Vs. Southeastern OSU
- Thread starter CoachTalk
- Start date
Hill has looked better and better every time I see him. I thought the team came out tight and couldn't make shots till mid 1st half. Chemistry should come around fairly quickly with real games showing whats needed. No way JB or Austin sits for Jalen to start imo.
WichitaSooner
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2015
- Messages
- 7,982
- Reaction score
- 3,387
Agree on all points. Specifically, zero chance Reaves doesn't start.
WichitaSooner
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2015
- Messages
- 7,982
- Reaction score
- 3,387
KSU only beat Washburn by 10 last night. I guess that means they are bound for 11th place since we know that 40 minutes of October basketball, a season makes!
skyvue
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2008
- Messages
- 8,451
- Reaction score
- 988
Speaking of reliable...
thebigabd
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2008
- Messages
- 13,496
- Reaction score
- 77
KSU only beat Washburn by 10 last night. I guess that means they are bound for 11th place since we know that 40 minutes of October basketball, a season makes!
Isn't KSU picked last?
thebigabd
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2008
- Messages
- 13,496
- Reaction score
- 77
Reasons I am worried.....
The team gave up 76 points Southeastern Oklahoma.
They only won the rebounding battle by 3 rebounds.
11 assists and 7 turnovers.... eh
Were there bright spots? Sure? Harmon looked great, Hill looked good, and Manek played like you would expect Manek to play against Southeastern Oklahoma. I am positive Harmon is going to be a really good player, but lets not forget he was facing off against Adam Dworsky. Who is a 5'10'' math major playing point guard, and a 6'5'' forward put up 25 points and 7 rebounds on team that is supposedly big, athletic, strong, etc... Those stats wouldn't matter if the game wasn't competitive. If OU won by 35 or something it wouldn't matter.
But I see a lot of risk of more scholarship players unable to contribute in a meaningful way again, no defense, bad rebounding, etc. Those are the things that have plagued Kruger teams these last few years.
The team gave up 76 points Southeastern Oklahoma.
They only won the rebounding battle by 3 rebounds.
11 assists and 7 turnovers.... eh
- Alondes Williams didn't score
- Kur Kuath had 2 points
- Corbin Merritt played 2 minutes
- The bench scored 23 points... That means the primary starters were heavily relied on just to win the game. Starters had to stay in the game and score about 70 points.
Were there bright spots? Sure? Harmon looked great, Hill looked good, and Manek played like you would expect Manek to play against Southeastern Oklahoma. I am positive Harmon is going to be a really good player, but lets not forget he was facing off against Adam Dworsky. Who is a 5'10'' math major playing point guard, and a 6'5'' forward put up 25 points and 7 rebounds on team that is supposedly big, athletic, strong, etc... Those stats wouldn't matter if the game wasn't competitive. If OU won by 35 or something it wouldn't matter.
But I see a lot of risk of more scholarship players unable to contribute in a meaningful way again, no defense, bad rebounding, etc. Those are the things that have plagued Kruger teams these last few years.
pnkranger
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2008
- Messages
- 3,683
- Reaction score
- 126
Confused at why it's an overreaction when I say that I think we can get there this year but that I'm not as impressed as everyone else seems to be. So, because some say exceedingly positive things, it's not an overreaction, but when I give a reasonable counterpoint, it's overreaction. Of course I don't think we should cancel the season.
I'm simply saying we have some fairly major areas that need improvement before we can become a competitive team night in and night out in the big 12. We're talking about a team that is bringing in 8 new bodies ... I don't think that assessment is unfair or overly negative. We've got a ways to go.
skyvue
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2008
- Messages
- 8,451
- Reaction score
- 988
It's true, we do. But is there a team in the Big 12 that, at this stage, doesn't have a ways to go? How much of a finished product were you hoping for in the exhibition game?
WichitaSooner
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2015
- Messages
- 7,982
- Reaction score
- 3,387
No defense has been an issue for the last few years? Top 20 nationally last year was bad? I think that's pretty darn good, especially since we weren't athletically gifted.
I just think it is silly to look at any stats from a single game and become optimistic or pessimistic. Trust me, if Williams had gone 4/5 from three, that wouldn't have me confident that he is going to be a high percentage shooter. It reminds me of baseball. If a guy hits .150 for the first week of the season, people freak out. If the same guy hits .150 for a random week in June, no one pays much attention because they realize it is just a tiny portion of the season. We had posters last year worried about the defense after the exhibition game, and obviously that didn't turn out to be a problem once the real games started.
Last edited:
AdaSooner
Admin Emeritus
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2008
- Messages
- 16,086
- Reaction score
- 49
Me too. I ain’t skeered now!
Thebigabd may not be as worried as he pretends to be. He knows OU will play more like a team later on and not like a collection of players still looking for an identity.
My guess is he’s also not giving Southeastern the credit they deserve. Southeastern is a good Division II team, emphasis on the word Team. They’re picked to win the GAC this season. They return four of their top five scorers and starters from last year’s team, including the GAC Player of the Year and All-American, Kevin Buckingham. Buckingham, Manek, and Dworsky each earned all-conference honors last season. The Storm averaged 82.0 ppg as a team and held an average margin of victory of 10.1 ppg.
I was disappointed with our defense, but that can be fixed in time. Lon played a lot of bodies, so I didn’t expect to see a finely tuned machine this early in the season, especially in an exhibition game. To repeat what inoref said, if OU is still playing like this in January, I will be worried!
WichitaSooner
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2015
- Messages
- 7,982
- Reaction score
- 3,387
The part of your post that I found an overreaction was the comment that every other team in the league would beat them by 25+. There is absolutely no way to know that. Again, KU was up 5 in the second half last week ... I just don't think drawing sweeping conclusions like that based off one game is the best idea. You did qualify your overall conclusionand I respect that, which is why my reply was mainly intended as a good natured jab.
mict085
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2009
- Messages
- 3,694
- Reaction score
- 1,146
KSU only beat Washburn by 10 last night. I guess that means they are bound for 11th place since we know that 40 minutes of October basketball, a season makes!
While I agree with your overall sentiment, this is a bad example. KSU May very well end up in last place this year. They are going to be bad. However, for OU, I don’t understand why anyone would draw too many conclusions after the first exhibition for a team with so many new players. This team will have some growing pains and they will learn and grow a lot over the next month and hopefully, continue to get better all season.
I’m very excited about this group and this season. Should be a fun ride.
WichitaSooner
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2015
- Messages
- 7,982
- Reaction score
- 3,387
I certainly agree with your take on OU. I think people are underestimating KSU though. They won't be nearly as bad as people think. I think they may we'll make the tournament.
coolm
New member
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2008
- Messages
- 8,694
- Reaction score
- 0
in these early games I try to see how comfortable new guys look on the defensive end.
are they out of place? are they communicating?
that was what impressed me first with Hill. you immediately notice he's heads up defensively and hollering out to teammates. whether he was instructing them or asking questions - immaterial. he was communicating on the court and that's a big step. coach Lon praised him for knowing his role so I suspect it was the former.
are they out of place? are they communicating?
that was what impressed me first with Hill. you immediately notice he's heads up defensively and hollering out to teammates. whether he was instructing them or asking questions - immaterial. he was communicating on the court and that's a big step. coach Lon praised him for knowing his role so I suspect it was the former.
Similar threads
