Not deep enough to run this fast

[pnkranger]

I do think that is a big part of the defensive challenges we face. Guys are getting gassed and banged up without any chance to get out of the game and recuperate. I still think we need another recruit in this class if we want a roster that can compete at this pace.

 

[Big Old Booger]

I do think that is a big part of the defensive challenges we face. Guys are getting gassed and banged up without any chance to get out of the game and recuperate. I still think we need another recruit in this class if we want a roster that can compete at this pace.

I'm not ready to say we shouldn't do this/that or can't do this/that after a 4 point loss in OT in a meaningless game.

Maybe you are right and then again, maybe you are wrong.

 

[garyeb2]

It takes years of developing players throughout their careers and recruiting players in to develop a system or style. Some of the things that Mich. St. could execute better than us, Izzo and his team have been doing for 15 years.

Sure, Kruger would need to be able to go 9/10 deep without much drop off in talent to get the maximum results from what he is trying to do. With a healthy Hornbeak, he can only get 6 deep now. Kruger has had to wait two seasons just to get to the point he is now. It is time to start now. He can not wait.

We would have never have gotten Buford or Lattin (and probably McNeace)without being able to bring them in to practice, set them down, and show them live and in person exactly how they would fit in to the system and tell them what they could accomplish at Oklahoma.

With the next bunch of recruits, the likely development of Booker, and the possible development of Bennett, Kruger will have the team almost there.

Kruger is trying to build back a dismantled program and install a winning style of play that will attract quality recruits. It is a process, not an event.

 

[AdaSooner]

Our backcourt depth is fine when everyone is healthy. Hornbeak and Booker give us two quality guards who are good enough to play meaningful minutes with little or no drop-off in our defense or our production on offense.

Cam will be gone next season, of course. But based on everything I have read since we signed Dante Buford, our coaches see him as Clark's replacement at the three next year. I wouldn't mind if our coaches added a scoring wing or a combo guard who can fill in if need be at the point in the spring signing period. IMO, that's not a must. I see it more as an "insurance policy" in case someone gets hurt like Hornbeak is now.

Help is on the way in our front court next season, so we don't need anymore big men, unless a can't miss transfer is available. That is definitely not the case this season. We never know what we're going to get when Neal and Bennett are on the floor. Both of them hurt more than they helped last night. But to Tyler's credit, he has actually played quite well in the majority of games this season.

I don't know what to think about D. J. Just when I think he's ready to contribute, he proves me wrong by fumbling what should be an easy lob slam dunk out of bounds, or misses a chippy put-back. I don't know if he just loses focus sometimes, or he has bad hands? Either way, he'll never be productive until he can finish around the rim in traffic.

In other words, it's not that we don't have enough bodies to play fast this year, it's that our backup front court guys aren't dependable enough to trust them with building on or holding onto a lead. Case in point, the last five minutes of the first half in last night's game.

 

[DenverSooner]

With a healthy Hornbeak, he can only get 6 deep now. Kruger has had to wait two seasons just to get to the point he is now.

I think with Hornbeak healthy OU is more than 6 deep. I think Booker is doing a really nice job as a true freshman. Neal has had some really good games in his career. At a minimum a guy like Bennett may be used to sub immediately prior to a scheduled TO to extend Spangler's rest.

 

[SoonerinNC]

Based on the minutes played last night we are now 6 deep. Can't run and play intense defense the entire game with that depth.

I am still puzzled why we kept taking the ball to the rim and putting up contested shots rather than getting more outside shots. Possibly the off game by Woodard had something to do with it.

 

[garyeb2]

I think with Hornbeak healthy OU is more than 6 deep. I think Booker is doing a really nice job as a true freshman. Neal has had some really good games in his career. At a minimum a guy like Bennett may be used to sub immediately prior to a scheduled TO to extend Spangler's rest.

I agree. But, the point that I was trying to make is that OU can take good advantage of most teams playing up tempo with their near elite team speed. That near elite team speed only goes 6 deep when Hornbeak is healthy.

The OP suggested that we didn't currently have the horses to play as fast as Kruger wants them to. While that is some what accurate, with six, up tempo is still the best option.

 

[stormspencer]

I agree. But, the point that I was trying to make is that OU can take good advantage of most teams playing up tempo with their near elite team speed. That near elite team speed only goes 6 deep when Hornbeak is healthy.

The OP suggested that we didn't currently have the horses to play as fast as Kruger wants them to. While that is some what accurate, with six, up tempo is still the best option.

It may be the right option, but only in certain situations. With our depth issues and the effect it has on our team's endurance in certain phases of the game, I don't think we need to play up tempo most of the time....right now. Playing "up tempo" some of the time is fine, but making every game a constant track meet has proved to be disadvantageous in our current situation.

 

[AdaSooner]

Based on the minutes played last night we are now 6 deep. Can't run and play intense defense the entire game with that depth.

I am still puzzled why we kept taking the ball to the rim and putting up contested shots rather than getting more outside shots. Possibly the off game by Woodard had something to do with it.

