Looking Forward

[Eielson]

Last night I vented quite a bit about Kruger. I've said plenty on that subject, so I'm not planning to use this thread to vent any further. He's not THE guy I want on my sideline for a crucial game, but if we get a good enough team, I don't expect him to sabotage it. He's certainly no Travis Ford. With that said, I think this team could be talented enough over the next two years that we could end Kansas' streak, and give Kruger his first outright regular season conference championship.

Last year we said good bye to our best player post-Blake Griffin era (Osby), our best shooter (Pledger), our starting point guard (Grooms), and eventually even M'Baye. Those were some brutal losses, and with no potential players to replace Osby, I thought this team had absolutely no shot at the NCAA Tournament. I thought NIT might even be a stretch. I'd felt that it was Osby vs SDSU in the NCAA Tournament, and M'Baye was the only person I thought had potential to in anyway comparably replace him. While we could have certainly used Osby (perhaps beaten KU and won conference?), I was wrong about just about everything else.

With those key losses in mind, losing Clark and Neal seems petty. Don't get me wrong, I loved Cam Clark. I think his mismatch ability at the 4 spot created a lot of our success, and while he had a disturbing tendency to disappear, he showed up on the biggest stages (32 against KU and MSU, and a big performance late against NDSU). He's no Osby, though, and I think he's replaceable. Neal developed into a serviceable player this year, but of our six losses between this year and last, he's easily the most replaceable. I wish him the best, and thank him for his time with the program, but I'm not concerned about losing him.

What Clark did for us, was put a Band-Aid on our lack of size. This year's team would have really struggled without him, but with the additions of Buford, Lattin, and McNeace, we should be able to completely remove the Band-Aid. Size is no longer an issue, as all three of them are big and athletic (we might also be able to add a 4th athletic front court player in Cunningham). I expect Buford to step into Clark's role next year. He's our most highly rated recruit, and while he has plenty of things to work on, he appears our most college-ready player, and he's the only one I expect to start from day 1. I watched some highlights films of his, and I saw countless dunks. One in particular that stuck out to me was an offensive rebound that he semi-windmill dunked. He's not going to get confused with Vince Carter, but it took enough athleticism that I don't think many of our recent players could have done it other than Blake. His jump shot needs work, but apparently it is quickly developing, and he's supposedly become semi-reliable knocking down 3's as a trailer. If he can get them to respect his jump shot, he's going to be dangerous on offense, as he has a very quick first step and can get to the basket (and finish). I don't think he'll replace Cam's offensive presence as a freshman, but I'm very excited about his defense. One ESPN analyst claimed he was as good as any PF in the country at blocking shots. We sure could have used that this year, and I bet Kruger can't wait to get this kid on campus.

As much as I think Buford will help, I think Lattin could be the real gem of this class. He is very raw, but his potential is through the roof. He's tall, athletic, runs the court really well, and has great shot blocking ability. Most of his early offense will come from transition dunks and offensive rebounds, but that's alright for now, because his defensive game is more developed. Given time, he could become quite a weapon on both ends of the floor, but we'll have to be patient with him. An ESPN analyst claimed he could develop into a player that is mentioned with Blake Griffin, Harvey Grant, and Waymon Tisdale. I wouldn't go that far, but while he isn't the best center right now, he's got as much potential as just about anybody.

I don't know much about McNeace, but I hear he's another big, athletic body. I suspect he'll take some time to develop, and won't contribute immediately.

There are a few issues that this group has, but I think we can work several of them out. One of the things I wanted was a shot blocker, and appears that's exactly what we have coming in with this recruiting class. I also think that we have a lot of good players, but not much superstar potential. The guy I would really like to see develop into that superstar is Jordan Woodard. He really didn't have a great season, but he showed the potential, and most of his mistakes can be corrected with time. I was very impressed with a particular sequence last night. He drove to the basket and drew all 5 defenders into the lane. He recognized this and found a wide open Booker for three. A little later, he penetrated again, but this time the defenders stayed with their men. He recognized this and went in for the lay up. If he can do that more often, and become a consistent threat from 3, he could be incredibly dangerous. I love the way he can get to the line, and I think he could be the leader of this team. His defense needs work, but I think we'll see improvement each year as he gets coached up.

