MBB TPT2 TRANSFER PORTAL THREAD 2

[dksooner]

If Hill was on the final four team, Spangler’s minutes would not have been reduced.

Agree with this.

 

[skyvue]

Id rather have him than not but not for 100k+. Dudes never seen a NCAA tourney and he never stepped up to be the player many thought he was on 2 bad teams now.

Also using Bam, noland, oweh and TG to boost his 3 shooting prowess is hilarious. You might as well include the team managers while youre at it. That doesn't somehow make hill's shooting good..

You are in absurd cherry-picking mode. He was our third-leading scorer (our second leading returning one), our second-leading rebounder (#1 among returners, if he were returning) and he was our best defender.

Three-point shooting is WAY down the last of stats and attributes by which Hill should be judged, but it's somehow your primary focus. So I pointed out that we had three guards (y'know, the guys who are supposed to be good shooters from behind the arc) who shot worse than Hill did and one of them is projected by many here to be a future star. At no point in Hill's four years at OU was anyone counting on him being a major contributor from deep but you're harping on that one stat as he walks out the door, ignoring everything else he brought to the table.

 

[hoopsaustin]

You are in absurd cherry-picking mode. He was our third-leading scorer (our second leading returning one), our second-leading rebounder (#1 among returners, if he were returning) and he was our best defender.

Three-point shooting is WAY down the last of stats and attributes by which Hill should be judged, but it's somehow your primary focus. So I pointed out that we had three guards (y'know, the guys who are supposed to be good shooters from behind the arc) who shot worse than Hill did and one of them is projected by many here to be a future star. At no point in Hill's four years at OU was anyone counting on him being a major contributor from deep but you're harping on that one stat as he walks out the door, ignoring everything else he brought to the table.

Pot meet kettle. I'm cherry picking while you're doing comparisons to other players on the team to somehow bolster average numbers.. i wish we kept him but not anywhere near the money he apparently asking for. I don't think hill will be a guy that we remember much in ou lore. Nothing wrong with that. Even a guy that wasnt a full time starter in Nate Carter was better imo and he got less minutes

 

[WichitaSooner]

Indeed!

He started some games two years ago as a sophomore on a tournament team. How quickly we forget.

 

[hoopsaustin]

He started some games two years ago as a sophomore on a tournament team. How quickly we forget.

You counting the nit? Lol

 

[WichitaSooner]

If Hill was on the final four team, Spangler’s minutes would not have been reduced.

I don’t agree, but even if you’re right, it really doesn’t defeat my point, which is that they are both really good college players who do a lot of things beyond what stats can capture. I simply don’t understand why that is so widely accepted for one but not the other. If Spangler had transferred from OU, people would have been proclaiming him a massive loss. Hill leaves, and people act like it’ll be easy to replace him with one of the “dozens” of better players in the portal. Not only are there not dozens of better players available, we have seen absolutely nothing to suggest that any of the guys who actually are better will want to come to OU.

 

[WichitaSooner]

You counting the nit? Lol

What are you talking about? Did you watch OU basketball in March of 2021, when we not only made the tournament but won a game and played Gonzaga competitively? Was that a different Jalen Hill in our starting five?

 

[skyvue]

Pot meet kettle. I'm cherry picking while you're doing comparisons to other players on the team to somehow bolster average numbers..

I would never have mentioned his 3-point percentage--not because it was bad but because it played such a non-role in his career at OU. He's a forward--and not a stretch forward; at no point in the past four years was anyone ever expecting Jalen Hill to score with any consistency from behind the arc, but you kept citing that stat. All I did was point out that several players who, unlike Hill, were actually expected to score from deep were even worse shooters than he was. I hope Sherfield doesn't leave; you'd no doubt discount the impact of his departure because he wasn't about to post anyone up.

 

[hoopsaustin]

What are you talking about? Did you watch OU basketball in March of 2021, when we not only made the tournament but won a game and played Gonzaga competitively? Was that a different Jalen Hill in our starting five?

Its late take it easy on me ha. My memory is fading

 

[hoopsaustin]

I would never have mentioned his 3-point percentage--not because it was bad but because it played such a non-role in his career at OU. He's a forward--and not a stretch forward; at no point in the past four years was anyone ever expecting Jalen Hill to score with any consistency from behind the arc, but you kept citing that stat. All I did was point out that several players who, unlike Hill, were actually expected to score from deep were even worse shooters than he was. I hope Sherfield doesn't leave; you'd no doubt discount the impact of his departure because he wasn't about to post anyone up.

