OU, Tulsa agree on two-game basketball contract

[WTSooner]

I won't say this very often, but I'm nearly 100% in agreement with gary on this.

First, it's possible for Hield/Hornbeak to have considerable more upside than Woodard, but for them to have had similar freshman seasons. I'm not saying that is the case, just saying it was possible. The problem you have trying to compare the seasons Hield and Hornbeak had, to the season that Woodard had, is two-fold.

First, Hield and Hornbeak played a considerably tougher schedule. How much tougher? According to Ken Pom, OU played the 34th toughest schedule, TU the 129th. That is considerable enough to skew any statistical comparison for sure. And secondly, they didn't have similar roles. Woodard, due to TU's roster being completely void of talent, especially after Smith went down, got to be a bit of a chucker. There was nobody to create offense, and not a lot of offense period. Give the ball to Woodard and watch him shoot was what they did a lot of times. Woodard shot 43% from the floor. 28% from three. And 68% from the FT line. That is not good. Don't let "volume" cloud your judgement on his stats. I said he attempted a similar number of shots as Pledger did. That is actually a little misleading, b/c Woodard shot a ton more FT's. Yet their averages per game were very similar. I'm not trying to compare the two players, that isn't what this discussion is about. I'm just trying to show the volume of shots Woodard had to put up to simply average 12 ppg as TU's "offensive leader".

Hield on the other hand was able to average 8 ppg on considerably fewer shots, and from being OU's 4th offensive option. So like I said, there is no even way to compare the two seasons. But I watched every OU game.....and I watched and followed TU pretty closely, and from a pure "what my eyes saw" perspective, I'd take both Hield and Hornbeak over Woodard every day of the week.

Just my $0.02.

 

[sportsfan]

I won't say this very often, but I'm nearly 100% in agreement with gary on this.

First, it's possible for Hield/Hornbeak to have considerable more upside than Woodard, but for them to have had similar freshman seasons. I'm not saying that is the case, just saying it was possible. The problem you have trying to compare the seasons Hield and Hornbeak had, to the season that Woodard had, is two-fold.

First, Hield and Hornbeak played a considerably tougher schedule. How much tougher? According to Ken Pom, OU played the 34th toughest schedule, TU the 129th. That is considerable enough to skew any statistical comparison for sure. And secondly, they didn't have similar roles. Woodard, due to TU's roster being completely void of talent, especially after Smith went down, got to be a bit of a chucker. There was nobody to create offense, and not a lot of offense period. Give the ball to Woodard and watch him shoot was what they did a lot of times. Woodard shot 43% from the floor. 28% from three. And 68% from the FT line. That is not good. Don't let "volume" cloud your judgement on his stats. I said he attempted a similar number of shots as Pledger did. That is actually a little misleading, b/c Woodard shot a ton more FT's. Yet their averages per game were very similar. I'm not trying to compare the two players, that isn't what this discussion is about. I'm just trying to show the volume of shots Woodard had to put up to simply average 12 ppg as TU's "offensive leader".

Hield on the other hand was able to average 8 ppg on considerably fewer shots, and from being OU's 4th offensive option. So like I said, there is no even way to compare the two seasons. But I watched every OU game.....and I watched and followed TU pretty closely, and from a pure "what my eyes saw" perspective, I'd take both Hield and Hornbeak over Woodard every day of the week.

Just my $0.02.

I think Woodard took maybe 12 shots a game I don't consider that a chucker. I guess since Hield and Hornbeak shot lets they probably have better averages, do you have those stats. This was just a simple lets not be too hasty to pass on Oklahoma kids because of rankings that is all this is about. I am from Oklahoma and I wish all schools in Oklahoma the best. I just like seeing the Oklahoma basketball kids get their due. Please show the stats for Hield and Hornbeak so that people won't be skewed by one players stats.

 

[Postman77]

I won't say this very often, but I'm nearly 100% in agreement with gary on this.

First, it's possible for Hield/Hornbeak to have considerable more upside than Woodard, but for them to have had similar freshman seasons. I'm not saying that is the case, just saying it was possible. The problem you have trying to compare the seasons Hield and Hornbeak had, to the season that Woodard had, is two-fold.

First, Hield and Hornbeak played a considerably tougher schedule. How much tougher? According to Ken Pom, OU played the 34th toughest schedule, TU the 129th. That is considerable enough to skew any statistical comparison for sure. And secondly, they didn't have similar roles. Woodard, due to TU's roster being completely void of talent, especially after Smith went down, got to be a bit of a chucker. There was nobody to create offense, and not a lot of offense period. Give the ball to Woodard and watch him shoot was what they did a lot of times. Woodard shot 43% from the floor. 28% from three. And 68% from the FT line. That is not good. Don't let "volume" cloud your judgement on his stats. I said he attempted a similar number of shots as Pledger did. That is actually a little misleading, b/c Woodard shot a ton more FT's. Yet their averages per game were very similar. I'm not trying to compare the two players, that isn't what this discussion is about. I'm just trying to show the volume of shots Woodard had to put up to simply average 12 ppg as TU's "offensive leader".