Similarly, I think we have a lot of good three point shooters, but no great three point shooters. I would really like a Mike Neal kind of player for this team (or just about any team for that matter). I think Booker is going to be that guy for us moving forward. He and Kruger seemed to have embraced that role for him, so I expect him to be working on his 3 all off-season. If he can consistently shoot 40-50% for us off the bench, he's going to be a deadly weapon.

I'd also like to see an elite wing defender develop. I haven't paid as much attention to our individual defense, so I'm not sure where all our guards are at right now. It would be awesome if Cousins was that guy, though.

I think our starting lineup is going to look something like this next year:

Spangler
Buford
Cousins
Hield
Woodard

Booker and Hornbeak should get considerable minutes off the bench at guard. Bennett will get minutes early, but I expect him to get less and less as Lattin develops. If we added Cunningham, I think we could afford to give Buford more minutes at the 3. I think this looks will look like a Sweet 16 team next year. This year's team could have made a Sweet 16, but we would have had to overachieve to do it. I don't think that will be the case with this team.

What really gets me excited is the following year, though. Our guys will have one more year to develop, and we might even be able to bring in Allonzo Trier. He has Oklahoma ties, apparently likes what he sees from Kruger, and twitter suggests he's got a good relationship with Woodard. I don't think he's quite a 1 and done player, but he's close. I don't usually like those kind of guys, but given the timing, he could give us that extra boost we need. Our lineup could look something like:

Lattin
Buford
Hield
Trier
Woodard

Trier is technically a PG, but he's so talented that I think we'll find a way for he and Woodard to coexist. We would also have the luxury of bringing experienced guys like Cousins, Booker (3 pt specialist), Spangler (great offensive rebounder). We'd have size, athleticism, shooting, and a couple of great shot blockers in the post. The only starting line up since Hollis that could rival that involved Blake Griffin, and I think the bench could push this team past that one. There are a lot of "if's," as Lattin may not develop, Buford hasn't stepped on campus, somebody may transfer, and Trier may go elsewhere, but it's all reasonable, and this team would have definite Final Four potential (dare I say more?). All of those things wouldn't even have to come together to make a run at a conference title.

I went into more depth, and stated things more eloquently the first time around, but when I submitted the post, it didn't go through. The first two paragraphs were auto-saved, but I lost the rest. This is a slightly condensed version of what I originally had, but hopefully it covers the main points, and I can add in more later.

I'm by no means the expert on this team, so please feel free to add your two cents in. Last night was pretty disheartening, so I wanted to get some of my more positive thoughts about this program out there. I'm hoping this stimulates some intelligent conversation, and that we'll get lots of information, videos, and opinions out there.

[Eielson]

Here were Temujin's thoughts.

Bennett isn't a world-beater, that's for sure. But his size and length allows him to be serviceable on the interior, at least defensively. He had his moments this year on defense, and defense is also a very teachable skill (it's mostly about positioning and how you move your feet). As for Spangler, the guy is definitely more of a workhorse than he is an athlete. Yeah, he's not an outside threat (though earlier this year his 15 foot jumper was pretty good). But I'm 99.999% positive that he's ideal at the 4 with another big man as a complement. You don't just replace a guy like Spangler with someone else. He's too good as a rebounder, particularly on the offensive end. Guys that can consistently pull offensive rebounds are irreplaceable.

Ideally we'll probably start Spangler and whoever steps up at the 5 spot. My guess is that we'll rotate Bennett, McNeace, and occasionally Lattin/Spangler at the 5 spot. At the 4, we'll probably rotate Spangler with Lattin and occasionally someone like Buford. Whatever the scenario, what I do know is that assuming these recruits are as good as their rankings suggest, we'll have enough depth on the interior to do things that we weren't capable of this year...on both sides of the ball.

