Joe Wieskamp No. 25 in ESPN's New Top 60 for '18

[Hawk5656]

Uhl, Baer, Moss, and probably a few others. I'm not pessimistic on them tho. I think I'm more optimistic on CW than anyone else on the team. That doesn't mean I think he will be the best. Just that he will exceed expectations the most.

Which surprises me considering he played 900 less minutes than Mike and here are your thoughts on Mike

He had a great assist to turnover ratio because he rarely tried to make a play happen. If there was a stat to keep track of assist to turnover ratio of when you're actually trying to make a play, he was probably pretty low on the list of Big 10 point guards. Think about the times Gesell did a drive and dish. I literally can't think of one. He rarely if ever drove the lane and dumped it off for an easy layup. Those are the assists that really help a team and areally hard to replace. His assists came in the flow of the offense.

 

[NikeHawk21]

We have to replace a PG who was Honorable Mention All Conference. We have to replace a PG that had a 3 to 1 A/TO ratio and was a really good defender. I think we will be worse at the PG position next year than we were this year which will be eye opening for some people on here

See this is the part I don't understand. This is the second time you've mentioned MG being an honorable mention Big10, and being a solid player for us, however earlier in this thread I believe you made a comment that "there were minutes to be had at PG" this year but CW wasn't good enough to get them. So which is it MG was good or bad?

 

[Hawk5656]

See this is the part I don't understand. This is the second time you've mentioned MG being an honorable mention Big10, and being a solid player for us, however earlier in this thread I believe you made a comment that "there were minutes to be had at PG" this year but CW wasn't good enough to get them. So which is it MG was good or bad?

MG played 30 mpg, Clemmons was not very good. There were minutes to be had for sure for a guard. Even Ellingson got 150 more minutes than CW.

 

[NikeHawk21]

MG played 30 mpg, Clemmons was not very good. There were minutes to be had for sure for a guard. Even Ellingson got 150 more minutes than CW.

For a guard or for a PG? Ellingson doesn't play point so that's another one of your smoke and mirrors posts. I can't find the post, you'll probably edit it, but it said minutes to be had at PG.

MG played 30. Clemmons, who was probably every bit as good as MG played the other 10 when MG was out. Clearly the most minutes to be had were at the 2/3 spots which is where CW earned his as the season wore on, beating out Ellingson in the process. This all seems pretty cut and dry but somewhere your logic has led you astray...

 

[Hawk5656]

For a guard or for a PG? Ellingson doesn't play point so that's another one of your smoke and mirrors posts. I can't find the post, you'll probably edit it, but it said minutes to be had at PG.

MG played 30. Clemmons, who was probably every bit as good as MG played the other 10 when MG was out. Clearly the most minutes to be had were at the 2/3 spots which is where CW earned his as the season wore on, beating out Ellingson in the process. This all seems pretty cut and dry but somewhere your logic has led you astray...

I think MG was better than Clemmons but that's just me. All I'm saying is if CW is better than MG like multiple posters have stated there were minutes to be had at the PG position. MG was good but he wasn't great, if CW is great he would have beat him out

 

[NikeHawk21]

I think MG was better than Clemmons but that's just me. All I'm saying is if CW is better than MG like multiple posters have stated there were minutes to be had at the PG position. MG was good but he wasn't great, if CW is great he would have beat him out

I have no doubt that MG was better than CW when he first stepped onto campus last year. There is this thing we call development. From the sounds of it, and from the small sample size we saw, CW improved mightily as the season wore on. Now that is not to say he was better than MG even at the end of the year, but for all we know he could have been. Now he has the summer to continue to improve his game. I'm willing to bet he's pretty confident after the way he finished last year.

Mike was a nice player, but he had some deficiencies, some around here are excited for CW's potential. You are still ticked off and watching Charlie Moore YouTube video's.

 

[Hawk5656]

I have no doubt that MG was better than CW when he first stepped onto campus last year. There is this thing we call development. From the sounds of it, and from the small sample size we saw, CW improved mightily as the season wore on. Now that is not to say he was better than MG even at the end of the year, but for all we know he could have been. Now he has the summer to continue to improve his game. I'm willing to bet he's pretty confident after the way he finished last year.

Mike was a nice player, but he had some deficiencies, some around here are excited for CW's potential. You are still ticked off and watching Charlie Moore YouTube video's.