Hield on the other hand was able to average 8 ppg on considerably fewer shots, and from being OU's 4th offensive option. So like I said, there is no even way to compare the two seasons. But I watched every OU game.....and I watched and followed TU pretty closely, and from a pure "what my eyes saw" perspective, I'd take both Hield and Hornbeak over Woodard every day of the week.

Just my $0.02.

WT....once again, I'm not going to argue about whether or not OU got talented kids. However, your statement just further supports what I was saying. Woodard was the number one option on a team that was very, very limited offensively. At the beginning of the season he was averaging 16 points per game, but that dropped off considerably after he became the focus of other teams scouts. Anyone who has played collegiate ball can tell you the huge difference that brings. He also guarded the oppositions best guard every night. He did all this as a freshman, playing 32 minutes plus per night. I don't care about opposition, etc......Woodard had a far tougher role to play than any of our freshmen. What would Woodard have been capable of if he had been a fourth option instead of being doubled as a freshman? His performance in that regard was extremely good for a freshman, and really was higher than our guards. Also, they played common opponents.....those stats tell a story as well. Once again...I'm not debating who is better, but if we have Oklahoma kids who are equals, then we should be taking those kids.

 

[Postman77]

--------------Gp. Min. Ppg. RPGs. Apg SPg bpg. Tpg. Fg%. Ft%. 3pt%
Buddy Hield 27 25.1 7.8 4.2 1.9 1.2 0.3 1.6 .388 .833 .238
Je'lon Hornbeak 32 22.7 5.6 2.7 1.7 1.0 0.2 1.6 .374 .739 .333
Isaiah Cousins 32 15.9 2.7 2.0 1.6 0.7 0.1 1.3 .279 .684 .250

James Woodard 32 29.4 12.0 5.9 2.0 1.0 0.2 2.3 .429 .681 .277

 

[Postman77]

Also some common opponent since I'm bored:

ORU:
Woodard 18 pts, 7 reb., 4 assists
Cousins. 0 pts, 4 reb, 3 assists
Hornbeak 5 pts, 3 reb, 0
Hield. 11 pts, 6 reb, 1 assist

S.F. Austin
Woodard 14, 8, 3
Cousins 1, 1, 0
Hornbeak 12, 3, 3
Hield 9, 11, 1

Tcu
Woodard 2, 5, 1 (hurt back)
Cousins 0,0,0
Hornbeak 8,2,0
Hield 10,9,2 (coming off injury)

 

[WTSooner]

Also some common opponent since I'm bored:

ORU:
Woodard 18 pts, 7 reb., 4 assists
Cousins. 0 pts, 4 reb, 3 assists
Hornbeak 5 pts, 3 reb, 0
Hield. 11 pts, 6 reb, 1 assist

S.F. Austin
Woodard 14, 8, 3
Cousins 1, 1, 0
Hornbeak 12, 3, 3
Hield 9, 11, 1

Tcu
Woodard 2, 5, 1 (hurt back)
Cousins 0,0,0
Hornbeak 8,2,0
Hield 10,9,2 (coming off injury)

This means nothing. Less than nothing, actually. Stick Woodard on last year's OU team, and he might have redshirted.

I'm going to trust my eyes and the scouts on this one. Hield and Hornbeak have considerable more upside than Woodard does. I think this will be evident by the end of the next season, or two seasons for sure. Nothing to do but wait and see.

 

[Postman77]

I won't say this very often, but I'm nearly 100% in agreement with gary on this.

First, it's possible for Hield/Hornbeak to have considerable more upside than Woodard, but for them to have had similar freshman seasons. I'm not saying that is the case, just saying it was possible. The problem you have trying to compare the seasons Hield and Hornbeak had, to the season that Woodard had, is two-fold.

First, Hield and Hornbeak played a considerably tougher schedule. How much tougher? According to Ken Pom, OU played the 34th toughest schedule, TU the 129th. That is considerable enough to skew any statistical comparison for sure. And secondly, they didn't have similar roles. Woodard, due to TU's roster being completely void of talent, especially after Smith went down, got to be a bit of a chucker. There was nobody to create offense, and not a lot of offense period. Give the ball to Woodard and watch him shoot was what they did a lot of times. Woodard shot 43% from the floor. 28% from three. And 68% from the FT line. That is not good. Don't let "volume" cloud your judgement on his stats. I said he attempted a similar number of shots as Pledger did. That is actually a little misleading, b/c Woodard shot a ton more FT's. Yet their averages per game were very similar. I'm not trying to compare the two players, that isn't what this discussion is about. I'm just trying to show the volume of shots Woodard had to put up to simply average 12 ppg as TU's "offensive leader".

Hield on the other hand was able to average 8 ppg on considerably fewer shots, and from being OU's 4th offensive option. So like I said, there is no even way to compare the two seasons. But I watched every OU game.....and I watched and followed TU pretty closely, and from a pure "what my eyes saw" perspective, I'd take both Hield and Hornbeak over Woodard every day of the week.

