-Nancy Cypress Woods team was not adequate to compete in either game. They would have lost both to SA and Flower Mound. They got the lead when she returned in the third quarter, and barely held it in the finals when she fouled out. Ogwumike was just a shooter, and not that high percentage of a shooter. I doubt she starts for Pepperdine. I doubt Perez starts for Tulsa. The only one of interest is that freshman forward.

Of course, Nancy will need people around her. What Nancy brings is something different. She can control a game without scoring. She disrupts the other team. But, I see Nancy as a high post on offense with a power forward. She needs guards, preferably those who can create given the havoc that she will cause. EJ or Vivi may be a perfect fit, McKenna if she can shoot. Having so many shooters around at guard is essential, as well as ball-handlers like Gabbi, Maddie, and Penzo. I think Dungee and Llanusa will be perfect with Nancy.

Excellent evaluation, Syb. But it is a waste of time.

We have several on the board who dislike everything about OU's team. In their claims:

1. OU will lose many more games than last year.
2. They have lousy coaching.
3. They are lousy recruiters.
4. They will finish lower than last year.
5. It is highly likely they will not beat Baylor even once over the next 5 years.
6. They have mostly lousy players.
7. Their recruits are lousy and the only reason we get them is because no one else will offer them a scholarship.

However, I think they are wrong. And we will see before long. I predict Sherri will really be inducted into the Hall of Fame - further evidence she is a great coach. And I think we will play well this year. And I think we will beat Baylor several times over the next few years. And I think Nancy will turn out to be an excellent player for us - and will be loved by the vast majority of OU fans.