What metrics do you use to support this conclusion? I loved Hollis Price but he doesn't do much better than Buddy and Buddy does a lot better than Hollis. Buddy averages 2 more (or 66%) more rebounds per game. Buddy is shooting at a higher percentage and shooting 3 pointers at .53 compared to .43 That is 25% better. Buddy has averaged more points each year of his career and is a full 7 points a game ahead of Hollis' senior year.
Hollis occasionally went off shooting to keep OU in games or take over games but Buddy has an ability to score in spurts that I personally think exceeds virtually any former Sooner that I can recall (I didn't see Wayman play much if at all).
I really liked Hollis Price and without a doubt he was a special player but Buddy is special among All Conference type players in my opinion.
It's funny you used the word "metric", and then named a bunch of non-metric stats. Keep in mind, especially this year, Buddy's OU team is playing at a much faster pace than Hollis' OU team. That means more points scored, more opportunities for rebounds/steals/assists, etc.
I actually had a long reply to your post above, but decided against posting it b/c I didn't have access to the kind of stats I wanted to use. Ken Pom has an offensive efficiency stat, by player, that I would love to see, but it's on the pay part of the site. I disagree that the Buddy group is better at ball handling or rebounding.
Also, you call Buddy a "special All Conference" player. Price himself was on numerous All-American teams, including 2nd team by the AP. He was third in the Wooden Award voting, which goes to the best college player. I don't say any of that to put Hollis ABOVE Buddy, as Buddy will likely have similar awards. But let's not forget just how special Hollis was. He and Ace were easily 2 of the top 5-7 players in the country the last couple of months of the season in 2002. Easily.
I also like White better than Woodard, and I was a big Ere fan. Too bad Ere was frequently injured during him time at OU.
In short, I think if you could balance out the stats to account for pace and competition, and find some good, well put together metrics, they'd certainly give WAY more credit to Hollis' bunch than you do. I will say this though.....Buddy and Woodard are currently on pace to produce the two best three point shooting percentage seasons in OU history. IF they don't fall off, that stat alone may benefit that group in any comparison. Hard to imagine they will keep up that pace though.
I also think Hollis' group defended better, but again, without a metric that evens out pace of play, that's a tough comparison to make.