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

[garyeb2]

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

High School rankings don't make any difference to me, and I'm not lying to myself about it. What I think is silly is that people attatch somekind of meaning to them and think the ranking is a predicter of what a kid can or can not do or accopmplish in college. And you can type as many words in caps as you want, it doesn't make it true.

As recently as a week ago I heard Pat Jones say that Mel Kiper or anyone else that ranks prospects don't have a clue what they are talking about. He was a pretty good coach and he didn't pay any attention to someone's elses rankings at any level he coached. The recruit ranking services say that Texas out recruits Oklahoma in football every year. How's that worked out?

Every year there will be a small handfull of elite prospects. Durant,Beasley, Blake, those kind of guys. They will be highly ranked and will likely work out OK. But, that doesn't validate ranking services. Everyone can find and identify those players.

The next group , alittle larger, are they players that are good enough to do the things a coach wants them to do. And the third group, much larger, are the one not likely able to do things the coach needs them to do. And even within those three broad ranges it would be easy to mis-classify a kid. But, even if it were possible to accurately assign kids to one of those three large groups. It would be the height of folly to to try to rank them within that group. There are just too many variables.

To say a 48 is a better college prospect than 65 is just, well, it cann't be done. If an experienced college coach like Kruger recruits and signs a kid that is unranked or poorly ranked. I would think that the error lies with the ranking service, not the coach.

 

[AdaSooner]

Every year there will be a small handfull of elite prospects. Durant,Beasley, Blake, those kind of guys. They will be highly ranked and will likely work out OK. But, that doesn't validate ranking services. Everyone can find and identify those players.

The next group , alittle larger, are they players that are good enough to do the things a coach wants them to do. And the third group, much larger, are the one not likely able to do things the coach needs them to do. And even within those three broad ranges it would be easy to mis-classify a kid. But, even if it were possible to accurately assign kids to one of those three large groups. It would be the height of folly to to try to rank them within that group. There are just too many variables.

To say a 48 is a better college prospect than 65 is just, well, it cann't be done. If an experienced college coach like Kruger recruits and signs a kid that is unranked or poorly ranked. I would think that the error lies with the ranking service, not the coach.

Exactly! I have said more than once over the years that the odds of a top twenty-five or so ranked player contributing in a meaningful way in college is usually pretty good. The rest are subjective at best.

I have followed recruiting online and in magazines for years. I've found that one recruiting service's top 40 to 60 player may barely scratch the top 100 with another service, which makes guaging a kid's worth outside the top 25 to 30 a crap shoot. Who is to say that #60 on one service's rankings is as good or better than the #92 ranked player on another service's list? Recruits ranked well outside the top 100 show up in the NCAA tourney every year, leaving us scratching our heads and saying, "where the heck did that kid come from?"

I said the odds of a top 25 to 30 recruit contributing at a high level in college are in a school's favor. But even the Mickey D, Jordan Classic, etc. recruits can't always be counted on. Tiny and TMG are good examples.

Sure, it's fun to talk about recruiting rankings on fan boards. I enjoy the discussions as much as anyone. But I take those rankings with a grain of salt, because I know they're not a reliable source in predicting how any high school kid will perform at the next level.

 

[bgrch1350]

Sure, it's fun to talk about recruiting rankings on fan boards. I enjoy the discussions as much as anyone. But I take those rankings with a grain of salt, because I know they're not a reliable source in predicting how any high school kid will perform at the next level.

The rankings may not be a true indicator on how they will perform at the next level but it is a true indicator on how well they are performing on the AAU circuit. The rankings might not benefit the kid who dominates their high school division but doesn't perform as well as others on the AAU circuit.

If you don't believe in any sites rankings thats fine...but I bet if you take time and go to, lets say Scouts Rankings, and pick a previous recruiting year and just do some research and see how those kids turned out, you will find that they hit a lot more then they miss. And you will also see that the schools with the poor recruiting classes hardly ever make it to the tournament.

 

[garyeb2]

The rankings may not be a true indicator on how they will perform at the next level but it is a true indicator on how well they are performing on the AAU circuit. The rankings might not benefit the kid who dominates their high school division but doesn't perform as well as others on the AAU circuit.

If you don't believe in any sites rankings thats fine...but I bet if you take time and go to, lets say Scouts Rankings, and pick a previous recruiting year and just do some research and see how those kids turned out, you will find that they hit a lot more then they miss. And you will also see that the schools with the poor recruiting classes hardly ever make it to the tournament.

Well, when you refer to Heild and Hornbeak as recruiting failures. How do you know if those two were hits or misses by the ranking service. Once again, I defer to the coaching staff. They watched them, evaluated them, and signed them.

 

[AdaSooner]

The rankings may not be a true indicator on how they will perform at the next level but it is a true indicator on how well they are performing on the AAU circuit. The rankings might not benefit the kid who dominates their high school division but doesn't perform as well as others on the AAU circuit.

If you don't believe in any sites rankings thats fine...but I bet if you take time and go to, lets say Scouts Rankings, and pick a previous recruiting year and just do some research and see how those kids turned out, you will find that they hit a lot more then they miss. And you will also see that the schools with the poor recruiting classes hardly ever make it to the tournament.