I'd like to see a rotation like this next year (again, assuming the new guys can step up):

C/F: Bennett/McNeace/Lattin
F: Spangler/Lattin/Buford
G/F: Buford/Cousins/Hield
G: Hield/Booker/Cousins
G: Woodard/Hornbeak

That's starting to look like a decent lineup, IMO. We probably won't be an interior powerhouse like KU, but at least we won't be badly over-matched in most games.

My guess is that next year we'll start pressing the guards a little more and shooting the passing lanes to get cheap steals. You saw some of that this year with guys like Hield and Cousins whenever we were guarding well on the inside. But most of the season our guards had to come down and double team and scrounge for rebounds. I think that's why we allowed open 3-pointers and drives that got deep into the paint. We just spent too much effort on double-teaming and recovery.

Anyway, that's just my opinion, for what it's worth. I guess I look at it a little more positively based on the fact that so far Kruger has taken guys that were 2/3-star players and for much of the season had them playing well above what everyone thought they were capable of. That and the vast improvement we saw from guys like Neal, Clark, Hield, and Cousins...and now we have some guys coming in that potentially have even more talent...so it makes me wonder what Kruger will do with it. I find it encouraging, that's all.

[Eielson]

I saw a better angle on a different video, but I can't remember which one, and I'm not feeling like digging through them at the moment. The #1 play (last one shown) here was Buford's windmill.

[SoonerInFortSmith]

The biggest problem I saw yesterday was difficulty rebounding against big men. Hopefully the new recruits will shore that up.

I think Hield could develop into a shut down defender in the next couple years.

[Temujin]

I've only seen highlights of Lattin and Buford. To me Lattin has the height to fit at center but doesn't seem aggressive enough. He's awfully thin. But he does have a slick midrange game. Buford looked like a more athletic version of Cam Clark.

As for a wing defender, I agree about Cousins, and Buford looks capable there too if we're needing more size in the lineup.

The player I came away encouraged about that I didn't expect was Cousins. He's got long arms and his defense is really improving. He's just got to be a better decision maker.

[Temujin]

Oh, and we played 9 guys pretty regularly this year, and 7 return. So depth seems like it might be a strength. We'll see.

[Eielson]

The biggest problem I saw yesterday was difficulty rebounding against big men. Hopefully the new recruits will shore that up.

All three of them rebound and block shots. It seems Kruger shared our concern before the season ever started.

I think Hield could develop into a shut down defender in the next couple years.

I think he has as good a chance as anybody to develop into a great defender. The reason I said I hoped Cousins became our shut down defender is because I think we'll be relying on Buddy to get us points. It takes a lot of energy to be one of the main scorers and then have to guard the opponents best scorer. I'd like to slide Buddy off to somebody that doesn't wear him out as much, and let somebody like Cousins who isn't relied on as much on offense take on their top scorer.

[Eielson]

To me Lattin has the height to fit at center but doesn't seem aggressive enough. He's awfully thin.

I didn't see enough to know for sure, but I saw some aggressiveness. He needs to put on weight so he doesn't get pushed around, but I think he can alter shots at the rim in help defense from day 1. He's definitely going to take some time to fully develop, though.

Buford looked like a more athletic version of Cam Clark.

That's kinda what I thought, but I didn't want to come right out and say it until I saw more. Cam's jumper was better, though, and I think Buford is going to be more agressive.

Oh, and we played 9 guys pretty regularly this year, and 7 return. So depth seems like it might be a strength. We'll see.

Absolutely, and I feel like just about everybody has or will develop an important skill. We'll have guys that are elite at penetrating, shooting outside, scoring inside, defending the perimeter, protecting the rim, grabbing offensive rebounds, and handling the ball. We'll be able to give so many different looks, and we won't have to rely on one thing offensively (or defensively).

