I think both Gesell and Clemmons are better point guards than Marble. Both of them were true freshmen last year, and they should be even better this year. Marbles future is at the off guard, not the point guard. Marble is pretty nifty until another team really concentrates on him. Marble has some skills, but he isn't a great shooter outside the three point line.
PTL Stats Recap, & More...
- Thread starter JonDMiller
- Start date
I think both Gesell and Clemmons are better point guards than Marble. Both of them were true freshmen last year, and they should be even better this year. Marbles future is at the off guard, not the point guard. Marble is pretty nifty until another team really concentrates on him. Marble has some skills, but he isn't a great shooter outside the three point line.
Every team already concentrates on him, he was the main focus of the other teams defensive gameplan every game last year. No matter who starts at pg, Gesell, Marble and Clemmons will all spend time there. And Gesell being a better outside shooter than Marble, which is debatable at this point, is more reason to play him off the ball, running off screens.
OakRaiders
Well-Known Member
Who do you think will be the leader on this team on the floor? With last years troubles late in games who do you think will step up big late and who will be the guy who gets the team through a tough trap game on the road? My inital thought was white with this usa experience this summer but i just didn't see it last year on the floor.
tm3308
Well-Known Member
Marble, IMO, is at his best playing the point, and I think we were better with him there.
1. His size creates mismatches at the point.
2. Gesell is better without the ball than Marble is.
3. Playing Gesell off the ball lets us set screens for him to get him good looks all over the floor.
Then again, we never really saw Marble develop off the ball last year because of his injury. But I know he's had good results while running the show in each of the past two seasons.
1. His size creates mismatches at the point.
2. Gesell is better without the ball than Marble is.
3. Playing Gesell off the ball lets us set screens for him to get him good looks all over the floor.
Then again, we never really saw Marble develop off the ball last year because of his injury. But I know he's had good results while running the show in each of the past two seasons.
MiniMoeHawk
Well-Known Member
Marble is streaky, when he is missing shots he tends to try to due everything on his own and turn the ball over. When he is having a good shooting game his assist / TO ratio seems to be much better.
Or slide at the very end and draw fouls on the big men. Fast little guys score around big slower guys, not over them.
So you're saying Jok should be our point guard?
Johnnyhawkeye
Well-Known Member
We started playing better when Marble came out of his long slump and injuries, it had little to do with him being the point it just happened to play out that way because of Gessel's injury. Both players are inner changeable,and the best player on the team usually handles the ball more often anyhow.
We have a wealth of talent that has been unseen since the days of Lute Olsen, and is frankly exciting to think of all the combinations we can unleash on our opponents this upcoming season. Who starts at point guard or is the better point guard really doesn't matter because on any given night someone in black and gold is fully capable of carrying this team to a win. Having to depend on just one player or two to win a game for us is essentially over, and could make us a real force to be reckoned with in March. I for one cannot wait for this upcoming basketball season. Go Hawks
RocknRollface
Well-Known Member
1. This is only the case when Iowas 2 is also big. If it Gessel at the 2 the others teams smaller guard will defend Mike.
2. Agreed. But the 2 guard dosen't necessarily need to run around off screens. Allot of the best two guards play off the dribble.
3. True as well.
I don't think it really matters who brings the ball up the court after a make but Mike is definitely better at pushing the ball in transition. Clemmons is actually the best of the three at looking ahead on the break though.
Dev and Mike are both combo guards, while Anthony is a true point, although he may be the best 3 point shooter of the 3 too.
RocknRollface
Well-Known Member
Davis was the coach in 87
It is simple the point pushes the break and gets us into the offense. Gesell and clemmons push the break best and get the offense started best (players stand more and move less with marble at the point). 2 guards can dominate the ball on offense without being the point, just look at Kobe and MJ. I know the offense needs to run through Devyn. And I know that gesell and even clemmons are better outside shooters to run off screens. That doesn't mean they are 2 guards.
1) gesell is a true point guard who can dominate with scoring when he has to or wants to.
2) clemmons is a true point guard that will dominate defensively and can put up points in the correct situation.
3) marble is a 2 guard that needs the ball. He is a serviceable point when he is needed to play there. Even when bc was here the team was better (offensively) with bc at the point than with marble. And bc didn't dominate the ball in the half court since everything was being run for gatens.
1) gesell is a true point guard who can dominate with scoring when he has to or wants to.
2) clemmons is a true point guard that will dominate defensively and can put up points in the correct situation.
3) marble is a 2 guard that needs the ball. He is a serviceable point when he is needed to play there. Even when bc was here the team was better (offensively) with bc at the point than with marble. And bc didn't dominate the ball in the half court since everything was being run for gatens.
