We offered this Rick Issanza kid

[WichitaSooner]

What was wrong with Bookout? He would start on this team with ease. I think to many times players are judge by how well they dunk and how flashy they are on the court...Leave that junk to the NBA.

LOL, well, if by junk you mean talent, skill, athleticism, and far and away the best basketball on the planet, then yeah, who would want to deal with that crap! :facepalm

This isn't meant to be a comment on the Bookout debate, BTW. Just seems crazy to me how many people who probably watch about 10 minutes of NBA per year like to take shots at it for all sorts of things.

 

[152219]

Was Ryan Spangler so much more athletic than Bookout? I'd take either of them (or a player like them) back in a heartbeat.

I would argue he was and had a lot better range. The argument being made in regards to Bookout is that playing the 4 in today's game is mostly centered on being a stretch 4 (think of players like Dirk) or a point forward (Lebron). But, that is much more prevalent in the NBA than in the college hoops because there aren't enough big guys to run this style of offense in the NBA and the ability of PFs to switch on all ball screens, something that Bookout would struggle with IMO. I do think Bookout would be successful at the college level today and likely average close to what he did back in the day, which if I recall was roughly 10 points and 8 rebounds/game.

 

[AdaSooner]

Was Ryan Spangler so much more athletic than Bookout? I'd take either of them (or a player like them) back in a heartbeat.

Me too, Sky! They were very different athletes. Ryan was quicker, jumped higher and played more above the rim than Kevin. I remember posters on OUI wondering out loud if he could dunk...until he did.

But, make no mistake, Kevin Bookout was a superb athlete. He was more of a track athlete with Olympic talent and skills, but only a fool would pass on a 6’ 8” 260 mountain of muscle to play basketball in college, back then or today.

Here’s Kevin’s bio coming out of high school:

High School
A second-team Parade All-American as a senior ... Named "Mr. Basketball" by The Oklahoman ... Tabbed state's co-player of the year by The Tulsa World ... Earned All-State honors after averaging 30.6 points, 16.2 rebounds, 4.0 blocks and 2.1 steals per game ... Rated as nation's 10th-best high school senior by analyst Clark Francis ... Made 380-of-451 field goal attempts for an astounding .843 figure ... Converted 12-of-17 three-point tries for a .706 figure ... Led Class 3A in scoring and entire state in rebounding ... Guided team to 28-3 record and state title ... Ranks ninth in state history with 2,802 career points ... A consensus top-50 national recruit ... Captained team all four years ... Coached by Danny Harris ... Regarded as one of nation's best prep shot put and discus throwers ... Earned four state titles in both the shot and discus ... Senior year shot and discus bests topped the nation ... Hit 65 home runs to set Oklahoma high school career record.

 

[inoref]

LOL, well, if by junk you mean talent, skill, athleticism, and far and away the best basketball on the planet, then yeah, who would want to deal with that crap! :facepalm

This isn't meant to be a comment on the Bookout debate, BTW. Just seems crazy to me how many people who probably watch about 10 minutes of NBA per year like to take shots at it for all sorts of things.

Why would I watch 10 minutes of it anymore? The NBA is almost as bad as the WWE

 

[coolm]

The NBA is almost as bad as the WWE

that's not even close to being accurate. I am sorry dude. I watch the NBA near every single night and it's the best show in town.

 

[OULad]

The NBA is great, and has been for over 10 years. Once teams got away from the Heat/Knicks/Pistons style that dominated the 90's.

 

[AdaSooner]

Why would I watch 10 minutes of it anymore? The NBA is almost as bad as the WWE

Aren’t you the same guy who didn’t know Blake Griffin was still in the NBA?

Enough said!

 

[Speedy17]

Bookout was very good when he played but he'd have a really tough time in today's game. Who would he guard? How would he score?

Maybe he would have also developed the skills that other sort of tweeners have developed since he played -- the ability to drive his man, to shoot from outside -- but a 6'7" back to the basket post player would have a really hard time today. The game has changed. If he had also changed, maybe it would work.

I guess Waymon Tisdale could not have played now.

 

[inoref]

Aren’t you the same guy who didn’t know Blake Griffin was still in the NBA?

Enough said!

I could have said that but I don't recall...But you're correct I do not keep up with Blake Griffin as/was a pro
BTW back to the original topic..is Rick Issanza good? chances of landing him?

 

[AdaSooner]

I could have said that but I don't recall...But you're correct I do not keep up with Blake Griffin as/was a pro
BTW back to the original topic..is Rick Issanza good? chances of landing him?

The good about Issanza is that he’s 7’ 1” with long arms.

Judging by everything I have seen of him on video (which is limited to be perfectly honest), he’s raw offensively and not quite ready for prime time at the next level. He has three Big 12 offers (OU, TCU and TTU).

There aren’t many 7’ 1” 225 recruits out there, so I can see why he got an OU offer. If he blows up this season and attracts more attention on the recruiting circuit, I may have to show a little more excitement.

