Will eat crow on CAM

[61sooner]

I was all over this kid, thought he wasn't going anywhere at OU but lately he has come alive and good for him and OU. I hope this is sign of good things to ahead for him.

 

[bgrch1350]

Thats b/c your too quick too judge. He's only a sophmore. I'm sure if he has a couple of more bad games you will be right back where you were.

 

[DenverSooner]

Both Neal and Cam have played a little better lately. I think OU has a chance to see noticeable improvement from Grooms, Osby and Arent (because they are effectively playing their first year of D-1 ball) and Clark and Neal (because they are sophomores). If Pledger, Fitzgerald and Blair improve a little and the three new guys contribute, I think OU has a chance to be pretty solid next season.

(I don't expect a lot from Arent but OU doesn't need a lot from Arent. If he can just come in and play a few solid minutes when OU has foul trouble, that will be fine.)

 

[WTSooner]

I'm on the opposite side. I'm not going to get a couple of good shooting games say that he has turned the corner. This has been a nightmare season for him on the offensive end. Even if he finishes strong, he'll still have played poorly much more often then he will have played well. I will wait, and see what he does next year.

 

[seniorsooner]

I just think people are expecting him to be something he's not. He's not an all-conference player. By the time he's done here I expect he'll be a 12-13 point, 6-7 rebound per game type.

 

[Max Power]

I just think people are expecting him to be something he's not. He's not an all-conference player. By the time he's done here I expect he'll be a 12-13 point, 6-7 rebound per game type.

Well since he was a 4 star, top 35 recruit, I think he should have been expected to be an all-conference player.

 

[WTSooner]

I just think people are expecting him to be something he's not. He's not an all-conference player. By the time he's done here I expect he'll be a 12-13 point, 6-7 rebound per game type.

I agree, and I said that before the ink dried on his LOI. Kid was really raw in the basketball skills department.

That said.....he has to do better, shooting percentage-wise, then he has done this year. His FG% is down nearly 6% from last season, and his 3FG% is down about 9%. It's not his ppg that hurts us, it's what it takes him to get those points. He is also pretty bad from the FT line for a starting guard. Ideally he'd be best coming off the bench. He could come in and provide energy, length, and defense. I'm just not sure we have the horses to send him to the bench next year.

 

[bgrch1350]

Well since he was a 4 star, top 35 recruit, I think he should have been expected to be an all-conference player.

He should...just not as a freshman or a sophmore. Expecting him to be all-conference already is wishful thinking and not realistic expectations. He's not that bad of a player as a sophmore. I expect him to be even better next year and the main guy on this team the year after.

 

[garyeb2]

He should...just not as a freshman or a sophmore. Expecting him to be all-conference already is wishful thinking and not realistic expectations. He's not that bad of a player as a sophmore. I expect him to be even better next year and the main guy on this team the year after.

By the time Cam is a senior, Kruger will have a half dozen players on the roster that are better.

 

[lk2183]

He should...just not as a freshman or a sophmore. Expecting him to be all-conference already is wishful thinking and not realistic expectations. He's not that bad of a player as a sophmore. I expect him to be even better next year and the main guy on this team the year after.

I Agree.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. We, and other fans in general, have unrealistic expectations most of the time when it comes to these kids. Sure, it would be great for kids to come in right away and dominate, but that is rarely the case. Clark is a sophomore with a lot of athleticism and some basketball skills. It seems to me that his ranking was based on his potential, not the state of his game at the time. Who knows, he may never reach the potential that some of those services anticipated or some of the fans want, but that doesn't mean he's a complete failure.

And gary2b2, while I hope that is the case, I highly doubt that will be even remotely close to true. I don't mean this as an attack by any means because I'm all for people expressing their opinions, but the more I read of yours the more ridiculous they seem. At the start of the season you firmly believed Arent would be an immediate starter and couldn't be told otherwise. That obviously didn't play out how you thought and I doubt the prediction on Cam will either.

 

[garyeb2]

I Agree.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. We, and other fans in general, have unrealistic expectations most of the time when it comes to these kids. Sure, it would be great for kids to come in right away and dominate, but that is rarely the case. Clark is a sophomore with a lot of athleticism and some basketball skills. It seems to me that his ranking was based on his potential, not the state of his game at the time. Who knows, he may never reach the potential that some of those services anticipated or some of the fans want, but that doesn't mean he's a complete failure.

