Tulsa World story on M'Baye

[cowboysooner]

Told you I was getting old, I meant Sampson and not Billy. I need to spell check as well.

 

[buttermaker1]

Something I have not see anyone discuss is the possibility of starting M'Baye on the wing and Clark at the PF spot on the offensive end and switching them on defensive end. Clark is a very good rebounder and pretty good defender, he is amuch better rebounder than Fitzgerald. On defense Clark can defend the 3 and M'Baye can defend the post player. I am not saying this will happen but I think it is a possibility. To me the bottom line is OU now has some options with Clark, Osby, Fitzgerald and M'Baye. If one of the two freshman can step up play some 3 and 2 minutes, OU should be noticeably improved. If they can both play 10 minutes a game including a few minutes at pg, OU should be vastly improved.

It is my hope that the 7 man rotation is Grooms, Fitzgerald, Osby, M'Baye, Pledger, Clark and Hield or Hornbeak. Blair can give Grooms a few minutes each half as the 8th man. Neal, Hield or Hornbeak and Arent provide additional depth.

Yip choo kennedy-esk for clark.

 

[TEvans4Three]

I didn't list "some stats" -- I listed virtually every stat, unlike those of you who are denigrating Sam. You're choosing to focus on shooting percentage alone; I'm looking at the entire picture.

Sam managed to score almost as many points per game as Quannas. That's the idea, right, to score points? Shooting percentages are great, but the idea is to put points on the scoreboard.

Count their assists and Sam accounted for more points per game than Quannas. Would it have helped if Sam had shot better? Of course. Was QW a better point guard in his junior season than SG? Yes, but not by as wide a margin as you and others have suggested. Sam's become the current whipping boy for many posters here, and he deserves better. We'd have loved to have had Sam last season, and even considering TMG's occasional breakout games, the season before that.

He might be the right point guard on the wrong team, given our lack of scorers, but he's not a bad PG. He just isn't.

I agree in that Grooms is a servicable PG. We would have a lot more losses without him. No way Blair handles starting. Even Calvin Newell is more of a natural SG. He could have run the offense and create through dribble-drive better than Blair.

BUT, the guy can't shoot. Think Doug Gottlieb downgraded. Doug could throw in some dimes yet, imagine how scary he would have been with a shot.

When I play ball and there is a guy who can't shoot long range and just drive it makes my defense WAY easier and I can get more steals/blocks just by backing off/playing more help-side. Having a shooter stretches out the defenses and causes more open looks, less double-teams down low, and makes the dribble drive more effective.

So QW>SG. And yes, 3pt shooting efficiency is a BIG difference in PGs.

 

[WTSooner]

BUT, the guy can't shoot. Think Doug Gottlieb downgraded. Doug could throw in some dimes yet, imagine how scary he would have been with a shot.

Yep. And another point I've made about the DG comparison is that I believe DG played with some very talented players. Meaning, there wasn't other "black holes" on the court with him. Not that Grooms is at fault for it, but having a black hole at the 3 spot all year, and at any position when a bench player substituted in for a starter, only makes Grooms less effective.

And I'm by no means calling Sam horrible. I'm certainly glad we have him starting over Blair, no doubt.

 

[TEvans4Three]

Yep. And another point I've made about the DG comparison is that I believe DG played with some very talented players. Meaning, there wasn't other "black holes" on the court with him. Not that Grooms is at fault for it, but having a black hole at the 3 spot all year, and at any position when a bench player substituted in for a starter, only makes Grooms less effective.

And I'm by no means calling Sam horrible. I'm certainly glad we have him starting over Blair, no doubt.

Couldn't agree more.

I am very partial to a 3pt PG because I was one.

But I feel for Grooms. Coming from a PG perspective, you practice and play games with your teammates every day. You know who your shooters/scorers are and how they flow with the gameplan. So when you are on the court you see (3) scorers or (4)/(5) scorers. It changes up your mindset/game when a sub comes in because you adjust. You start thinking "Spot up shooter on left, penetrate, draw double team and kick it to him for the 3 or cutting to the basket/back-cut." Without that threat with you, you don't think like that. You know you will get doubleteamed and kick it out to no shot. Also having those shootes opens up lanes for you to take your man to the hole. If not, you take more of the scoring in your hands, get more aggressive.

Not sure how many of you played, especially PG, but there is so much of a mental game that goes along with it. It becomes second nature to think about attacking defenses with different personnel on the floor. Which can be a hinder or a boost to your game with different players out there.

 

[DenverSooner]

I actually think Sam Grooms shoots better than Gotlieb. Gotlieb was a solid basketball palyer but had zero shot. He couldn't shoot free throws. He was so bad at shooting free throws that Sutton used to put him on the bench in the final two minutes of close games so teams couldn't foul him. I don't think I have seen Kruger put Grooms on the bench at the end of games. I also think Grooms has a much better looking shot than Gotlieb had. I am not sure how their assist to turn over numbers compare but I would probably give Gotlieb a slight nod as the better pg. (For those that don't recall, Gotlieb used to make All Big XII - personally I disagreed with that decision because I didn't think you belong on the All Big XII team if you couldn't finish close games.)

In my opinion, Gotlieb is one of the best talents on ESPN basketball coverage today. I truly cannot stand most of the older guys anymore and think virtually all of them need to retire. Vitale, Rafferty, Mussburger, and a few others just need to go.

 

[WTSooner]

Doug's OSU career averages:
38% FG%
24% 3FG%
45% FT%

Grooms this year:
35% FG%
20% 3FG%
66% FT%

So I'd say Doug was at least AS GOOD from the field, but you are right about the FT's, he was terrible.

 

[campbest]

but I would probably give Gotlieb a slight nod as the better pg. (For those that don't recall, Gotlieb used to make All Big XII - personally I disagreed with that decision because I didn't think you belong on the All Big XII team if you couldn't finish close games.)

haha, Gottlieb was twice the PG Grooms is. As mentioned before, a problem for Grooms is the talent around him, doesn't help his cause at all. However, this team would be better if Gottlieb was the PG...Doug had a knack for making the players around him better. Don't think Grooms is on that level.

 

[DenverSooner]

Doug's OSU career averages:
38% FG%
24% 3FG%
45% FT%

Grooms this year:
35% FG%
20% 3FG%
66% FT%

So I'd say Doug was at least AS GOOD from the field, but you are right about the FT's, he was terrible.

That surprises me. I would have thought Grooms had better percentages than Gotlieb by about 5% in FG% and 3FG%. Grooms has to improve these percentages. If he could hit 45% of his shots and 30% of his 3 (limiting his attempts), OU would be notably improved.