What would our record be if Calvin Newell didn't transfer?

:facepalm

The fact that this is still your analysis should lead everyone to take what you saw in practices with a giant grain of salt.

So I'm not sure I should believe Kruger had it out for Newell anymore than I believe Arent is going to be a major contributor.

How many times do we have to litigate this? I never said Arent was going to be a major contributor after I saw him in practice. After I saw him in practice, I said he wasn't as good as CJ.

I did predict that Arent was going to be a solid contributor before practices started because I had seen Fitz play. My assumption was that anyone Kruger thought enough of to bring in would be better than Fitz. In Arent's case, that was a faulty assumption. I still assume that will be the case going forward.

I never said Kruger had it in for Calvin. I did say that Kruger held Calvin to a higher standard and was more critical of Calvin's performance. It is quite likely that Calvin had behaviors and attitudes that warranted that response from Kruger. Coach obviously decided he didn't have the desire to deal with a problem child along with everything else. And he moved on. Are we clear on that point?

Did you not see what this 5 win team degenerated into? They are a walk it over the time line, run 1/2 court sets, and drop into a passive zone bunch of juggernaughts. That is what coach's have to do to keep themselves in games when they are ankle deep in talent. That is nothing like what Kruger wants to do or be. An uptempo offense that runs in transition along with an attacking defense are his consistant stated objectives.

Players like Calvin fit exactly into the mold of the type of player Kruger needs to play the way he wants to. Players like Pledger and Fitz are the kind of players that keep Kruger from playing like he wants to. Adopting a playing style that accomodates the limited range of abilities those two bring is exactly the thing that gets you beat in the Big 12.

Oh, you don't think so. Let's see. Let's see if Kruger ever recruits a shooting guard that is slow, limited athleticaly, clumsy with the ball in his hands, and a weak to marginal defender. Or let's see going forward if Kruger ever recruits a big that is slow,limited athlticaly, plays below the rim, and is a weak to marginal defender. It won't happen.

This years team would have been measurabley better with Calvin. Next years team could be alot better if Kruger has the option of putting a couple of guys in that can run the floor, defend and score alittle. And then let Pledger and Fitz be that off the bench scoring threat everyone thinks we need.
 
GREAT question. If you'd stop bringing it up every time Newell is mentioned, maybe it would stop.

I didn't start the thread. And I certainly have no interest in whether or not you think it is appropriate if or when I post an opininion.
 
I didn't start the thread. And I certainly have no interest in whether or not you think it is appropriate if or when I post an opininion.

I just found it funny that you would complain about the number of times this subject has been "litigated", yet you're repeatedly the cause for the litigation.
 
Your putting some high expectations on some guards that arent ranked very high. Even Pledger who is a top notch guard right now averaged 16mpg and 3.8ppg as a freshmen. Crocker as a freshmen averaged 21mpg and 6.4ppg. Newell averaged 10mpg and 2.1ppg. And Davis averaged 12mpg and 3.3ppg.
Hield and Hornbeak fall into the same category as these recruits.

And to actually think that you think these 2 freshmen are going to be that good right out of the gate is insane. And even more insane that you think that they would be better than Newell next year.

Personally, I don't think it is too much to expect Hield, Horbeak or a combination to the two to contribute at a descent level. Crocker averaged 8.6 as a freshman. Price averaged over 7 as a freshman. Godbold averaged about 5 as a freshman. Heskett averaged 4 as a freshman. Those teams were better than this current team so I think these guys can combine for 7+ a game. Regardless scoring is not all that important for them. If they can defend and give some rest to Pledger it will help the team. If they can hit open 3 point shots it will help the team.

I think OU is going to have 5 guys that consistently score 10 points a game next season and between them will average over 60 a game. Clark, Fitzgerald, M'Baye, Osby and Pledger are all going to score significant points (this year Pledger = 16.6, Fitz=12.2, Osby=12.8, Clark=8.6). If M'Baye can average 12 a game the top five will average 61.2 per game. I think Grooms will score slightly more next season (he averaged 6.5 this year) so if we put him at 7.5 this year the top 6 guys average 68.7 next season. If they just get 11.3 a game from Blair, Neal, Hield, Hornbeak and Arent, OU is averaging 80 points a game next season.