If you will read my post again, you'll see that I admitted to using recruiting web sites and magazines to form an opinion about how kids OU is in on might stack up on a national scale. I'm also smart enough to know that the articles I read and the rankings I analyze are not an exact science. They're a predictor only, a tool to be used and have fun with in forming an opinion.

I have seen too many "can't miss" kids fall flat on their collective faces, or leave school for one reason or another before they reach their full potential. At the same time, there are any number of kids who were not highly recruited coming out of high school, who go on to very productive college careers.

Would I get excited if OU signs a top 50 to 75 recruit in the late signing period, or any year for that matter? You bet I would. I've been guilty of posting woots and dancing Emoticons a number of times over the years.

All I'm saying is that no one on this board can predict how a player will turn out based on the recruiting rankings from any source. I would much rather take the word of our coaches and posters on this board who have actually seen M'Baye, Hornbeak, Hield or any of our recruits play in person or on television, than to trust any web site I have ever been on.

By all means, read the articles and analyze the rankings to your heart's content. Get excited with me if that's what you want to do. But don't use those rankings to predict that a recruit who may be outside the "magical" top 100 list, will not turn out to be just as good or better than a player who made those lists. It happens every year, and a lot more often than you might think.

 

[DenverSooner]

I will flatly assure everyone that Hield and Hornbeak will make OU a better team next year. They have to because right now OU doesn't have anyone. If nothing else they will push Blair and make him work harder for his minutes.

 

[bgrch1350]

Well, when you refer to Heild and Hornbeak as recruiting failures. How do you know if those two were hits or misses by the ranking service. Once again, I defer to the coaching staff. They watched them, evaluated them, and signed them.

I'm not calling them failures...what I am saying is while we are bringing Dodge's and Chevy's...which may just be what the doctor ordered..but our competition is bringing in Ferrari's and Lamborghini's.

and I'm not saying I don't want Hield, Henry, and Hornbeak..but I am saying that if we don't start bringing in some instant contributors to go with these guys were not going to be tournament contenders every year.

And Kruger may be a great coach...but this league is field with good to great coach's.

 

[seniorsooner]

Ask yourself this: from a recruiting standpoint did Kelvin win here with "Ferrari's and Lamborghini's"?

 

[WTSooner]

Ask yourself this: from a recruiting standpoint did Kelvin win here with "Ferrari's and Lamborghini's"?

Pintos.

What do I win?

 

[bgrch1350]

Ask yourself this: from a recruiting standpoint did Kelvin win here with "Ferrari's and Lamborghini's"?

Ferrari's and Lamborghini's were heading straight to the NBA and now they are coming to college and some are even staying more than a year. And right now KU, Baylor, Texas, and OSU all have them on their roster and coming in next year as well.

 

[garyeb2]

I'm not calling them failures...what I am saying is while we are bringing Dodge's and Chevy's...which may just be what the doctor ordered..but our competition is bringing in Ferrari's and Lamborghini's.

and I'm not saying I don't want Hield, Henry, and Hornbeak..but I am saying that if we don't start bringing in some instant contributors to go with these guys were not going to be tournament contenders every year.

And Kruger may be a great coach...but this league is field with good to great coach's.

This topic has been discussed before. Kruger has no history of bringing in the elite recruit. I would hope that he brought in a program changer every year. But, that just hasn't been his way.

Kruger seems to be the guy that can and will beat your fresh and soph 5 stars with his 3 star juniors and 4/5th year seniors. Make no mistake, Kruger's way imposes a ceiling on the program. The good news is that Kruger's ceiling is alot higher than the current state of OU's program.

The people in Las Vegas appreciated everything he did and he could have stayed as long as he wanted to. But, from what I read, they viewed his departure as an opportunity to move up to the next level. You know, kind of like the people around here felt about Kelvin.

 

[NickZepp]

The people in Las Vegas appreciated everything he did and he could have stayed as long as he wanted to. But, from what I read, they viewed his departure as an opportunity to move up to the next level. You know, kind of like the people around here felt about Kelvin.

And since then we've gone to all sorts of new lows.

 

[bgrch1350]

This topic has been discussed before. Kruger has no history of bringing in the elite recruit. I would hope that he brought in a program changer every year. But, that just hasn't been his way.

Kruger seems to be the guy that can and will beat your fresh and soph 5 stars with his 3 star juniors and 4/5th year seniors. Make no mistake, Kruger's way imposes a ceiling on the program. The good news is that Kruger's ceiling is alot higher than the current state of OU's program.

The reason Ford is not succeeding is b/c he continued playing the same type of basketball that he won up at Umass with. He continues to go with smaller lineups and thinks that he can consistently win with them.

This is the Big 12..not the A-10 and not the MWC. There are solid coach's across the board. NBA talent on every team. If we want to be consistlently good...He's going to have to bring in better recruits than what he has so far.

 

[StatGeek]

The reason Ford is not succeeding is b/c he continued playing the same type of basketball that he won up at Umass with. He continues to go with smaller lineups and thinks that he can consistently win with them.

