HawkeyeMike23
Banned
It's not a wash on offense, JO draws a lot more defensive attention than Clemmons. Teams help off of Clemmons a lot more and he didn't make them pay this week.
*** Official Hawks thump Cuse Thread***
- Thread starter 1hawkeye1
- Start date
It's not a wash on offense, JO draws a lot more defensive attention than Clemmons. Teams help off of Clemmons a lot more and he didn't make them pay this week.
ibahawkeye
Well-Known Member
I would say that the D has to respect Clemmons driving ability more than Josh's but of course honor Josh's shooting ability but he is absolutely no threat off the bounce.
I hold my position... it's a wash.
EDIT:
And if you really want to look at stats:
Clemmons 5-8 62.5%
Ogelsby 3-13 23.1%
Granted we are only 4 games in but i think the stats thus far lean in my favor... it's a wash.
hawkforlife9
Well-Known Member
With the exception of White, Franny has an average bunch of players. Not enough talent to do what needs to be done. Going to be a long season.
HawkeyeMike23
Banned
They really don't have to, Clemmons can't finish at the rim. As we saw in the Texas game, if the on ball defender gets beat, as long as the help defender challenges Clemmons shot he won't make it. That's the problem of having a backcourt made up of two 6' guards
ibahawkeye
Well-Known Member
Look I said in another thread that the 2 guard is this teams #1 issue.
I think we probably can both agree the issue is that we don't have a good #2 on the team. I've read your stuff enoguh to know you're smart enough Mike that you won't argue that Josh is a starting 2 guard in the big 10.
So we agree Mike isn't a 2 and starting Clemmons and Mike side by side isn't the solution.
This falls on Fran. We lack talent plain and simple and specifically at the wing position.
HawkeyeMike23
Banned
3 point shooting against teams with a pulse:
Clemmons 0/5
Ogelsby 3/11
Knocking down 3's against Hampton and NDSU doesn't mean much, Ogelsby hasn't shot great but still better than what we saw from Clemmons this week.
Clemmons 0/5
Ogelsby 3/11
Knocking down 3's against Hampton and NDSU doesn't mean much, Ogelsby hasn't shot great but still better than what we saw from Clemmons this week.
HawkeyeMike23
Banned
I would expand that to say that our backcourt as a whole is the number one issue right now. And yes, I wouldn't argue that either Clemmons or Oglesby is a good B10 2 guard. So we do agree on that. But hopefully one of these guys steps up soon, I don't care if it's Clemmons, Oglesby, Dickerson or Jok, there's a lot of playing time available for anyone that wants to earn it.
So Gessel is obligated to the 1 despite his mistakes? Clemmons has looked better. MG has looked the worst of the 3. How can you say Gessel isnt a 2 and say Clemmons is? MG is more of a 2 than Clemmons. Clemmons is more of a 1 guard than MG. We have 2, 2 guards. Oges and Jok. Mike and Sapp are both 1 guards. Sure Mike may play better at the 1 but dont say clemmons is a 2.
HawkeyeMike23
Banned
I don't think any guard we have is particularly good at either spot. I just want to see someone, anyone, step up.
Poor overall shooting and below average athletically is hard to overcome.
only chance is great in game coaching, so far not Fran's strong point.
Bob Knight could take this team pretty far, not sure they have a very high ceiling. 18 wins and 7th place looks very good right now.
Was great in Prime Time League .......
People talk like we are a terrible team. If our guards are terrible, our shooting is terrible, our coaching is terrible and our toughness is terrible, shouldn't we barely beat the first 2 teams we played and get pounded by the last 2 teams we played.
We have one problem and that's shooting. If we were an average shooting team we would be top 10 to top 15 caliber. If we were a good shooting team we could make a run at the final 4. As it is we are a terrible shooting team that stil hangs with a top 10 team and barely loses to a top 25 team.
We have one problem and that's shooting. If we were an average shooting team we would be top 10 to top 15 caliber. If we were a good shooting team we could make a run at the final 4. As it is we are a terrible shooting team that stil hangs with a top 10 team and barely loses to a top 25 team.
1hawkeye1
Well-Known Member
I think shooting is the biggest problem but there are a few other big ones in play. Iowa just doesn't have guys who can score consistently, particularly at the guard spots. Good players can still score without being shooters, Iowa has had a couple over the years but they sure don't now. MG, AC, & TD have all show some ability to move well and drive but they can't even consistently hit bunnies. In MG & AC's cases, they can't even hit free throws. Maybe Utoff? But he really isn't aggressive. At least not yet.
I would also put defense in the big problem category. Last night was awful. Tonight was somewhat better but Syracuse is not a good offensive team. They still look too much like the D we saw in February & March.
Syracuse got pasted by an unranked team before playing Iowa. They started out in the top 25 by being Syracuse not by what they had coming back or coming in. They won't be there in the new top 25. Iowa played Texas tough for a half and then got dismantled in the second half. I don't think either game deserves any moral victory especially in year 5.
1977Hawkeye
Well-Known Member
I agree. The way I see it, the game against Texas, Iowa had the lead against a good team that basically sleepwalked through the first half but came out and turned it on in the second. Iowa couldn't keep up.
Syracuse - This looks like a down year for them although I would guess they will probably still be an NCAA team. Glad to see Iowa fight back and make it interesting, but as we've been seeing for the past few years now, Iowa competes, it's tight in the last couple minutes, but in the end, it's the other team that makes the plays, Iowa cannot, and it turns into nothing more than yet another close loss.
The games we "almost" won.. How many of those are there now? Far too many for me to blindly believe that they are going to just magically figure this out. We've all been saying "they're still learning how to win" and "they'll figure it out". Still waiting. Year 5. Enough.
I just can't have blind faith anymore that Iowa is going to start winning these games when it counts until it starts actually happening. Iowa just doesn't seem to have that "it" factor (whatever that is - mental toughness?) to make plays inside the last 2 minutes of a tight game. Just more of the same against Syracuse - two chances to take the lead in the last couple minutes, and two turnovers including an easy pass just bobbled out of bounds.
Just got back from out of town and watched the game earlier, so was late chiming in here.
1977Hawkeye
Well-Known Member
Too many if's in that paragraph for me. Iowa is what it is.
Iowa is not terrible, no. But what I'm seeing, they're NIT or fringe-bubble material.
The "ifs" were to make my point that every other aspect of our team is good enough for winning basketball other than shooting.
M
mysteron
Guest
I can't be the only one chuckling at posts like this. I think the real point you made is that when someone love's something, they will lose the ability to be embarrassed by their comments.
Team Yugo: "If you take winning and going fast out of the equation, we have a really good Formula One team."
Wow dude. Try rereading the posts and comprehend the context. If the point of my post was to suggest we are good and we just have bad shooters then I agree with you that it's stupid. When my point is to defend the other aspects of our team and suggest it's the shooting that's making us suck then my post is fine and your response is stupid.
I thought about flipping 1977 some **** for taking my post so out of context but he's a good poster so I let it go.