[8timechamps]

Good stuff guys. I've not been on the board since the loss, partially because I wanted to take some time to reflect on the season before I gave my post season analysis. I realize this is more about looking forward, and I will, but I'll also make some comments about this season and how it ended.

First, about this season...

I was really disappointed with the way this team finished. I was disappointed with the way Lon coached both in the conference tourney and the NCAA tourney. However, I can't really say I don't want Lon. First, I never judge a coach until he has four years under his belt, and next year will be the litmus test for Coach Kruger. It's important to remember how far the program had fallen so quickly, and he has done some really exceptional work to this point. He's also been an excellent recruiter (and lets face it, OU is never going to get the Andrew Wiggins' of the world unless they live close and are lifelong fans, but I digress). Where I think he's fallen short is closing out the season, and even that has improved. I could list a bunch of reasons why I am "okay" with the OT loss to NDSU (from being under-seeded, to playing better than last year), but ultimately, I am okay with the way the season turned out. Not happy, but okay. So, with all of that said, if we can't get to the Sweet 16 next year, and there is no discernible improvement, I'll probably be ready to move on to a new coach.

We were really young in the front court this year. Even though Hield played like an upper-classman, he wasn't. Woodard got better with each game, but again, only a freshman. Hornbeak continues to be a solid off-the-bench kid, but will also continue to get better. Spangler played lights-out the vast majority of the year, but he's being asked to do things that he physically just can't do. Anyway, all-in-all, we played better-than-expected this year, and I'm happy about that.

The last thing I'll touch on is the loss to NDSU, and I won't spend a lot of time on it. We had the game won, and even though we struggled on defense most of the game, we were in position (more than once) to win the game. I put a lot of it on Coach Kruger, but there was also enough to go around to some of the players. I love Isiah Cousins, and I've seen glimpses of an NBA caliber player, but I've seen many more glimpses of mental mistakes. If this team is to get to the next level, we're going to need players that we can depend on in big games. Woodard is that kind of player, and Hield is that kind of player, we need Cousins to get to that level. Anyway, I think we all agree that we could have and should have won, but we didn't, so no reason to dwell on that anymore than I have.

Now, on to next year...

I've mentioned it before, but it's worth mentioning again (because it's on-topic). On selection Sunday, Clark Kellogg said (paraphrasing) "OU is a year early to the part, nobody expected them to be here until next year". By "here", I think Kellogg meant 'among the top 25 type teams'. I think he was right. We bring back the core of the team, and I agree with what Eilson said above, while Clark was a good player for us this year, he's replaceable. We'll bring back our parameter shooting threat almost entirely. And finally, we'll get some size that we greatly need.

Of the new guys coming in next year, Buford is the guy we need the most. That's nothing to say about him that hasn't already been said, so all I'll add is that he will be a difference maker for us next year. No so much him individually, just his addition to this team.

In the end, I hate the feeling this season left...A successful regular season (more than most thought), followed by a very disappointing post-season. However, there are positives to look forward to on the horizon, and with Wiggins leaving and OSU looking to be down, the conference could be open for the Sooners next year. We're a football school anyway

[birddog]

Im thinkin that when you guys single out Lon you're talking about his staff as he's ultimately responsible for the assistants that develop the players, and recruit. Lon has been praised as a coach and what he does with a program but the guys underneath him spend more time with the players, correct or no? We obviously get the best players we can and I just don't think we can get the type of freakish players that can take over a game, with the rare exceptions we all know about.

We didn't make shots thurs. Our team relies on outside shooting. We had NO muscle down low and we all knew it. This season was just a bunch of young guards gettin experience, we just happened to stumble our way to a second place finish behind the most storied program in basketball. I'm good with Lon stickin around for a few more years. Lets see how this next class or two blends in with the guys that gave us alot to be proud of for the first time in awhile.

[hawaii 5-0]

Just a coupla things.

I was happy to see Lon go deeper into his bench than previous coaches. Ya just can't go wrong with some quality PT.