Ita 2023, just about every player should be able to shoot the 3 these days..

Again, that argument is so weak. Idc that the other players couldnt shoot the 3 either, that doesnt somehow make sub 33% good.

We need Sherfield pretty badly until we start locking in some new guys. Your remark is SO witty otherwise.

 

[TINY]

I don’t agree, but even if you’re right, it really doesn’t defeat my point, which is that they are both really good college players who do a lot of things beyond what stats can capture. I simply don’t understand why that is so widely accepted for one but not the other. If Spangler had transferred from OU, people would have been proclaiming him a massive loss. Hill leaves, and people act like it’ll be easy to replace him with one of the “dozens” of better players in the portal. Not only are there not dozens of better players available, we have seen absolutely nothing to suggest that any of the guys who actually are better will want to come to OU.

Hill is 2-3 inches shorter than Spangler though. Hill got exploited both offensively and defensively when he is going against legitimate forwards w size like osu had for instance.

Hill Isn’t as good of a rebounder, shooter, or scorer as Spangler was:

Career Total Shooting
-Spangler 62% (better FG% and 3pt%)
-Hill 59% (better FT%)

Career Rebounds per 40
-Spangler 11.5
-Hill 7.3

Career Points per 40
-Spangler 12.7
-Hill 11

The actual average career points and rebounds delta is even greater in favor of Spangler than the “per 40” by the way.

I think Hill is the better defender overall because he can guard multiple positions effectively (some better than others). I would rather have Spangler guarding a legitimate 6-8+ forward, though.

 

[TEvans4Three]

Wow we really need a portal signing soon.

The fact that this board is actually debating Spangler v. Hill is completely insane.

 

[WichitaSooner]

Hill is 2-3 inches shorter than Spangler though. Hill got exploited both offensively and defensively when he is going against legitimate forwards w size like osu had for instance.

Hill Isn’t as good of a rebounder, shooter, or scorer as Spangler was:

Career Total Shooting
-Spangler 62% (better FG% and 3pt%)
-Hill 59% (better FT%)

Career Rebounds per 40
-Spangler 11.5
-Hill 7.3

Career Points per 40
-Spangler 12.7
-Hill 11

The actual average career points and rebounds delta is even greater in favor of Spangler than the “per 40” by the way.

I think Hill is the better defender overall because he can guard multiple positions effectively (some better than others). I would rather have Spangler guarding a legitimate 6-8+ forward, though.

I agree with your latter point, but obviously it’s just as true that Hill is better than Spangler at guarding guys 6’7” and under. The difference is that by necessity, Hill often had to defend bigger guys, and he certainly held his own. Spangler never had to defend multiple positions because we always had three guys capable of guarding perimeter players, so he was always able to just guard his natural position. Overall, I think Hill is a much better defender.

 

[NorthCarolinaSooner]

Facts:

1. People on here (rightfully) *****ed all year about how bad this team was.

2. Hill was a starter on the last place team in the conference.




Why are we wringing our hands over losing anyone that has entered the portal?
You guys wanted a better basketball team with more talent.....but we cannot improve talent without losing guys who are already on the roster in order to free up scholarships. I really think alot of people just simply want to complain just to complain because we are literally arguing back and forth over losing guys who we bashed as a team for months.

If you want to improve then you need new players. We are going to get that. (I hope)

 

[skyvue]

Why are we wringing our hands over losing anyone that has entered the portal?
You guys wanted a better basketball team with more talent.....but we cannot improve talent without losing guys who are already on the roster in order to free up scholarships. I really think alot of people just simply want to complain just to complain because we are literally arguing back and forth over losing guys who we bashed as a team for months.

If you want to improve then you need new players. We are going to get that. (I hope)

The way you improve a team's talent level is to retain the best players and then bring in equally good or better players. Under Moser, we have lost our best players and brought in average or worse players. Jalen Hill wasn't the biggest problem on this year's team. In fact, he was one of the two or three best players on the team. Acting as if it doesn't hurt to lose that kind of player because the team overall wasn't good makes no sense, especially if it requires one to have faith that Moser is going to bring in a haul of top-notch talent from the portal. I hope he does, but nothing he's achieved via the portal so far suggests that he will. And even if he does bring in those players, we'd have been better off with Hlll playing alongside them than without him.

 

[WTSooner]

Facts:

1. People on here (rightfully) *****ed all year about how bad this team was.

2. Hill was a starter on the last place team in the conference.




Why are we wringing our hands over losing anyone that has entered the portal?

