Spangler and Bookout

[vbdad]

Maddux graduated from Putnam City North in 87. He was a McDonald's all-american. He started for KU against us in the championship game.

 

[BoulderSooner]

What part of depth does the "why would Kruger bring in a bench player" group not understand?!? You have to have bodies. We will play 5 posts this year, 4 in most every game. What if we lose Fitz or Osby to injury? You have to have enough bodies.

Osby, Fitz, and M'Baye are going to get most of the post minutes. Bennett will get about what Washington got. Arent is likely Honore's replacement.

this .. thank you

 

[garyeb2]

This is what the " why would Kruger bring in bench player group" doesn't understand. We already have a strong cadre of bench players. We don't need anymore. Their names are Fitz,Pledger,Cam, Neal, Arent, and Grooms. (if he doesn't start making a few shots)

If the objective is to have a good basketball team, we need starters. Not bench players. For next year,as far as Bennett goes. The " I love the pain of losing,so, let's stick with our boys group" is probably right.

 

[BoulderSooner]

This is what the " why would Kruger bring in bench player group" doesn't understand. We already have a strong cadre of bench players. We don't need anymore. Their names are Fitz,Pledger,Cam, Neal, Arent, and Grooms. (if he doesn't start making a few shots)

If the objective is to have a good basketball team, we need starters. Not bench players. For next year,as far as Bennett goes. The " I love the pain of losing,so, let's stick with our boys group" is probably right.

the senior version of pleder and fitz would start for most of the teams in the big 12 .. as would the jr version of cam

 

[boksooner]

the senior version of pleder and fitz would start for most of the teams in the big 12 .. as would the jr version of cam

Don't you know that players do not get better over time and win/loss record is the only way to judge talent?

 

[DenverSooner]

This is what the " why would Kruger bring in bench player group" doesn't understand. We already have a strong cadre of bench players. We don't need anymore. Their names are Fitz,Pledger,Cam, Neal, Arent, and Grooms. (if he doesn't start making a few shots)

If the objective is to have a good basketball team, we need starters. Not bench players. For next year,as far as Bennett goes. The " I love the pain of losing,so, let's stick with our boys group" is probably right.

I really disagree with your bashing of Fitz, Pledger, Cam and Grooms. Indiidually, they are all starter quality players in the Big XII or worst case a sixth man playing starter minutes. In my opinion the porblem is that the weaknesses of these players do not work well together. For example, if Grooms or Clark had a really good three point shot the other players inability to hit a 3 point shot would not be such a big deal.

 

[WTSooner]

I really disagree with your bashing of Fitz, Pledger, Cam and Grooms. Indiidually, they are all starter quality players in the Big XII or worst case a sixth man playing starter minutes. In my opinion the porblem is that the weaknesses of these players do not work well together. For example, if Grooms or Clark had a really good three point shot the other players inability to hit a 3 point shot would not be such a big deal.

Exactly. It's not so much that we lack talent when evaluated individually, it's that the talent we have doesn't fit together all that great. Hopefully the new guys can fill in those voids next year, and make us a more complete team.

 

[garyeb2]

I really disagree with your bashing of Fitz, Pledger, Cam and Grooms. Indiidually, they are all starter quality players in the Big XII or worst case a sixth man playing starter minutes. In my opinion the porblem is that the weaknesses of these players do not work well together. For example, if Grooms or Clark had a really good three point shot the other players inability to hit a 3 point shot would not be such a big deal.

I'm not bashing Grooms and Cam. I kind of like both of them and think they have quite abit of upside. But, last years version would not have gotten them a starting job on any of the upper division Big 12 teams.

Pledger and Fitz could probably start for OU.Tech, and A&m. For Fitz, you could probably throw in OSU. That's it. All lower division teams. Good teams have better players than that.

Fitz can score. But, most of his points come from away from the basket. And he doesn't rebound or defend so good. And he is our man in the middle. That gets you an off the bench job on a good team. And on and on.

