Next Two Games

[campbest]

Real question is how the team defends when they are forced to play at a slower pace...which is what will happen during conference.

 

[AdaSooner]

I wanted to add one more thought. Our team's job right now is NOT to play the best defense that they can. Their job is to play the best defense that they can without getting into foul trouble. Without Spangler, Woodard, Buddy, or Cam we are exposed to the liability of losing to just about anyone left on our schedule. With all of our starters on the floor we have a shot to beat almost every one we play.

Excellent point, Gary! It's easy to forget that this team does not have the quality depth to overcome an injury or foul trouble to more than one player, and even that can be problematic. Case in point, Je'lon's current injury and losing Ryan in the second half of the Tulsa game.

I'm not unhappy at all with Tyler, Frank and D. J.'s progress so far. They have done an admirable job. But when we have to go more than six deep (five now that Je'lon is injured), there is a noticeable gap in the talent level. That gap will be even more apparent when we get into the conference portion of our schedule. That is, unless there is a marked improvement in our subs in the next couple of weeks, which is what we all hope to see.

You'd better believe that Coach Kruger is well aware of the difference in the talent level right now. He can say all of the nice things he wants about Neal, Booker and Bennett. That's what head coaches are supposed to do. But the drop off when one or more is on the floor is bigger than most of us want to admit. That's not meant as a knock on any of those guys. It's just a fact that they are not as good as the players they replace.

This is a six player deep team, with three subs who are marginally adequate, at least most of the time. LK is wise to do everything he can to keep our best players on the floor as much as possible. If that means, slacking off a little on defense to avoid foul trouble, so be it.

 

[garyeb2]

I have been a part of this board since day one, and I am NOT a constant critic year to year. This year I have been pretty consistently critical of this team on defense, but I'm not blind to impact of pace or the rules or our lack of depth. I posted the following in last night's game thread:

"We're good enough to score on anybody, but we're not deep enough to keep the defensive pressure up for 40 minutes...Combine that with youthful gambling and reaching and forgotten assignments, and we are just downright poor on defense."

I'm okay with high scoring games, just not okay with wide open looks under the basket, not closing out on three point shooters, not stopping the ball in transition, etc. Will we be better when Hornbeak comes back? Absolutely. All I'm saying is that if we don't get better -- and quick -- on defense, then we're going to start the Big 12 season in a hole.

I'll buy in to the argument that there is a gap between the current defensive performance and the needed defensive performance. But, that is it.

You are hanging unrealistic expectations on this group. This team is simply not good enough to be 10-1 AND lead the country in every statistical category. Only the very good teams can do that. We aren't there yet.

This team is very young, lacks size inside, and relative to the starters, has a very weak bench. Those shortcoming will manifest themselves in a variety of different ways as the season goes along. On the occasion defense shows up better, it could be something else over the next few games. Contrary to the current evidence, nothing is resolved. There will be shooting and scoring slumps to come. There will be some poor rebounding games and games with too many turnovers.

This years team represents a massive talent upgrade over what Kruger found when he got here. Young talent coupled with elite speed gives them a chance to win a lot of games this season. And they just might. But, their shortcomings will cost them some games one way or the other. That one way or another is no more likely to be defense than anything else.

 

[pnkranger]

I'll buy in to the argument that there is a gap between the current defensive performance and the needed defensive performance. But, that is it. You are hanging unrealistic expectations on this group. This team is simply not good enough to be 10-1 AND lead the country in every statistical category. Only the very good teams can do that. We aren't there yet.

I don't think any of us are expecting this team to be top 10 in defense and offense. We're a top 15 offensive team and not even in the top 150 defenses. I'm willing to let the offense carry the team...but the defense has to pull its weight.

I think WT said it best: I'm not asking for us to play like Wisconsin, I just want us to play right on both ends of the floor. On defense, all the excuses in this thread aside, very few of our guys are playing well defensively.

 

[WTSooner]

I don't think any of us are expecting this team to be top 10 in defense and offense. We're a top 15 offensive team and not even in the top 150 defenses. I'm willing to let the offense carry the team...but the defense has to pull its weight.

I think WT said it best: I'm not asking for us to play like Wisconsin, I just want us to play right on both ends of the floor. On defense, all the excuses in this thread aside, very few of our guys are playing well defensively.

Yep. Bump our D ranking up to 75 or so, and we'd be a considerably better team. I think that is doable.