I was also happy there were no injuries this year that kept good players sidelined. I hope that continues but ya can't count on not having injured players.

I love to see OU has several penetrating players, ones that can take it to the basket.

I'd love to see Spangler get some help inside next season.

Overall I was pleased with this season's performance despite the losses in both of the season's ending tourneys.

5-0

[SoonerorLater]

I pretty much agree with everything that's been said. I think maybe I tend to like Kruger more than most here. Let's face it, when he was hired he was brought in to clean up and rebuild a program. In this respect he has done a good job. It's a difficult line to walk between recruiting top talent and running a clean program, especially at a non-traditional powerhouse program. We've been down that road with Capel who sort of ignored character issues to go after high profile recruits. I can't put that era far enough in the rear view mirror.

I think Kruger given that backdrop has been a very good coach. Really a perfect guy for the job. Between cleaning up the mess left by his predecessors and going after good character type guys he has left some holes in the roster. I think that will begin to clear up next year even if only one of either Lattin and Buford develop into a serious minutes type player. If both come through then I think it will be a complete game changer for OU. It frees up a lot of options for Kruger.

We were never able to truly overcome our lack of size inside. IMO in order to be successful running what amounted to a 4 guard offense a lot of times, you need to be a prolific side to side, baseline to baseline team that forces lots of turnovers. We didn't do that. You need tough on the ball defenders forcing pressure on the opposing guards. That certainly wasn't us. We don't have any guys that I would describe as great on the ball defenders. Really we don't have guys that I would say are good at this point. If I were pressed, I would say game in, game out Cousins and Hornbeak are the best we have. A lot of that was scheme as we just couldn't get any type of favorable matchups employing man to man defense. Thus what we saw this year kind of a hodge podge defensive philosophy with some 1-3-1, matchup zone and what kind of looked to me like a poor man's 2-3 zone. Basically anything to keep Spangler from getting drawn too far out. Another big man inside will change that but we definitely will need greater defensive results from our guards.

The first round exit was disappointing but not altogether unexpected. A veteran NDSU team did a pretty good job against us especially inside the 3 point line where we were only 13 of 42. Contrasting that NDSU was 21-37 inside the 3 point area. In essence NDSU just out shot us because their defense was really good and was able to exploit our weakness inside. Even at that we had a chance to win the game at the end. Really just a little better defensive effort, just hold them to under 50% from the field and we move on.

I'm pretty optimistic about next year with the addition of some size inside. Just my $.02

[Eielson]

I wouldn't go as far as to say I want Kruger removed. I'm happy with what he's done, and this season exceeded my expectations. I'm just not optimistic about Kruger's coaching in crucial games/situations. We really needed somebody who could keep their hands clean and restore our program to respectability. I just think in three or four years, if we want to take the next step, we'll need to move on. I'd certainly much rather have a guy like Pitino or Coach K, but those guys aren't realistic. Getting Calhoun or Howland would be pretty sweet, but we probably couldn't even have grabbed one of them when Capel was leaving.

[8timechamps]

I wouldn't go as far as to say I want Kruger removed. I'm happy with what he's done, and this season exceeded my expectations. I'm just not optimistic about Kruger's coaching in crucial games/situations. We really needed somebody who could keep their hands clean and restore our program to respectability. I just think in three or four years, if we want to take the next step, we'll need to move on. I'd certainly much rather have a guy like Pitino or Coach K, but those guys aren't realistic. Getting Calhoun or Howland would be pretty sweet, but we probably couldn't even have grabbed one of them when Capel was leaving.

Yep, that's where I am too. I really admire Kruger, and there's no question he's done a very good job. He's an extremely knowledgeable coach, no doubt. However, sometimes I think he out-thinks himself. As a person, he's someone I really look up to, and a great person to lead young men. I'm just not overly-optimistic that he can take the program to the elite status.

Like I said in my long-winded post above, next year is the litmus test for Kruger. We'll see.