Wins and losses are how you keep score. And a players worth, as many would like it to be, isn't determined by statistics compiled in losing efforts. But, moreso a players ability to do all the things required of the position that contributes to the teams winning effort. Scoring and no defense does not help the team win games. It hinders the team. It is exactly those one deminsional types of contributions that have gotten the program in the ditch. Not some mystic chemistry problem.

And, if you want to be the player bashing police, Why don't you expand your beat to cover the every recruit isn't good enough and it is everyone's fault but Pledger's crowd? And there is also the Kruger failed in his 1st year crowd, when they are on break from their mensa meetings, roaming the streets.

 

[Mr.B!!!]

I agree, I think that there is plenty of "talent" but it isn't very complimentary or cohesive. A few examples:

1. I think Grooms is a solid point guard at the D-1 level and if he had just one other person who could hit an outside shot consistently he'd have an extra assist or two per game and an easier path to the basket, even with guys lagging off him because of his poor three point shooting.

2. I think Pledger is an above-average to good shooting guard who probably gets more points than he should because he is the only guy capable of hitting outside shots. Point is, if Grooms or Cam could hit a three every once in a while, Pledger probably becomes a more efficient player overall.

3. I think that Fitz is an average to above-average post with limited athletic ability but the ability to hit shots consistently from about 12 feet and in [except at the rim, but is even getting a little more savvy down low]. Unfortunately, Grooms can't shoot so his defender can sag to prevent Fitz from getting clean looks to either shot from or pass out of.

4. Cam has the potential to be a good SF in this conference and he is already a solid athlete and defender; however, he lacks the handles to get to the rim, and his outside shooting isn't good enough to make a defender respect it. The good news, these things can be improved upon with work.

This is college basketball, every player isn't going to be a stud...and some guys need to fit their roles, which I expect after a full year to work will be more defined.

 

[BoulderSooner]

I'm not bashing Grooms and Cam. I kind of like both of them and think they have quite abit of upside. But, last years version would not have gotten them a starting job on any of the upper division Big 12 teams.

Pledger and Fitz could probably start for OU.Tech, and A&m. For Fitz, you could probably throw in OSU. That's it. All lower division teams. Good teams have better players than that.

Fitz can score. But, most of his points come from away from the basket. And he doesn't rebound or defend so good. And he is our man in the middle. That gets you an off the bench job on a good team. And on and on.

Wins and losses are how you keep score. And a players worth, as many would like it to be, isn't determined by statistics compiled in losing efforts. But, moreso a players ability to do all the things required of the position that contributes to the teams winning effort. Scoring and no defense does not help the team win games. It hinders the team. It is exactly those one deminsional types of contributions that have gotten the program in the ditch. Not some mystic chemistry problem.

And, if you want to be the player bashing police, Why don't you expand your beat to cover the every recruit isn't good enough and it is everyone's fault but Pledger's crowd? And there is also the Kruger failed in his 1st year crowd, when they are on break from their mensa meetings, roaming the streets.

grooms would have started for UNC in the ncaa tourney

 

[garyeb2]

grooms would have started for UNC in the ncaa tourney

Please, if you want to argue about something, at least do your homework. UNC looked at him as a backup point guard and nothing else.They needed a replacement for their projected backup that left unexpectedly. He made the cut to the final 3. They signed someone else.

Their starter was out and the backup played. Now, what is your point? I have been a proponent of Grooms and argued extensivly on his behalf. Mostly with people like you who thought that because Blair had "experience" Grooms was going to come in here and be the backup.

That doesn't change the fact that, if Grooms can not shoot well enough that the oppoents have to make at least a token attempt to guard him, Kruger needs to get him out of there. Any coach with a reasonable option would do just that.

 

[DenverSooner]

That doesn't change the fact that, if Grooms can not shoot well enough that the oppoents have to make at least a token attempt to guard him, Kruger needs to get him out of there. Any coach with a reasonable option would do just that.

Gotlieb was an all-conference or borderline all-conference level player and he could not shoot.