 

[garyeb2]

I don't think any of us are expecting this team to be top 10 in defense and offense. We're a top 15 offensive team and not even in the top 150 defenses. I'm willing to let the offense carry the team...but the defense has to pull its weight.

I think WT said it best: I'm not asking for us to play like Wisconsin, I just want us to play right on both ends of the floor. On defense, all the excuses in this thread aside, very few of our guys are playing well defensively.

This is a real head scratcher for me. What do those rankings actually mean to you? We are talking about a 10-1 team with a top 40 rpi. It sounds like that you have convinced yourself and are now trying to convince others that there are over 150 teams that play better defense. Don't you realize how unlikely it is that actually may be true.

If you were trying to make some reasonable argument based on useless stats, I wouldn't be trying to give you so much blowback. If you were saying something like maybe " there could be as many as 50 teams that are better than OU on defense and I would sleep better at night if there were only 25," OK by me.

 

[psk2080]

This team isn't built for a half court type of game. It's a small lineup built better for an up and down the court transition type of game. With that being said, easy points in transition are a good thing, so the best thing this team could do is up the tempo. Unfortunately, with Hornbeak injured, it puts stress on our point guard position. Add to that the fact that so many of our players are freshmen and sophomores, you have a recipe for a team that will lack discipline at times and make mistakes on defense and makes mistakes with poor clock management in the half court and in shot selection. Lon will teach them, and next year with the big men coming in you will likely see a less up-tempo style, although that style is very attractive to recruits, so maybe the team will continue with the up-tempo style. Billy Tubbs' teams could play defense, but you couldn't tell it by the points per game his teams gave up. But when you average over 100 per game on offense, giving up 80+ per game wasn't too bad. Will this team make mistakes? Yes. They are young. Will they get better? Yes. Especially when Hornbeak gets healthier and when Woodard, Hield, Booker, Cousins, Spangler and Hornbeak all get more experience. They are all freshmen or sophomores. The only upperclassmen in the rotation are Clark, Bennett and Neal.

 

[JBaker]

This is a real head scratcher for me. What do those rankings actually mean to you? We are talking about a 10-1 team with a top 40 rpi. It sounds like that you have convinced yourself and are now trying to convince others that there are over 150 teams that play better defense. Don't you realize how unlikely it is that actually may be true.

If you were trying to make some reasonable argument based on useless stats, I wouldn't be trying to give you so much blowback. If you were saying something like maybe " there could be as many as 50 teams that are better than OU on defense and I would sleep better at night if there were only 25," OK by me.

There are a lot of D-1 teams.
And the way we've played so far, I'd say there are DEFINITELY at LEAST 50 teams better on defense than us so far.

We are all incredibly happy that we're 10-1. But if we play defense like we have the last two games in our next two games, we will be 10-3 in a hurry, with an incredibly tough first 5 game stretch to start the conference season.

Our point is, we can be much better on defense, and we need to be to continue to win.

Of the 10 teams we've beaten, only North Texas (6-5), Seton Hall (7-4), Mercer (7-4), and George Mason (5-4) have winning records. Our next two opponents are 8-2 and 9-3. The opposition talent is about to step up significantly. And if we don't shore things up defensively, we could end up giving up 100 to somebody.

 

[garyeb2]

There are a lot of D-1 teams.
And the way we've played so far, I'd say there are DEFINITELY at LEAST 50 teams better on defense than us so far.

We are all incredibly happy that we're 10-1. But if we play defense like we have the last two games in our next two games, we will be 10-3 in a hurry, with an incredibly tough first 5 game stretch to start the conference season.

Our point is, we can be much better on defense, and we need to be to continue to win.

Of the 10 teams we've beaten, only North Texas (6-5), Seton Hall (7-4), Mercer (7-4), and George Mason (5-4) have winning records. Our next two opponents are 8-2 and 9-3. The opposition talent is about to step up significantly. And if we don't shore things up defensively, we could end up giving up 100 to somebody.

There are 351 of them. Mercer, Geo. Mason, and Alabama all have a better RPI than La. Tech. Mercer, Geo. Mason, Alabama, Seaton Hall, and Tulsa all have a better RPI than Texas A&M. We will be stepping up in competition, but, it won't be in the next two games.

There may be 50 or more teams that are currently playing better defense. But, there are less than 50 teams that would ever be favored to beat us.

 

[pnkranger]

This is a real head scratcher for me. What do those rankings actually mean to you? We are talking about a 10-1 team with a top 40 rpi. It sounds like that you have convinced yourself and are now trying to convince others that there are over 150 teams that play better defense. Don't you realize how unlikely it is that actually may be true.

