sam godwin

[Sooner Season]

No surprise but being reported tbat Godwin is a No Go tomorrow.

Whew……..we dodged a bullet there!!!!

 

[TINY]

I hope the team is even more motivated to extend the season for Godwin to get another chance to put on the OU jersey! Especially in the postseason!

 

[CoachTalk]

Folks hated Manek, before him was reaves, Always a fall guy.

 

[AdaSooner]

Absolutely. But I would suggest, then, that the criticism should be aimed elsewhere. Sam has done his part. He's busted his ass, comported himself well and done his best to fill a role he should never have been expected to play. It's not his fault that a better player hasn't been brought in. And yet he gets more criticism than any other player, several of whom are contributing less than he does.

Well said, Sky! Thank you!!!

 

[dksooner]

Sam has been serviceable and been a pretty solid 5. I get he's been outsized at times and missed some easy layups but he's also put up some great #s in spurts. He loves sooner hoops and I appreciate that. Hope he gets a chance to play in the madness!

 

[WichitaSooner]

Folks hated Manek, before him was reaves, Always a fall guy.

lol one of these things is not like the other.

 

[SoonerDutch]

Sam is a great Sooner but as many have pointed out, not an ideal P5 starting 5 much less in the best conferences in America the last three seasons.

But not his fault he’s been put in that role, regardless of whoever you want to blame between Moser and OU’s non-existent NIL. It seems like OU is better off with his minutes reduced but wish he could get back especially because a guy like him deserves the March experience (assuming OU makes it).

My hottest of hot takes, much prefer Sam to Tanner. Godwin is not a focal point of the offense (give me the missed layups over the momentum-killing threes) and (maybe because my expectations are lower) less outraged when Godwin is exposed physically than Groves.

 

[CoachTalk]

No one is saying Sam starts and plays 30 mins. But if we make the ncaa tournament. It’d be nice to have him.

 

[colston15]

We have three bigs, none of whom is very good. They are very different players with different styles. None of them would be starting on a better roster. Because they are all unreliable, prone to fouls, and more likely to play poorly than to play well, it's scary if you only have two of three available. It also gives you five fewer fouls to play with. That's the main reason why it would not be good to be without Sam. I can easily see Mo getting in foul trouble, Luke going 0-3 from the floor and getting abused on defense, and us being in a very difficult position. If Cole hadn't been in hibernation for three months, he would be an option, but I just don't see that happening (although Cooper was one of our best players in the slaughter by TCU last March after not getting any PT for months). Can a Moore/Taylor combo manage to avoid getting killed inside to allow us to use them together for extended minutes? I think we will likely find out if Sam is out.

Exactly. Godwin adds (sometimes) quality depth. That’s why we desperately need him vs. UGA, if for nothing else to give us five more fouls.

If we are ever down to Moore and Taylor, we will get abused.

 

[TEvans4Three]

Sam is a great Sooner but as many have pointed out, not an ideal P5 starting 5 much less in the best conferences in America the last three seasons.

But not his fault he’s been put in that role, regardless of whoever you want to blame between Moser and OU’s non-existent NIL. It seems like OU is better off with his minutes reduced but wish he could get back especially because a guy like him deserves the March experience (assuming OU makes it).

My hottest of hot takes, much prefer Sam to Tanner. Godwin is not a focal point of the offense (give me the missed layups over the momentum-killing threes) and (maybe because my expectations are lower) less outraged when Godwin is exposed physically than Groves.

I appreciate your view and echo, however I am Tanner over Godwin bc Tanner with some serviceable guards would be awesome to watch. I do see your point though, just different focus.

No one is saying Sam starts and plays 30 mins. But if we make the ncaa tournament. It’d be nice to have him.

Agree. He is our best rostered 5, IMO. He should start and play 13-15 mins, to then be spelled by "Foulie McGee" and "North- Shooting, sure, but what is rebounding? -weather" ... but we need more smallball to out-athlete guys. All our bigs make dumb fouls.

Exactly. Godwin adds (sometimes) quality depth. That’s why we desperately need him vs. UGA, if for nothing else to give us five more fouls.

If we are ever down to Moore and Taylor, we will get abused.

I think that can be match-up dependent. If we play a smaller school, shouldn't be an issue. We play Michigan again? Absolutely devastating.

 

[Soonerinkc]

My take on the whole SG thing...

When I coached...both girls (JV/Asst V) boys (soph/asst V) I had GREAT kids...that weren't great or very good players. It sucked because they were great people, worked hard but just didn't have it.

SG is in that mold… it was hard to get on these kids butts but on the other side, playing them was very frustrating… this is at a very low level. Can’t imagine the frustration at D1 level.

 

[cowboysooner]

KC, my dad, hired and fired a ton of basketball coaches, and one of his common statements to me was that the relationship coaches have with the kids can subconsciously prevent them from fairly judging the merits and talents of the kids on his roster. One of the things he told me he watched for when evaluating a coach was whether he played his best players. He found that they commonly didn't. Coaches love their kids, and naturally, like some kids more than others and it can be hard sometimes for a coach to be objective. Great kids that work their tail off and do everything right, but are a little less productive (for whatever reason) are the easiest to pull for and hardest to sit for a coach (I would imagine -- haven't coached).

Dad would commonly grab my brother and I and head out to a high school tournament and watch some games (to evaluate coaches for future purposes usually). He would take notes. He evaluated coaches not on winning or losing, as he felt high school coaches, particularly in the small schools, just have what talent they are supplied with usually. His notes on a team would commonly have categories like: Effort, discipline, kids playing within their skill level, and transition. His idea of transition was different than what most people would think. It didn't have anything to do with the pace of play on offense. Dad thought one of the keys to successful coaching was how quickly kids were trained to shift to different tasks. For example, how quickly a kid goes from offense to defense, how quickly a kid goes from a shooter to following his shot, how quickly kid goes from making a layup to taking his position on a full court press scheme. etc

 

[Soonerinkc]

KC, my dad, hired and fired a ton of basketball coaches, and one of his common statements to me was that the relationship coaches have with the kids can subconsciously prevent them from fairly judging the merits and talents of the kids on his roster. One of the things he told me he watched for when evaluating a coach was whether he played his best players. He found that they commonly didn't. Coaches love their kids, and naturally, like some kids more than others and it can be hard sometimes for a coach to be objective. Great kids that work their tail off and do everything right, but are a little less productive (for whatever reason) are the easiest to pull for and hardest to sit for a coach (I would imagine -- haven't coached).

Dad would commonly grab my brother and I and head out to a high school tournament and watch some games (to evaluate coaches for future purposes usually). He would take notes. He evaluated coaches not on winning or losing, as he felt high school coaches, particularly in the small schools, just have what talent they are supplied with usually. His notes on a team would commonly have categories like: Effort, discipline, kids playing within their skill level, and transition. His idea of transition was different than what most people would think. It didn't have anything to do with the pace of play on offense. Dad thought one of the keys to successful coaching was how quickly kids were trained to shift to different tasks. For example, how quickly a kid goes from offense to defense, how quickly a kid goes from a shooter to following his shot, how quickly kid goes from making a layup to taking his position on a full court press scheme. etc

lol yup...one of my boys "better teams" as far as win/loss...(several started V by their Sr yr)...were a bunch of a-holes...behavior wise, coachability, etc... One of my more coachable teams (none made it to V) and not such a-holes we just didn't have the ability..

Urban public school...except the girls were a Catholic school, small. I always said "can't make chicken salad out of chicken $hit". We had what we had.