I also think OU is going to have four or five guys that can really hurt an opponent next season in Pledger, Osby, Fitzgerald, M'Baye and Clark (known without spending a lot of time as follows: Pledger 38, Clark 26, Osby 24, and Fitzgerald over 20 multiple times). I am assuming M'Baye can put up 20 or more too on a good night. That will make OU tougher to defend.

If Neal, Hield, Hornbeak, M'Baye and Osby can hit 3 point shots next year OU will be harder to defend. Osby actually shot 40% from 3 on the season but he didn't take many. Neal shot 33% hopefully he can move that to 38% or above next season.

I am actually more concerned with defense than offense next season. OU must improve defensively if they want to be an NCAA Tournament team.
 
Personally, I don't think it is too much to expect Hield, Horbeak or a combination to the two to contribute at a descent level. Crocker averaged 8.6 as a freshman. Price averaged over 7 as a freshman. Godbold averaged about 5 as a freshman. Heskett averaged 4 as a freshman. Those teams were better than this current team so I think these guys can combine for 7+ a game. Regardless scoring is not all that important for them. If they can defend and give some rest to Pledger it will help the team. If they can hit open 3 point shots it will help the team.

Godbold averaged 5ppg as a freshmen but he also averaged 16mpg. Crocker averaged 6.4ppg in conference and thats what counts. And as for what Price averaged...lets not compare these 2 players to Price.

Freshmen don't defend. So don't expect that to be their strongsuit.

Pledger will get his 30 + mpg... So you're looking at these 2 guys getting combined minutes of around 16mpg.
 
I also think OU is going to have four or five guys that can really hurt an opponent next season in Pledger, Osby, Fitzgerald, M'Baye and Clark (known without spending a lot of time as follows: Pledger 38, Clark 26, Osby 24, and Fitzgerald over 20 multiple times). I am assuming M'Baye can put up 20 or more too on a good night. That will make OU tougher to defend.

If Neal, Hield, Hornbeak, M'Baye and Osby can hit 3 point shots next year OU will be harder to defend. Osby actually shot 40% from 3 on the season but he didn't take many. Neal shot 33% hopefully he can move that to 38% or above next season.

Well hopefull Neal can shoot better than his 24% 3pt shooting in conference play.
 
He was also ranked in the top 40 out of high school...these recruits aren't even in the top 100.

I wouldn't get too hung up on rankings if I were you. Pick any game you want to watch on television and you'll see good players on both teams who were not top 100 recruits. That's especially true of mid-major programs.

Clark is an example of the opposite end of the spectrum. He was a top 40 recruit who has yet to perform to that level. Maybe he will in time. But he should not be used to guage how Hornbeak, Hield or any other recruit will play.
 
He was also ranked in the top 40 out of high school...these recruits aren't even in the top 100.

The funny thing about your take on Heild and Hornbeak is it is almost a certainty that Kruger has no idea how Rivals rates these kids. Nor would he have any reason to ever care how someone else rates the kids he is looking at. Those rankings and ratings of prospects are for the fans and ousiders.

Kruger has been doing this long enough, at enough different places, and with enough success that his judgement would be preferred over some rating service web poster.

Coaches know what they are looking for in a player. And they know, often within the blink of an eye, whether the kid is capable of or has the potential to do what they need them to do. Well, at least the experts do and they don't need some rating service to validate their opinion.

Saying some kid is a 3 star or a 4 star or a 5 star and that kid will or will not be able to do something based on those ratings is basing an arguement on the thinest of possible threads.
 
And as for what Price averaged...lets not compare these 2 players to Price.

Why they are ranked similarly. Hollis Price was high top 100 by some sources and not ranked by others. Hield and Hornbeak are high top 100 by some sources and not ranked by others.
 