I said the same thing on another thread. Billy Tubbs mentioned it several times in last night's broadcast. Our guards and wings continued to pass on open threes to drive with the ball and throw up off-balance, contested shot that had little chance of going in.

Nothing about that made sense to me. I know it may be hard to believe, but we have six players who are shooting 32% or better from behind the arc (5 between 34% and 50%).

We've got to start taking the danged shots when they're open! I realize driving with the ball can pay huge dividends with the way the games are being called. But, so can making shots from the perimeter. For one thing, it keeps our opponents from packing it in on defense.

 

[DenverSooner]

Perhaps some balance between shooting and driving is what the team will learn from that loss.

 

[garyeb2]

It may be the right option, but only in certain situations. With our depth issues and the effect it has on our team's endurance in certain phases of the game, I don't think we need to play up tempo most of the time....right now. Playing "up tempo" some of the time is fine, but making every game a constant track meet has proved to be disadvantageous in our current situation.

We are 11/2. Our team speed is an advantage. We need to use whatever advantage we have. What other advantages do we have? Experience ? Size? Deep bench? I think we have several really good young players. But, we don't have the talent edge on the better in teams in the conference that would allow us to impose our will on them. What do you want us to do? Pack in to a 1-3-1 all the time, walk the ball up, kill some clock, and hope the opponents miss their 3's and try to win games 50 to 45? Who can we recruit that wants to do that.

Either we will be an up tempo team or not. Either we will work everyday to improve our up tempo style or not. We will either recruit to that style or not. A team can only have one identity, not two. My suggestion would be to relax.

The game will slow down during conference season. Not by design. Not because Kruger read the message boards and realized he was doing the wrong thing. Other teams in the conference will be able to closely match our team speed. Other teams in the conference will be able to closely match or even exceed our current talent level. Those close matches will manifest themselves in a slower tempo. That slower tempo may either help or hurt in one area or another.

 

[stormspencer]

We are 11/2. Our team speed is an advantage. We need to use whatever advantage we have. What other advantages do we have? Experience ? Size? Deep bench? I think we have several really good young players. But, we don't have the talent edge on the better in teams in the conference that would allow us to impose our will on them. What do you want us to do? Pack in to a 1-3-1 all the time, walk the ball up, kill some clock, and hope the opponents miss their 3's and try to win games 50 to 45? Who can we recruit that wants to do that.

Either we will be an up tempo team or not. Either we will work everyday to improve our up tempo style or not. We will either recruit to that style or not. A team can only have one identity, not two. My suggestion would be to relax.

The game will slow down during conference season. Not by design. Not because Kruger read the message boards and realized he was doing the wrong thing. Other teams in the conference will be able to closely match our team speed. Other teams in the conference will be able to closely match or even exceed our current talent level. Those close matches will manifest themselves in a slower tempo. That slower tempo may either help or hurt in one area or another.

My statement was to be "up tempo" some of the time....in our current situation (while getting Jelon healthy). Otherwise, the games will continue to repeat themselves...the textbook definition of insanity. We will keep getting gassed, lose our intensity, give up leads, and lose to teams we should beat. You're strawman argument is trying to indicate that, since I don't want to play helter skelter all the time, then I want us to play at a Wisconsin-pace all the time. This is not the case. I stated it would be better served if we slowed our pace down in certain situations to preserve some energy/intensity...thus possibly decreasing the chances of quickly evaporating leads that we have become accustomed to this season. It may or may not work, but playing "pedal to the medal" all the time has led to a loss to a team we shouldn't have lost to (La Tech)....and some close games against mediocre to bad teams. And yes we are 11-2....and we've lost to the best two teams on our rather weak OOC schedule.

I recognize our deficiencies and weaknesses....and I was theorizing that limiting possessions, at times, could benefit this team in the short term. I know you go to practices and you have a personal relationship with Coach Kruger and understand his philosophy better than most of us. You see what many of us don't have the opportunity to see at practices, but conversely, you may be too close to the situation to "not see" what others of us have been seeing throughout the season. I like the direction of the program and I like these kids. And I hope they continue to improve, but that doesn't mean that subtle adjustments can't be made to better cover our lack of depth.

 

[garyeb2]

My statement was to be "up tempo" some of the time....in our current situation (while getting Jelon healthy). Otherwise, the games will continue to repeat themselves...the textbook definition of insanity. We will keep getting gassed, lose our intensity, give up leads, and lose to teams we should beat. You're strawman argument is trying to indicate that, since I don't want to play helter skelter all the time, then I want us to play at a Wisconsin-pace all the time. This is not the case. I stated it would be better served if we slowed our pace down in certain situations to preserve some energy/intensity...thus possibly decreasing the chances of quickly evaporating leads that we have become accustomed to this season. It may or may not work, but playing "pedal to the medal" all the time has led to a loss to a team we shouldn't have lost to (La Tech)....and some close games against mediocre to bad teams. And yes we are 11-2....and we've lost to the best two teams on our rather weak OOC schedule.