Agreed. I said it in another post, if we're going to find a starting 5 for next year that is more of an interior guy, we need our starting 4 to be a better offensive player, especially on the perimeter, than Hill can likely be. So even if Hill's replacement is only better at shooting and scoring, and maybe isn't quite the defender or rebounder that Hill was, it still could be a net gain for the team.

OU fans on this board - "Did you see our lack of talent? If we're going to compete in the mighty Big 12 we must get better, more athletic players."

Those same fans - "What do you mean losing Hill isn't a big deal? How will we ever replace his intangibles and 9.7 points per game as a 4th year player?

Sky mentioned improving the other starting spots. What spots are those? Sherfield is still on the roster. I figure Uzan and Oweh at least plan to start. We do know we'll be bringing in a new 5, but who knows who that will be and how talented they will be. Honestly, I feel like we have a better chance at upgrading the 4 (Hill) than we do the 5 (TG). We'll get more athletic at the 5 probably, but better? I dunno. Lots of 4's in the Portal that can shoot it.

 

[TEvans4Three]

The way you improve a team's talent level is to retain the best players and then bring in equally good or better players. Under Moser, we have lost our best players and brought in average or worse players. Jalen Hill wasn't the biggest problem on this year's team. In fact, he was one of the two or three best players on the team. Acting as if it doesn't hurt to lose that kind of player because the team overall wasn't good makes no sense, especially if it requires one to have faith that Moser is going to bring in a haul of top-notch talent from the portal. I hope he does, but nothing he's achieved via the portal so far suggests that he will. And even if he does bring in those players, we'd have been better off with Hlll playing alongside them than without him.

So now you want him to stay to stay, but not to be the starting 4. Is that right? (please correct me if I am misinterpreting what you are trying to say there, based on that last sentence)

I wouldn't say he was a top 2 player on the team, more consistent than our top 2, perhaps. (Until the end of the season)

The problem is, NIL (people) has/have told Hill, "you are worth more". Hill is in no way staying to be a 6th man. So, by that very fact, you are not increasing your talent level. Moser cannot retain him without a large NIL package and without sacrificing a starting spot for a more athletic and proper 4.

I am all for glue guys and culture guys, but they have to be willing to sacrifice starting minutes for the team in that situation.

 

[TEvans4Three]

Agreed. I said it in another post, if we're going to find a starting 5 for next year that is more of an interior guy, we need our starting 4 to be a better offensive player, especially on the perimeter, than Hill can likely be. So even if Hill's replacement is only better at shooting and scoring, and maybe isn't quite the defender or rebounder that Hill was, it still could be a net gain for the team.

OU fans on this board - "Did you see our lack of talent? If we're going to compete in the mighty Big 12 we must get better, more athletic players."

Those same fans - "What do you mean losing Hill isn't a big deal? How will we ever replace his intangibles and 9.7 points per game as a 4th year player?

Sky mentioned improving the other starting spots. What spots are those? Sherfield is still on the roster. I figure Uzan and Oweh at least plan to start. We do know we'll be bringing in a new 5, but who knows who that will be and how talented they will be. Honestly, I feel like we have a better chance at upgrading the 4 (Hill) than we do the 5 (TG). We'll get more athletic at the 5 probably, but better? I dunno. Lots of 4's in the Portal that can shoot it.

Can't believe I am saying this, but very much this^^^

We need shooters to create space. We had no space last year and team's clogged the lane. The games we won with outside shooting was because we hit our WIDE OPEN 3s. Why were they wide open? Because defenses knew how to beat us. Clog the lane, prevent Tanner from being able to role, and that is it.

We need shooters and scorers to spread the floor. A stretch 4, who can actually stretch and not get blocked on every layup attempt, should be a high, if not the highest, priority.

 

[WTSooner]

Can't believe I am saying this, but very much this^^^

Gross.

 

[skyvue]

So now you want him to stay to stay, but not to be the starting 4. Is that right?

That presumes he wouldn't beat out whoever Moser brought in to compete with him, which suggests you have much more faith in Moser's facility with working the portal than I do.

I'll say it again: Hill would have been our second-leading returning scorer (our top returning scorer if Sherfield should leave) and the guy with the second-highest shooting percentage among returning players and the best defender on the team. To find a better player than him won't be easy--and based on his previous portal performance, it'll be a huge challenge for Moser.

As someone else stated, Moser loved Hill and wanted him to stay, so you guys dismissing his departure as no big deal and implying that he'll be easily replaced are taking a stance Moser himself would likely disagree with.