The funny thing about your take on Heild and Hornbeak is it is almost a certainty that Kruger has no idea how Rivals rates these kids. Nor would he have any reason to ever care how someone else rates the kids he is looking at. Those rankings and ratings of prospects are for the fans and ousiders.

Kruger has been doing this long enough, at enough different places, and with enough success that his judgement would be preferred over some rating service web poster.

Thats great...Kruger is bringing in Grooms and Arent and we finish 2nd to last in the big 12. Baylor is bringing in top 100 talent and they are ranked nationally all year. And most on here think Drew sucks as a coach..well if he sucks as a coach then why is has his team been ranked so high...maybe its b/c he's bringing in top talent.

Its one thing to be excited about the players we are bringing in...but its another thing when you look at who our competition is bringing in. And our competition is out recruiting us on every level.
 
Thats great...Kruger is bringing in Grooms and Arent and we finish 2nd to last in the big 12. Baylor is bringing in top 100 talent and they are ranked nationally all year. And most on here think Drew sucks as a coach..well if he sucks as a coach then why is has his team been ranked so high...maybe its b/c he's bringing in top talent.

Its one thing to be excited about the players we are bringing in...but its another thing when you look at who our competition is bringing in. And our competition is out recruiting us on every level.

No one said Drew wasn't a fantastic recruiter, but to criticize his coaching ability his completely fair. He (arguably) has the most talent of any team in the Big 12 and continues to fall short of expectations.
 
Why they are ranked similarly. Hollis Price was high top 100 by some sources and not ranked by others. Hield and Hornbeak are high top 100 by some sources and not ranked by others.

Are you sure some publications didn't have Price ranked at all? He was Louisiana Player of the Year and lead St. Augustine, one of the most elite athletic schools in the state, to a state championship. I find it hard to believe a player to reach those pinnacles in a state as talented as Louisiana wasn't even ranked.
 
Are you sure some publications didn't have Price ranked at all? He was Louisiana Player of the Year and lead St. Augustine, one of the most elite athletic schools in the state, to a state championship. I find it hard to believe a player to reach those pinnacles in a state as talented as Louisiana wasn't even ranked.

I am pretty sure he was not a consensus top 100 player but I could be wrong about that. Tyler Neal was the Oklahoma Player of the Year and I am pretty sure he was not ranked.
 
I don't really care for rankings out of HS but it's tough for freshmen to get that many points their first year especially at guard.

Hollis scored 7.2 ppg as a freshman, 11.8 as a sophomore.

DeAngelo Alexander scored 7.1, 9.6 as a soph then went on to have a good career at Charlotte.

Lawrance McKenzie came in and averaged 8.2

David Godbold averaged 4.6 ppg

Tony Crocker 8.6 ppg

Cameron Clark averaged 9.3 ppg

Austin Johnson 3.1 ppg

The 2 guys that had the most ppg average since the mid 90s as freshmen are JR Raymond and Drew Lavender. Lavender went on to have success at Xavier, Raymond dropped off the face of the planet after 2 good years at OU.

These are all the best guards that came to OU as freshman since the mid 90s. Freshmen that come in and really give you points as freshman is few and far between. But 6 or 7 points a game would help a lot especially if we get a couple 3s out of two of them.
 
You guys are silly and lying to yourself if your saying you dont care about highschool rankings.

The first thing people say when we landed a "cameron clark"....is that the kid is a top 50 recruit.

the only time people say they dont care about rankings is when a kid is either not ranked or ranked pretty low.

the fact is rankings IS a good gauge of a kids athletic ability and talent. Now whether that transelates to the college level is a completely different scenario. But I will take a highly talented, highly ranked, kid all day and just hope that kruger or whomever the coach is can bring the best out of him and make him fit our system
 
The fact is rankings DO matter. They bring in excitement and energy. The average fan either doesnt follow recruiting like we do or doesnt have the time to. But when they here a "top 50 recruit" is coming they get excited.

It doesnt always translate into wins and losses but I will take highly recruited kids all day long.
 
Back
Top