And gary2b2, while I hope that is the case, I highly doubt that will be even remotely close to true. I don't mean this as an attack by any means because I'm all for people expressing their opinions, but the more I read of yours the more ridiculous they seem. At the start of the season you firmly believed Arent would be an immediate starter and couldn't be told otherwise. That obviously didn't play out how you thought and I doubt the prediction on Cam will either.

Well, I also said that Grooms would start. Neither of those predictions were based on anything that had to do with how good either of those guys actually were. I didn't know, I hadn't seen either of them play.

But, I had seen Blair play. And I had seen Fitz play. And I have seen Cam play. Teams simply can not put players of that caliber on the floor and win in the Big 12. Assuming that anyone Kruger brings in will be better than Capel's leftovers easily puts me on the right side of probability.

So, what is the worst that would have happened if Arent had started over Fitz? The team would have been so bad they we would have only won 3 conference games. Either players are good enough to make the team competitive in the Big 12 or they aren't. There isn't a nickles worth of diffence between those two. Because, niether of them are good enough.

How much evidence do you need? Isn't 3 years enough? Kruger doesn't have anything. The cupboard is bare. These guys cann't play. Kruger needs new guys. The fact that people want to contunue to argue differently in the face of all the existing evidence is what I find ridiculous.

Yea, I know, I like to try to build a case that Osby is probably good enough to play. And others think Pledger is good enough. But, the reality is, if anyone is right about those two, it is just barely right.

 

[DenverSooner]

Well, I also said that Grooms would start. Neither of those predictions were based on anything that had to do with how good either of those guys actually were. I didn't know, I hadn't seen either of them play.

But, I had seen Blair play. And I had seen Fitz play. And I have seen Cam play. Teams simply can not put players of that caliber on the floor and win in the Big 12. Assuming that anyone Kruger brings in will be better than Capel's leftovers easily puts me on the right side of probability.

So, what is the worst that would have happened if Arent had started over Fitz? The team would have been so bad they we would have only won 3 conference games. Either players are good enough to make the team competitive in the Big 12 or they aren't. There isn't a nickles worth of diffence between those two. Because, niether of them are good enough.

How much evidence do you need? Isn't 3 years enough? Kruger doesn't have anything. The cupboard is bare. These guys cann't play. Kruger needs new guys. The fact that people want to contunue to argue differently in the face of all the existing evidence is what I find ridiculous.

Yea, I know, I like to try to build a case that Osby is probably good enough to play. And others think Pledger is good enough. But, the reality is, if anyone is right about those two, it is just barely right.

There is nothing wrong with Grooms, Clark, Pledger, Fitzgerald or Osby. All of them belong playing major minutes in the Big XII. The problem is putting them all together on one team without a star player. If you add one star player to OU's team like McCruder, Chistopherson, Royce White or thomas Robertson OU would have a really good team. Even adding a guy like Quincy Acey would make a big difference

 

[schoonerdriver]

Cam is a more athletic Crocker. Solid 4 year player.

 

[TheGimper]

I had seen Fitz play. Teams simply can not put players of that caliber on the floor and win in the Big 12. A
So, what is the worst that would have happened if Arent had started over Fitz? There isn't a nickles worth of diffence between those two. Because, niether of them are good enough.

So wait, you're telling me that if Arent played for OU last season he would have earned All Big 12 honorable mention by the end of the season as a sophomore? How did that kid not land a major D1 scholarship? How is he playing behind C.J. Washington? You must be seeing something no one else that has watched either one of them play has seen.

 

[garyeb2]

There is nothing wrong with Grooms, Clark, Pledger, Fitzgerald or Osby. All of them belong playing major minutes in the Big XII. The problem is putting them all together on one team without a star player. If you add one star player to OU's team like McCruder, Chistopherson, Royce White or thomas Robertson OU would have a really good team. Even adding a guy like Quincy Acey would make a big difference

Yea, it is that. Or another 3 pt. shooter. Or a point guard that can score. Or a stronger bench. Or some other excuse. Well, mayby. But, what is wrong with the obvious conclusion? Most of the other teams in the conference just have better players. Afterall, most of the games have been played and the results are just about in. 4 and 12.