If you were trying to make some reasonable argument based on useless stats, I wouldn't be trying to give you so much blowback. If you were saying something like maybe " there could be as many as 50 teams that are better than OU on defense and I would sleep better at night if there were only 25," OK by me.

Gary, I'm not looking at the stats and thinking we have a bad defense. I'm watching the product on the floor, seeing that we have a bad defense, and then looking at the statistics, which confirm what I see with my own eyes.

Throw out nationally...I think there are 8 teams playing better defense than us in the Big 12 right now.

 

[pnkranger]

There are 351 of them. Mercer, Geo. Mason, and Alabama all have a better RPI than La. Tech. Mercer, Geo. Mason, Alabama, Seaton Hall, and Tulsa all have a better RPI than Texas A&M. We will be stepping up in competition, but, it won't be in the next two games.

There may be 50 or more teams that are currently playing better defense. But, there are less than 50 teams that would ever be favored to beat us.

So wait...you can use the RPI, but we can't use Ken Pom or Jeff Sagarin?

 

[garyeb2]

Gary, I'm not looking at the stats and thinking we have a bad defense. I'm watching the product on the floor, seeing that we have a bad defense, and then looking at the statistics, which confirm what I see with my own eyes.

Throw out nationally...I think there are 8 teams playing better defense than us in the Big 12 right now.

It is my opinion that the stats that you are using are not a confirmation of anything. But, let's put that behind us.

I don't how much scouting you have done to get your number. So, let us assume that you are right. Is the better defense, to some degree, enough of advantage to those 8 teams, that it would actually allow them to beat us? Maybe in some cases. Maybe even in the majority of cases. But, certainly not in all the cases.

In those cases where it isn't enough of an advantage to actually beat us, defense will have been a non issue. All this handwringing for nothing. Some of those 8 teams might beat us for a variety of reasons. In addition to having a better defense, they could have more and better talent, or a stronger bench, or more experienced players. In those cases our defensive deficiency was only a minor contributor to the loss and even a better defense wouldn't have been enough to overcome other severe shortcomings.

I'll concede that it could come to pass that we lose a game and the defense could be tagged as the culprit. But, it hasn't happened yet.

This young team is doing so many things well. When some of you continue with this over blown out of proportion grinding on one facet of the game, (which needs improvement) it makes me think that complaining is just in your DNA.

 

[garyeb2]

So wait...you can use the RPI, but we can't use Ken Pom or Jeff Sagarin?

The NCAA selection committee use the RPI. They don't use Ken Pom.

 

[opsooner]

Excellent point, Gary! It's easy to forget that this team does not have the quality depth to overcome an injury or foul trouble to more than one player, and even that can be problematic. Case in point, Je'lon's current injury and losing Ryan in the second half of the Tulsa game.

I'm not unhappy at all with Tyler, Frank and D. J.'s progress so far. They have done an admirable job. But when we have to go more than six deep (five now that Je'lon is injured), there is a noticeable gap in the talent level. That gap will be even more apparent when we get into the conference portion of our schedule. That is, unless there is a marked improvement in our subs in the next couple of weeks, which is what we all hope to see.

You'd better believe that Coach Kruger is well aware of the difference in the talent level right now. He can say all of the nice things he wants about Neal, Booker and Bennett. That's what head coaches are supposed to do. But the drop off when one or more is on the floor is bigger than most of us want to admit. That's not meant as a knock on any of those guys. It's just a fact that they are not as good as the players they replace.

This is a six player deep team, with three subs who are marginally adequate, at least most of the time. LK is wise to do everything he can to keep our best players on the floor as much as possible. If that means, slacking off a little on defense to avoid foul trouble, so be it.

I agree with that part. But in man we are out challenging everything and getting beat off the dribble quite often. I would rather see us play a little more conservatively on D, at least at times and just stay between man and basket. I realize LK is trying to generate offense from the D but I just would like to see him change it up a lot. We can still play man but can save a little energy at times. Might give up some outside shots at times but getting beat off the dribble opens up the entire court.

I do like that he went to zone last night (turns out for most of the game) but was surprised he did not mix it up a little more in the second half.

I, like everyone else here, am elated with our record and effort so far. However, this a basketball forum and we fans always want to see improvement, often times faster than it can ever come.

I look forward to playing OSU, KU, Texas, Baylor, ISU to see where we stand. Also hoping we can take care of business (for the most part) against the other conference teams.