 

[scrybe]

The 2002 Sooner squad went all the way to the Final Four, and probably should have hoisted a championship banner inside LNC. That said, there wasn't a player on that team, IIRC, that was good enough to sniff the NBA.

Certain coaches can do quite well with a handful of blue collar-type players; players who probably fall a little short in the pure talent department. Sampson was one of those coaches; I believe Kruger is too.

 

[WTSooner]

The 2002 Sooner squad went all the way to the Final Four, and probably should have hoisted a championship banner inside LNC. That said, there wasn't a player on that team, IIRC, that was good enough to sniff the NBA.

Certain coaches can do quite well with a handful of blue collar-type players; players who probably fall a little short in the pure talent department. Sampson was one of those coaches; I believe Kruger is too.

True, but it had the closest thing to it.....it had several guys that were very good players, just not big enough to have a spot in the NBA. There aren't too many college guys I would have traded Hollis or Ace for at the end of that season. Both of those guys, and Ere, and White, all played overseas. Not sure about Jabahri Brown, Selvy, or Detrick.

It was an experienced team. It was a complete team. It was a team that defended and could shoot.

 

[WTSooner]

Gotlieb was an all-conference or borderline all-conference level player and he could not shoot.

But his career averages at OSU were still better than Grooms' stats (shooting) last year, save FT%.

http://ouhoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=344946&postcount=27

 

[garyeb2]

Gotlieb was an all-conference or borderline all-conference level player and he could not shoot.

Yes, that is right. And I don't think making jumpers is anywhere close to the most important thing a point guard does. But, I hadn't come around to the idea that Grooms was as good as Gotlieb in all the other aspects of being a point guard. Have You?

 

[BoulderSooner]

Please, if you want to argue about something, at least do your homework. UNC looked at him as a backup point guard and nothing else.They needed a replacement for their projected backup that left unexpectedly. He made the cut to the final 3. They signed someone else.

Their starter was out and the backup played. Now, what is your point? I have been a proponent of Grooms and argued extensivly on his behalf. Mostly with people like you who thought that because Blair had "experience" Grooms was going to come in here and be the backup.

That doesn't change the fact that, if Grooms can not shoot well enough that the oppoents have to make at least a token attempt to guard him, Kruger needs to get him out of there. Any coach with a reasonable option would do just that.

thank you for showing in 1 post how little you know about basketball

 

[DenverSooner]

Yes, that is right. And I don't think making jumpers is anywhere close to the most important thing a point guard does. But, I hadn't come around to the idea that Grooms was as good as Gotlieb in all the other aspects of being a point guard. Have You?

I don't know, probably not but my point is simply that he doesn't have to be a good shooter to be a good pg.

 

[garyeb2]

I don't know, probably not but my point is simply that he doesn't have to be a good shooter to be a good pg.

Why do you feel the need to point that out to me? I have been Grooms most consistant supporter and defender since before he hit campus. And was vilified by the majority of posters for doing so. You know, the ones that define every player's worth by their shooting pct.

Grooms is a good point guard that shot poorly this past season. He shot so pooly that defenders started to ignore him and were able to sag off and clog passing lanes to Pledger and drop into quick double teams on Fitz. That hurt the team. It made the team easier to beat.

That is a big deal. And has to be considered along with the things he does very well. Kruger had no reasonable alternative this past season. If a reasonable alternative presents itself next season, Grooms needs to shoot better to keep his job. He doesn't have to be a good shooter. But, he has to be able to draw a defender when he is wide open and the ball is in his hands.

 

[WTSooner]

I don't know, probably not but my point is simply that he doesn't have to be a good shooter to be a good pg.

Maybe not a "good" shooter, but you have to shoot better than he did last year. And I'd argue that to be a good PG on the roster we had last year, he probably needed to be a good shooter. It's not Sam's fault that Cam didn't play well, and that we had nothing off the bench, but what Sam did last year as a PG added very little to the team, over what any average PG would have. He either needs to shoot it significantly better this year, or we need better offensive play across the board to compensate for him (and he still needs to shoot it a little better).