OU @ ISU 7pm CST ESPN2

[Eielson]

This is just patently false and I gave several examples to highlight how ridiculous it is. Perhaps they haven't improved to the point that you thought they should have and you might even be right, but that's not the same as saying they haven't improved. James, Manek, Doolittle, McNeace, Odomes, Freeman...they're all better than they were when they got to Norman. It's just not close.

If you're going to respond to my posts, at least read them first. Strawman arguments are a waste of everybody's time.

I said that nobody has exceeded our expectations in improvement, but I didn't say that nobody has improved at all. I specifically pointed out that Doolittle and James have improved. Odomes and McNeace have improved since arriving on campus (which I also already stated), but they're no better now than they were as sophomores, and they were freshmen on that Final 4 team that had Henson and Hill on it. I also didn't say that Manek is necessarily worse, but it's hard to argue that his best basketball was his first 20(ish) games here (which I'm going to assume is the reason you took the strawman way out). You also never addressed Lattin or McGusty.

Player development is bad right now. Maybe the worst in 30 years. It doesn't make us bad fans for pointing that out, so get off your high horse.

 

[WichitaSooner]

If you're going to respond to my posts, at least read them first. Strawman arguments are a waste of everybody's time.

I said that nobody has exceeded our expectations in improvement, but I didn't say that nobody has improved at all. I specifically pointed out that Doolittle and James have improved. Odomes and McNeace have improved since arriving on campus (which I also already stated), but they're no better now than they were as sophomores, and they were freshmen on that Final 4 team that had Henson and Hill on it. I also didn't say that Manek is necessarily worse, but it's hard to argue that his best basketball was his first 20(ish) games here (which I'm going to assume is the reason you took the strawman way out). You also never addressed Lattin or McGusty.

Player development is bad right now. Maybe the worst in 30 years. It doesn't make us bad fans for pointing that out, so get off your high horse.

Manek is much better than last year. He basically made wide open shots early last season, only in home games, that he got because of Trae. He is a better player in every way this season. Don't get me wrong, he frustrates me frequently with missed layups and his tendency to go in the tank for a while when things aren't going well, but his overall play is far better and more consistent.

 

[WTSooner]

Some of you confuse being better with having more opportunities or being asked to do more.

And also, just about every player in the country is going to have a natural progression over 2, 3, or 4 years. If they are playing in games and competing in practice, there is going to be some level of them improving regardless of the coaching.

You have to look beyond that to see if guys are really making strides.

 

[Ghost of Gar Heard]

If you're going to respond to my posts, at least read them first. Strawman arguments are a waste of everybody's time.

I said that nobody has exceeded our expectations in improvement, but I didn't say that nobody has improved at all. I specifically pointed out that Doolittle and James have improved. Odomes and McNeace have improved since arriving on campus (which I also already stated), but they're no better now than they were as sophomores, and they were freshmen on that Final 4 team that had Henson and Hill on it. I also didn't say that Manek is necessarily worse, but it's hard to argue that his best basketball was his first 20(ish) games here (which I'm going to assume is the reason you took the strawman way out). You also never addressed Lattin or McGusty.

Player development is bad right now. Maybe the worst in 30 years. It doesn't make us bad fans for pointing that out, so get off your high horse.

You're the one who made it a strawman. I responded to the comment that no one had improved. You criticized my comment, apparently attempting to defend the indefensible. But then qualified it by saying, "some guys have improved and some haven't." So yours was the strawman, not mine.

It was an absurd statement. I called it out for its absurdity and gave several examples to highlight its absurdity. Now, you can either agree that it was absurd or, out of personal animus toward me, go with the absurd statement -- knowing full-well that it's absurd. I couldn't care less. But your accusing me of a strawman argument is just projecting.

 

[Eielson]

You're the one who made it a strawman. I responded to the comment that no one had improved. You criticized my comment, apparently attempting to defend the indefensible. But then qualified it by saying, "some guys have improved and some haven't." So yours was the strawman, not mine.

It was an absurd statement. I called it out for its absurdity and gave several examples to highlight its absurdity. Now, you can either agree that it was absurd or, out of personal animus toward me, go with the absurd statement -- knowing full-well that it's absurd. I couldn't care less. But your accusing me of a strawman argument is just projecting.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

 

[Eielson]

Manek is much better than last year. He basically made wide open shots early last season, only in home games, that he got because of Trae. He is a better player in every way this season. Don't get me wrong, he frustrates me frequently with missed layups and his tendency to go in the tank for a while when things aren't going well, but his overall play is far better and more consistent.

I'd agree with most of this. I don't necessarily mean to say that he's truly a worse player, but statistically he's worse in 2P%, 3P%, and turnovers. His points and rebounds are slightly up, but that disappears when you take a per 40 minute average. We'll see how things turn out -- I don't think we have enough at this point to consider him a developmental success or failure. My hope, obviously, is that he becomes a success.

 

[sperry]

Development is not the issue. Talent is the issue.

 

[Eielson]

Development is not the issue. Talent is the issue.

That's an uncommon take. And not one supported by recruiting services.

 

[Ghost of Gar Heard]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

I'm the one who knows what it means. Dude said, "no one here has progressed 1 bit in the last several years." That's the argument I engaged. I called it "ridiculous" and " laughable." Literally the first sentence of your post engaging me is "it's not ridiculous at all." Then you go on something about Jordan Woodard (patently absurd to say he didn't improve) and a bunch of other stuff. Your statement "it's not ridiculous at all" is you attempting (though you do it poorly since you never once challenged me on any of the examples of players mentioned who have improved) to defend the argument I engaged that "no one has improved in this program in several years."

What you did was attempt to change the argument to something like, "players haven't developed here as much as I think they should have" -- an entirely different argument altogether and, frankly, one worth having. Changing the argument and attempting to reframe my comment into something I never said is the definition of a straw man.

Now, which argument are you interested in? The 1st one -- "Manek is terrible, hasn't improved, doesn't belong on the court, and no one at OU has improved in the last several year" is a ridiculous assertion, easily refuted, and isn't worth engaging. It's like arguing with a 6 year old who isn't allowed to play with a toy. The other one is an interesting topic. But you can't switch the argument and call others out for arguing something they never argued and then turn around and pretend that never happened.