If we look up and see the same 5 starters next season, the result will be the same. A second division finish and another missed tourney year. Any improvement will come from new faces in the lineup. If M'baye starts, we will be better. If Kruger locks down the JC big from New Mexico and he comes in and starts, we will be better. If one or both of the incoming guards are good enough to start, we will be better. If all that happens, we will be alot better.

Any case that members of a 4 win team are good enough is built on pretty flimsy evidence. The program wouldn't be much worse off if Kruger had pulled a Billy G. and ran them all off and started from scratch. I'm glad he didn't do that. But, we did lose to them.

 

[garyeb2]

So wait, you're telling me that if Arent played for OU last season he would have earned All Big 12 honorable mention by the end of the season as a sophomore? How did that kid not land a major D1 scholarship? How is he playing behind C.J. Washington? You must be seeing something no one else that has watched either one of them play has seen.

What was OU's record last year? What was OU's conference record. Pretty bad, huh. If Arent was here last year and started in front of Fitz, how much worse would it have been. It couldn't have been much, if any.

My point is, even though Fitz is a better indivual player than Arent. Fitz still isn't good enough to win in the Big 12. Last years team was just terrible and Fitz was part of that. It doesn't make any difference which one you have. You will get beat and get beat badly.

 

[TheGimper]

What was OU's record last year? What was OU's conference record. Pretty bad, huh. If Arent was here last year and started in front of Fitz, how much worse would it have been. It couldn't have been much, if any.

My point is, even though Fitz is a better indivual player than Arent. Fitz still isn't good enough to win in the Big 12. Last years team was just terrible and Fitz was part of that. It doesn't make any difference which one you have. You will get beat and get beat badly.

Wasn't Fitz or 1st or 2nd leading scorer last season? So, I would say last year's team would have been a lot worse if he had limited minutes off the bench. A lot, lot worse. Also, Fitz is the primary reason why we have won several games (most notably the K-State game at home this season). Without him we would have lost a lot more games. Without Arent I don't see a big impact in our W-L differential.

I've seen a lot of ignorant opinions. But saying Arent & Fitz are practically interchangeable and would have minimal impact on this team is close to taking the cake.

 

[Soonerman]

Yea, I know, I like to try to build a case that Osby is probably good enough to play. And others think Pledger is good enough. But, the reality is, if anyone is right about those two, it is just barely right.

The rest of your post sucked as well, but this paragraph was certainly the highlight. Were you dropped on your head as a child?

Both Osby and Pledger start on the majority of the teams in the Big 12. They are good college players (sometimes they're great) who are probably going to be even better next year. The fact that you still can't give Pledger credit when he's putting up 17+ a game and shooting over 40% from behind the 3 is remarkable.

 

[garyeb2]

Wasn't Fitz or 1st or 2nd leading scorer last season? So, I would say last year's team would have been a lot worse if he had limited minutes off the bench. A lot, lot worse. Also, Fitz is the primary reason why we have won several games (most notably the K-State game at home this season). Without him we would have lost a lot more games. Without Arent I don't see a big impact in our W-L differential.

I've seen a lot of ignorant opinions. But saying Arent & Fitz are practically interchangeable and would have minimal impact on this team is close to taking the cake.

Let me help you with the math. This years team has won to this point a total of 4 conference games. I know, that is just terrible. But, 4 is all that it is. Now, if Arent had been the starter, the very worst possible outcome would be zero wins. Even with Arent in the lineup, we would have probably won one or two games.

So, what difference does it make if we win one or two conference games or four games. Both results are very bad. From the perspective of whether or not the team had a good season or bad season, Arent and Fitz are interchangeable.

 

[Soonerman]

Let me help you with the math. This years team has won to this point a total of 4 conference games. I know, that is just terrible. But, 4 is all that it is. Now, if Arent had been the starter, the very worst possible outcome would be zero wins. Even with Arent in the lineup, we would have probably won one or two games.

So, what difference does it make if we win one or two conference games or four games. Both results are very bad. From the perspective of whether or not the team had a good season or bad season, Arent and Fitz are interchangeable.

This logic.....so terrible....must turn away.....why....makes no sense....off his rocker....