Just my $0.02.

WT...I agree with your statement in the previous post about needing to wait and see, but I wanted to share another stat with you...one that you used in an attempt to prove your point. Woodard averaged one shot attempt every 2.27 minutes played. Buddy averaged one shot every 2.35 minutes played. Those stats show a) Woodard wasn't any more of a "chucker" than Buddy, and b) even though I personally may think Buddy has a very high ceiling (very probably higher than Woodard--although I disagree about the others)...the fact of the matter is the only separation between any of them is physical appearance and rose colored sooner glasses.

 

[sportsfan]

This means nothing. Less than nothing, actually. Stick Woodard on last year's OU team, and he might have redshirted.

I'm going to trust my eyes and the scouts on this one. Hield and Hornbeak have considerable more upside than Woodard does. I think this will be evident by the end of the next season, or two seasons for sure. Nothing to do but wait and see.

WT you are the one that threw in the stats but only showing Woodard's. My point was with last season as freshmen. That was my whole point impact as freshman. I appreciate the discussion. I think all are good players and wish all of them the best. I just don't want the major universities to get caught up at looking at rankings and forget about homegrown talent.

 

[oSuJeff97]

My, you certainly have a strong opinion on this topic. Let's not get to carried away on the value of an OSU offer. Hasn't Ford run off about as many as he has kept. One whole recruiting class if I recall. His batting average in the talent evaluation department isn't something to hang your hat on.

I don't know if I would say he "ran off" as many as he's kept.

Ford's first recruiting class at OSU ended up being a disaster, but since then, he's recruited very well in terms of both role players and stars:

• Darrell Williams (juco)
• J.P. Olukemi (transfer)
• Michael Cobbins
• Brian Williams
• Markel Brown
• Phillip Jurick (juco)
• Cezar Guerrero
• LeBryan Nash
• Marcus Smart
• Phil Forte
• Kamari Murphy
• Kirby Gardner (juco)

Since that first class, I'd say he's had close to a 100% success rate on guys he took out of high school. All of those guys ended up being good players. The only exception so far is Guerrero, who may end up being a good player down the road .. we'll see.

The jucos and transfers have been a bit more spotty, but that's generally always the case. I'd say Jurick and Olukemi were a success, and I think most coaches would take a 50% hit rate on jucos/transfers.

I hate to be the one to bust your bubble on this one. Forte is no good. Every minute that he is on the floor makes OSU easier to beat.

Ridiculous. Forte was a key contributor to an NCAA Tournament team as a true freshman. He had the highest offensive efficiency rating on the team... again as a true freshman.

I'm not saying he's All Big 12 or anything, but to say he's "no good" is clearly wrong.

 

[garyeb2]

I don't know if I would say he "ran off" as many as he's kept.

Ford's first recruiting class at OSU ended up being a disaster, but since then, he's recruited very well in terms of both role players and stars:

• Darrell Williams (juco)
• J.P. Olukemi (transfer)
• Michael Cobbins
• Brian Williams
• Markel Brown
• Phillip Jurick (juco)
• Cezar Guerrero
• LeBryan Nash
• Marcus Smart
• Phil Forte
• Kamari Murphy
• Kirby Gardner (juco)

Since that first class, I'd say he's had close to a 100% success rate on guys he took out of high school. All of those guys ended up being good players. The only exception so far is Guerrero, who may end up being a good player down the road .. we'll see.

The jucos and transfers have been a bit more spotty, but that's generally always the case. I'd say Jurick and Olukemi were a success, and I think most coaches would take a 50% hit rate on jucos/transfers.



Ridiculous. Forte was a key contributor to an NCAA Tournament team as a true freshman. He had the highest offensive efficiency rating on the team... again as a true freshman.

I'm not saying he's All Big 12 or anything, but to say he's "no good" is clearly wrong.

Let me rephrase that for you so that it will be more palatable. Relative to the type of player it takes to win consistently at a high level, Forte is no good. To argue otherwise would of course be ridiculous.

 

[Boomer-D]

I would trade the older Woodard and Wright for Cousins and Bennett at this point. I'm not giving up Heild or Hornbeak though. I'd give up Cole's schollie for Shaq Morris too.

 

[oSuJeff97]

Let me rephrase that for you so that it will be more palatable. Relative to the type of player it takes to win consistently at a high level, Forte is no good. To argue otherwise would of course be ridiculous.

What does that mean, "relative to the type of player it takes to win consistently at a high level"....

Nobody expects Forte to lead the team in scoring or be an All-American. That's not his role.

Forte is a good player who can play a key role on a very good team. We'll see that this year.

 

[garyeb2]

What does that mean, "relative to the type of player it takes to win consistently at a high level"....

Nobody expects Forte to lead the team in scoring or be an All-American. That's not his role.

Forte is a good player who can play a key role on a very good team. We'll see that this year.

We just disagree on that. It is my opinion that playing Forte imposes a lower ceiling on OSU. You will just need better role players than that if you want the talent to get you very far. That is what I think we will see this year.