I recognize our deficiencies and weaknesses....and I was theorizing that limiting possessions, at times, could benefit this team in the short term. I know you go to practices and you have a personal relationship with Coach Kruger and understand his philosophy better than most of us. You see what many of us don't have the opportunity to see at practices, but conversely, you may be too close to the situation to "not see" what others of us have been seeing throughout the season. I like the direction of the program and I like these kids. And I hope they continue to improve, but that doesn't mean that subtle adjustments can't be made to better cover our lack of depth.

I'll try again. We are 11-2. We probably couldn't have beat Mich. St. on a neutral court no matter what we did. They just simply had a better team. We lost an overtime game to a decent team. Every OU loss is not evidence that the coach or the team is or has does something wrong. La. Tech played well. They had a couple of good players that played well. They have a decent coach that coached well. They deserve some credit.

OU has passed the non conference test. They have done enough. There is no evidence that a change in playing style would have resulted in a better record. A different tempo could have very well got us to 9-4.

 

[bgrch1350]

I'll try again. We are 11-2. We probably couldn't have beat Mich. St. on a neutral court no matter what we did. They just simply had a better team. We lost an overtime game to a decent team. Every OU loss is not evidence that the coach or the team is or has does something wrong. La. Tech played well. They had a couple of good players that played well. They have a decent coach that coached well. They deserve some credit.

OU has passed the non conference test. They have done enough. There is no evidence that a change in playing style would have resulted in a better record. A different tempo could have very well got us to 9-4.

We were tested?

 

[garyeb2]

We were tested?

In a way. But, not much. We were 1-1 in games when we were the under dog and 10-1 as the favorite. That is good enough for the non conference portion of the schedule. Our NCAA fate will be determined by our conference performance.

 

[pnkranger]

I'll try again. We are 11-2. We probably couldn't have beat Mich. St. on a neutral court no matter what we did. They just simply had a better team. We lost an overtime game to a decent team. Every OU loss is not evidence that the coach or the team is or has does something wrong. La. Tech played well. They had a couple of good players that played well. They have a decent coach that coached well. They deserve some credit.

OU has passed the non conference test. They have done enough. There is no evidence that a change in playing style would have resulted in a better record. A different tempo could have very well got us to 9-4.

Gary, you and I have been on the opposite side of this argument for a few weeks. I've been saying that my concern is about HOW we are playing, not the outcome. If we played great ball, and La Tech beat us at home, them I'm fine with it. If you let la tech score triple digits in Lloyd noble and lose, then it is perfectly fine for us to be concerned about HOW the team is playing, despite the outcome of our regular season games.

 

[bgrch1350]

In a way. But, not much. We were 1-1 in games when we were the under dog and 10-1 as the favorite. That is good enough for the non conference portion of the schedule. Our NCAA fate will be determined by our conference performance.

I agree with that

 

[BigTime]

Pnk,

I disagree. With 'beak back, we need to run, run and run some more. Next year, we can slow it down.

 

[pnkranger]

Pnk,

I disagree. With 'beak back, we need to run, run and run some more. Next year, we can slow it down.

Big, I see what you're saying, but I think this is one of those times where the skills of the players dictate that we run, but the depth of the team should dictate that we pace ourselves (sometimes fast, sometimes slow) as mentioned above. Just to give everyone a chance to recover.

 

[garyeb2]

Gary, you and I have been on the opposite side of this argument for a few weeks. I've been saying that my concern is about HOW we are playing, not the outcome. If we played great ball, and La Tech beat us at home, them I'm fine with it. If you let la tech score triple digits in Lloyd noble and lose, then it is perfectly fine for us to be concerned about HOW the team is playing, despite the outcome of our regular season games.

What I am saying is that the critics are holding the team to a standard that is way too high. The expectations are out of line. With this group, this season, winning has to be good enough.

They are young. They are inexperienced. They are learning a system that is brand new to them. They are a new group of front line players that are still learning to play together as a team. These things take time to work out.

Take the youth and add lack of size, and as yet to develop interior bench strength along with an untimely Hornbeak injury and you have a team with some serious limitations. At this point their performance can not be anything but uneven. To this point the games we have won are a result of a combination of young talent and speed. Now, some of you want to take away the speed.

All the concerns in the world won't change the fact that this season we are looking at what will probably be a top 40 team. Not a top 10 team. Not a top 25 team. Top 40 teams don't do everything well all the time. If they did, the would be a top 25 or top 10 team. They are 2/3 nice players away from being the kind of team that some seem to think we are now.

La. Tech had 4 returning starters from a 27 win team. They are seasoned, in terms of size and quickness, their guards matched up well with ours, and they had the luxury (which we don't) of fouling out two players challenging shots in the paint and around the rim. They are exactly the kind of team a young talented team like ours is vulnerable to.

We were a 3 point favorite at home. That tells the story. The game was always going to be a tight fit. With a break or two, we could have beaten a tough matchup for us.