He was hardly playing at the end of the year and Mike was playing a lot so I think it's safe to say MG was still better

 

[PCHawk]

I think MG was better than Clemmons but that's just me. All I'm saying is if CW is better than MG like multiple posters have stated there were minutes to be had at the PG position. MG was good but he wasn't great, if CW is great he would have beat him out

I think by the end of last year, CW was close to being as good as MG because CW was getting better and MG played so far beneath his ceiling. There is no way a coach is going to sit the senior for the freshman who is coming on strong. Not when the senior has the potential to turn it on at any time. It just never happened for Mike. After another off season, I'm optimistic that CW will improve even more.

 

[Hawk5656]

I think by the end of last year, CW was close to being as good as MG because CW was getting better and MG played so far beneath his ceiling. There is no way a coach is going to sit the senior for the freshman who is coming on strong. Not when the senior has the potential to turn it on at any time. It just never happened for Mike. After another off season, I'm optimistic that CW will improve even more.

You're crazy man

 

[PCHawk]

I have no doubt that MG was better than CW when he first stepped onto campus last year. There is this thing we call development. From the sounds of it, and from the small sample size we saw, CW improved mightily as the season wore on. Now that is not to say he was better than MG even at the end of the year, but for all we know he could have been. Now he has the summer to continue to improve his game. I'm willing to bet he's pretty confident after the way he finished last year.

Mike was a nice player, but he had some deficiencies, some around here are excited for CW's potential. You are still ticked off and watching Charlie Moore YouTube video's.

Beat me to it.

 

[PCHawk]

You're crazy man

He would come in and make plays right away. Plays Mike was incapable of making. His drive and pull up jumper will be tough for point guards to defend with his length.

 

[Hawk5656]

The last 10 games of the season Mike had 74 points, 66 assists and only 16 turnovers. The last 10 games of the season CW had 16 points and 2 assists. If he was that good he would have played more. CW only played 38 minutes total the last 10 games, I have no clue how you could say he was close to being good as Mike.

 

[NikeHawk21]

He was hardly playing at the end of the year and Mike was playing a lot so I think it's safe to say MG was still better

Even if MG was better at the end of the year, what does that prove?

 

[Hawk5656]

He would come in and make plays right away. Plays Mike was incapable of making. His drive and pull up jumper will be tough for point guards to defend with his length.

He made 5 shots on 13 attempts and had 2 assists

 

[Hawk5656]

Even if MG was better at the end of the year, what does that prove?

Mike was clearly better than CW last year and everyone on here hates on Mike and thinks next year CW will be better than Mike ever was. He is going to have to improve A LOT in a short time for that to be the case which seems unrealistic to me

 

[PCHawk]

The last 10 games of the season Mike had 74 points, 66 assists and only 16 turnovers. The last 10 games of the season CW had 16 points and 2 assists. If he was that good he would have played more. CW only played 38 minutes total the last 10 games, I have no clue how you could say he was close to being good as Mike.

Why are you showing stats? We all know CW didn't get many minutes. Of course he didn't stuff the Stat sheet. Like I said, Mike had potential to play great. Fran would be stupid to sit him for a freshman who was just coming on. Fran also saw he needed to get CW more minutes to, which he did.

 

[PCHawk]

He made 5 shots on 13 attempts and had 2 assists

In 38 minutes. Gesell would go 3 games in a row playing 30 minutes and make zero shots. A senior starter playing 30 minutes and making zero shots.

 

[Hawk5656]

In 38 minutes. Gesell would go 3 games in a row playing 30 minutes and make zero shots. A senior starter playing 30 minutes and making zero shots.

When?

 

[deanvogs]

Mike was clearly better than CW last year and everyone on here hates on Mike and thinks next year CW will be better than Mike ever was. He is going to have to improve A LOT in a short time for that to be the case which seems unrealistic to me

One year has nothing to do with another. Peter Jok as a Fr. didn't just kick Ogelsby out of the rotation and take all his minutes. Do you think Ogelsby is a better player?

Just because Williams couldn't take minutes from a 3 year starter than Fran trusted doesn't mean he won't be eventually better. I don't know if he will or won't, but what he did last year is pretty irrelevant as to how good he will be.

 

[Hawk5656]

One year has nothing to do with another. Peter Jok as a Fr. didn't just kick Ogelsby out of the rotation and take all his minutes. Do you think Ogelsby is a better player?

Just because Williams couldn't take minutes from a 3 year starter than Fran trusted doesn't mean he won't be eventually better. I don't know if he will or won't, but what he did last year is pretty irrelevant as to how good he will be.

I'm on the fence if Williams will ever be better than Mike mostly because he's playing out of position. I don't think he will be next year at all though like other posters have said so that's mainly what I'm referencing