 

[coolm]

he's pretty tall for 7'1

 

[Ghost of Gar Heard]

Why would I watch 10 minutes of it anymore? The NBA is almost as bad as the WWE

This is deranged. Clearly you haven't watched the NBA since the Bad Boys won games 92-88.

 

[Ghost of Gar Heard]

I guess Waymon Tisdale could not have played now.

It's a different game, to be sure, but Tisdale had skills that Bookout didn't and clearly was a lot better.

But Bookout played 15 years ago and Tisdale played, what, 35 years ago? Players are miles more athletic and so much better than players were then. Guys like Bookout and Tisdale would have to have a lot more diverse skill set to be as great today as they were then. Maybe they'd have developed them as the other players have. But we're still talking about 2 relatively short post players who had no outside shot and would have a ton of trouble guarding wings...because that's who they'd have to guard.

They didn't face many 6'9" or 10 guys who could jump through the roof and block shots and now nearly every good team has at least 1 guy like that.

The bottom line is that players today are so much more athletic and so much more skilled than they were 15 or 35 years ago. Tisdale and Bookout would have to have a wider array of skills to be great today than they did then.

It reminds me of an interview I heard the other day w a major league pitcher who argued, correctly in my view, that Babe Ruth would basically be pretty terrible in today's game. He's arguably the best of all time but that doesn't mean he'd be great today. I think the analogy is pretty similar. Great then doesn't mean great today.

 

[skyvue]

It reminds me of an interview I heard the other day w a major league pitcher who argued, correctly in my view, that Babe Ruth would basically be pretty terrible in today's game. He's arguably the best of all time but that doesn't mean he'd be great today. I think the analogy is pretty similar. Great then doesn't mean great today.

It's fun but pointless to compare eras. There's no reason in the world to think that Babe Ruth would not have been just as great today, assuming he'd grown up with the same training and coaching and nutrition (and so on and so on) that today's athletes are given from childhood.

The same goes with Wayman; if he'd played today's brand of hoops his whole life, he'd have adjusted and improved. He was plenty athletic. I'd take him back as a Sooner in a freaking heartbeat.

If you're talking about plunking Ruth from 1930 into today's game (and not letting him grow up with same benefits today's athletes have), you might be right, but that's just silly and unfair, frankly. You also leave out other factors -- the athletes of Ruth's era were tougher, grittier, more hard-nosed and had more stamina, and in that sense I don't think today's players would know what hit them if they could face off against a team from that era.

 

[sperry]

The days of plodding, methodical big men like Bookout are long gone. There wouldn't be anyone for him to guard on most teams. He certainly wouldn't be able to guard anyone that plays minutes on this OU team, for example.

 

[CoachTalk]

Bookout could play right now. For every Big 12 team this year.

some of you are out of touch with reality.

 

[sperry]

Bookout could play right now. For every Big 12 team this year.

some of you are out of touch with reality.

Slow, unathletic big men who can't stretch the floor do not play big minutes for good basketball teams unless they are ridiculously potent offensive players.

 

[Eielson]

Months??? we heard the same discussion when he was here. exact same discussion.

This wasn't a board when Bookout was here.

 

[Ghost of Gar Heard]

It's fun but pointless to compare eras. There's no reason in the world to think that Babe Ruth would not have been just as great today, assuming he'd grown up with the same training and coaching and nutrition (and so on and so on) that today's athletes are given from childhood.

The same goes with Wayman; if he'd played today's brand of hoops his whole life, he'd have adjusted and improved. He was plenty athletic. I'd take him back as a Sooner in a freaking heartbeat.

If you're talking about plunking Ruth from 1930 into today's game (and not letting him grow up with same benefits today's athletes have), you might be right, but that's just silly and unfair, frankly. You also leave out other factors -- the athletes of Ruth's era were tougher, grittier, more hard-nosed and had more stamina, and in that sense I don't think today's players would know what hit them if they could face off against a team from that era.

That's laughably ridiculous. Babe Ruth and others of his era were in horrendous shape and were far less committed to staying in shape than those of today. The worst teams today would destroy the best teams off those by-gone eras.

Of course I was talking about Bookout and Tisdale then, as my post noted explicitly more than once. If their skills had advanced to match those of their peers', it's a different story but that was never the comparison. It was always about Bookout then, and Tisdale then. That's what I responded to from the beginning. You can say, "Well, if Bookout was quicker and had good ball-handling skills and could shot it from 21 feet, he'd be able to compete against today's players." Obviously that's true but that's not who Bookout was.

Look at good major college basketball players today. Who's the best comp for Bookout? Could he guard anyone on KU's team? No. Could he score when guarded by Lawson? No. The game has changed. Athletes are better. Players are more skilled. And the things that made Bookout really good wouldn't make him really good today.

 

[coolm]

This wasn't a board when Bookout was here.

yes, this was a board when bookout was here. just in some other form. there has been an OU men's basketball community with many of these same players since 1995.