This is the Big 12..not the A-10 and not the MWC. There are solid coach's across the board. NBA talent on every team. If we want to be consistlently good...He's going to have to bring in better recruits than what he has so far.

Why do you keep posting this garbage? Kruger has coached (and won) in the Big 8, Big Ten, & the SEC.

 

[bgrch1350]

Why do you keep posting this garbage? Kruger has coached (and won) in the Big 8, Big Ten, & the SEC.

Self has won a championship. Barnes has been to a final 4. Bob Huggins is a great coach. BCG has coached at Kentucky...what is your point. That he's been to every conference...Great.

You guys need to realize that this league is solid and is loaded with big name coach's. Bob Knight was a great coach with 3 Natn'l Chmps rings...couldn't get Texas Tech great because he couldn't bring in top recruits.

 

[StatGeek]

Self has won a championship. Barnes has been to a final 4. Bob Huggins is a great coach. BCG has coached at Kentucky...what is your point. That he's been to every conference...Great.

You guys need to realize that this league is solid and is loaded with big name coach's. Bob Knight was a great coach with 3 Natn'l Chmps rings...couldn't get Texas Tech great because he couldn't bring in top recruits.

What is your point? Kruger is every bit as impressive as any coach in the Big 12 sans Bill Self. You're trying to act like Kruger has stepped up to the big leagues with all of your this aint the MWC talk, as if the man hasn't coached in the big leagues before. You're comparing Travis Ford's struggles with Kruger? You are a joke, plain and simple.

 

[bgrch1350]

What is your point? Kruger is every bit as impressive as any coach in the Big 12 sans Bill Self. You're trying to act like Kruger has stepped up to the big leagues with all of your this aint the MWC talk, as if the man hasn't coached in the big leagues before. You're comparing Travis Ford's struggles with Kruger? You are a joke, plain and simple.

What is your point...what is your point...what is your point...you keep saying that.

I agree...He is every bit as impressive as any coach in the big 12. Thats why we finished 3rd to last in the big 12 b/c he didn't bring in any solid recruits and they did. And next year, as of right now, they are bringing in way better recruits than us.

So if he's every bit as good as the rest of the coach's in this league...how is he going to win if he can't bring in better players?

 

[StatGeek]

What is your point...what is your point...what is your point...you keep saying that.

I agree...He is every bit as impressive as any coach in the big 12. Thats why we finished 3rd to last in the big 12 b/c he didn't bring in any solid recruits and they did. And next year, as of right now, they are bringing in way better recruits than us.

So if he's every bit as good as the rest of the coach's in this league...how is he going to win if he can't bring in better players?

I'm curious, how many of the Big 12 recruits have you seen play and how do you rank them?

What separates Cameron Ridley, Robert Upshaw, & Prince Ibeh?

What separates Isaiah Austin, Marcus Smart, Perry Ellis, Ricardo Gathers, Andrew White, Elijah Macon, & Wanaah Bail?

How do J-Mychal Reese, Alex Caruso, Jelon Hornbeak, Jevan Felix, Buddy Hield,& CJ Rose compare to one another?

Please fill me in so I can better understand the depths of our problems and understand the wisdom you are presently bringing to the board.

 

[bgrch1350]

I'm curious, how many of the Big 12 recruits have you seen play and how do you rank them?

What separates Cameron Ridley, Robert Upshaw, & Prince Ibeh?

What separates Isaiah Austin, Marcus Smart, Perry Ellis, Ricardo Gathers, Andrew White, Elijah Macon, & Wanaah Bail?

How do J-Mychal Reese, Alex Caruso, Jelon Hornbeak, Jevan Felix, Buddy Hield,& CJ Rose compare to one another?

Please fill me in so I can better understand the depths of our problems and understand the wisdom you are presently bringing to the board.

Who would start for this team next year?? Isaiah Austin or MBaye?
Smart or Hield?
Reese or Grooms?
Rose or Grooms?

I'm not going to give you a scouting report on every player...They have video and they have rankings by several different sites that get paid to give you this information. Scout, ESPN, Rivals, Hoop Scoop, Hot 100 Hoops...They are all competing against one another to give you the best product....so fill free to look at all of them or none...I don't care. But I do look and I do watch their videos and I do see why players are ranked the way they are.

 

[StatGeek]

Who would start for this team next year?? Isaiah Austin or MBaye?
Smart or Hield?
Reese or Grooms?
Rose or Grooms?

I'm not going to give you a scouting report on every player...They have video and they have rankings by several different sites that get paid to give you this information. Scout, ESPN, Rivals, Hoop Scoop, Hot 100 Hoops...They are all competing against one another to give you the best product....so fill free to look at all of them or none...I don't care. But I do look and I do watch their videos and I do see why players are ranked the way they are.

I honestly don't know the answers to your questions, outside of Grooms I haven't seen any of those guys play a single second of basketball.

Seriously, help me out here, why are Alex Caruso & J-Mychal Reese better players than Jelon Hornbeak & Buddy Hield? And just how much better are they?