Are you the same poster who thought the Thunder would be better if they brought in a "true point guard" and moved Westbrook to the two? If so, I think it's obvious you have some ideal image of a point guard in mind and anyone who doesn't fit that should not be playing pg in your opinion. In that case, if Gesell becomes a 15 ppg scorer in a year or two you will probably be calling for him to move to the two because he shoots so much.
Westbrook is the second coming of Allen iverson. He wasn't a pg in college and he shouldn't be one in the pros. Points can score and still be points if they share the ball and make their teammates better by getting them the ball in positions they can score. Gesell showed this in the ptl by averaging 11 assists without having a player nearly div 1 scoring ability on the team with him.
gesell averaged the 3rd most pts on the team as a frosh...pretty sure that means he can score.
clemmons doesn't force his shot. He lets the scoring come to him rather than taking bad shots (something marble does a lot). You want to score on every possession from a team aspect. But if you don't have a good match up you don't force it as a player. Clemmons understands this. He had a great match up against Isu and took advantage.
when you look at the team we have you have to put the players in the position that helps the team the best. Last yr that meant aw at the 3 even though he isn't a 3. This year he will likely play more 4 with the addition of uthoff and jok. It also meant that basabe started though most agree he is best off the bench (which I think is where he will be this yr). If gesell and clemmons are healthy they are the best options at pg. marble is a better 2 than anyone else on the team. Even if you say that gesell and marble are equal at the point it would be a downgrade with gesell at the 2 instead of marble.
marble will play the point when the team goes big but I doubt he plays a true point with gesell or clemmons on the court.
gesell averaged the 3rd most pts on the team as a frosh...pretty sure that means he can score.
clemmons doesn't force his shot. He lets the scoring come to him rather than taking bad shots (something marble does a lot). You want to score on every possession from a team aspect. But if you don't have a good match up you don't force it as a player. Clemmons understands this. He had a great match up against Isu and took advantage.
when you look at the team we have you have to put the players in the position that helps the team the best. Last yr that meant aw at the 3 even though he isn't a 3. This year he will likely play more 4 with the addition of uthoff and jok. It also meant that basabe started though most agree he is best off the bench (which I think is where he will be this yr). If gesell and clemmons are healthy they are the best options at pg. marble is a better 2 than anyone else on the team. Even if you say that gesell and marble are equal at the point it would be a downgrade with gesell at the 2 instead of marble.
marble will play the point when the team goes big but I doubt he plays a true point with gesell or clemmons on the court.
deanvogs
Well-Known Member
I tend to agree with you on this one. There was a reason that Fran had Gesell at the PG when he was healthy. He sees the players in practice, and has a much better feel for the team than any of us ever will. I do think that Marble likes the ball in his hands, and is very effective when he is in control of the offense. This is why I think we will see stretches where Marble is at the PG, but I would imagine that the majority of the time he will be at the 2/3.
This is such a lazy argument. Marble didn't have the option to only pick his spots like Clemmons and Gesell. If these two were really as good of scorers last year as you make them out to be, then they really screwed their teammates over. Iowa consistently struggled in the half court offense last year due to a bad combination of poor outside shooting and the lack of players who could consistently create their own shots. I'm sure Marble didn't want to force a lot of those possessions but he had no choice.
You claimed Gesell can dominate scoring wise and your proof is that he averaged 8.7 ppg last year, third on the team? No one on Iowa was a dominate scorer last year and certainly not Gesell. Also, you do realize Marble was a much more efficient scorer than either Clemmons or Gesell, right? You also realize Marble had a higher assist rate and lower turnover rate than Gesell, right? And that Clemmons' TO rate was one of the worst in the B10, right? These aren't opinions, these are facts which I know you don't like.
I don't know if I believe this or not but isn't it possible we were on the verge of playing good as a team and marble was breaking out of his slump regardless of what position he was at? Maybe the run in the NIT had nothing to do with marble playing point and everything to do with the fact that Frans teams get better as the year goes on.
I was actually about ready to say this same thing. Marble was primed and ready to breakout.
Marble has forced shots since his freshman year and anyone who says he had to isn't watching. When Iowa is short on shot clock that is when it is ok to force a shot. He does it 10 seconds into the clock sometimes. I like Marble as a 2 guard and I like him as a change up at the point but if we rely on him as our primary point guard we will not be as good as the team should be.
tm3308
Well-Known Member
This. You didn't see him jacking up a ton of shots during his slump. Something was off, and he knew it, so he didn't purposely waste a lot of possessions by taking a lot of bad shots.
jacknicholson
Well-Known Member
It is a huge advantage to have three talented players who can play point guard, two of whom, can play very well at shooting guard. I believe Gesell is the better playmaker, and Devyn scores more playing the point. That might change with Uthoff and Jok on the floor with him......
Last edited:
