Aren't Forbes and Demps primarily shooting guards? I haven't looked at advanced metrics, but a lot would depend on how much a player's team relies on them to score. Koenig has even almost become more of a shooting guard when they bring the other kid off the bench (name?). Melo takes a lot more shots than Mike and his percentages are probably even worse, except for FTs. I think Walton and Mike are probably most comparable, with Walton scoring more, but Mike assisting more. Mike has gotten the better of him in head-to-head match ups this year. Not claiming Mike is an outstanding PG, but if he is in the top half of B1G PGs, and I think he is, then he is much better than very, very average.
Just when I think Mike Gesell can't possibly....
- Thread starter SJeagleEye
- Start date
No. No Lick would not put up good assist numbers because he couldn't cut it at Marian, let alone Iowa. Bad analogy is bad and you should feel bad.
I think Mike's FT percentage has been way overblown. I think he might now be third on the team. He averages less than two TOs a game and is the primary ball handler for about 30 minutes a game, so I think the number of boneheaded plays is also way overblown. I honestly believe that if Fran would just keep running the offense toward the end of games, most of Mike's shortcomings would almost disappear.
Excellent point. This team lacks a true 2, which hurts both MG and AC. Maybe Fran envisioned Jones being the answer in some type of hybrid role, but without a 3rd shooter on the floor, our perimeter game is all on Jok and Uthoff.
You are probably right about Forbes but that's why I put Valentine, who does often play point for MSU. The advanced metrics takes or reduces the subjectivity. The eye test is often a poor way to measure a players value. I'll be honest, I'm not real familiar with basketball metrics, but I understand their importance, because I've had the same arguments with non-metric fans in baseball, which I'm much more familiar with.
MG is a very avg PG. He plays above avg D and below avg offense. Nothing wrong with being avg, but you pair it with a SG who is also avg, and has the same weaknesses (offensively challenged), it doesn't make for a good pair. Stick Tyler Ulis on this team and it's a potential final four team, with MG they'll be lucky to win 1 game.
Well, I don't feel the least bit bad because I was using hyperbole which should have been obvious.
You picked the worst player to wear an Iowa uniform in my 40 years on this earth and compared him to a guy that will break the single season assist record this year.
Phantom, I am not going to battle with you on this site, but you are like a virus that just won't go away and refuses to respond to treatment. Your non-stop degrading of Mike Gesell is not only unwarranted, it is mostly inaccurate. So far, you have managed to move to saying Mike is very, very average, and that is an upgrade from most other discussions. Assist/turnover ratios don't matter. Excellent on-ball and help defense by Mike is "average." He's a horrible free throw shooter, but yet he is third on the team of players with many minutes...
Repeatedly, you have basically blamed Mike for losses, some in which Mike was one of the main reasons Iowa was even in the game. Mike can play 30 minutes of great basketball, but if he then doesn't make the play to win it near the end of the game, even if he was basically left with the ball and no one else on the team doing much make themselves available, then we have to read how Mike blew it again. I have enjoyed watching Mike Gesell play, and Iowa has been very lucky that he put on an Iowa uniform.
I have a gut feeling that Mikey has one more North Carolina gutsy type of game left this season...
At least my argument is based on emotionalism, as yours is, so sorry if that doesn't go with your opinion. According to advanced metrics, MG is avg (of course, you'd never know this because you don't look at any stat beyond assists/turnovers). I've never claimed he was anything less than avg. I've said in the past MG was avg/slightly above avg. I hate when people whine and bitch without providing any evidence to support their claim, or make falsehoods to support their hypothesis. Quote me accurately, don't make things up. Nowhere here have I said "assist/turnover ratios don't matter". What I said was assists are an overrated stat (they are), much like RBI in baseball. I didn't say he was a horrible FT shooter, I said he chokes down the stretch shooting FT's.
Repeatedly, you misstate my position and it's getting tiring correcting you. Either stick to the facts, using quotes from me or STFU because I don't have time constantly correcting your lies. You are like a pest who throws up strawmen to knock them down.
"Mike can play 30 minutes of great basketball, but if he then doesn't make the play to win it near the end of the game, even if he was basically left with the ball and no one else on the team doing much make themselves available, then we have to read how Mike blew it again."
And how often have we seen this happen? Once? Twice? And, since you seem to be oblivious to it the final 10 minutes are the most critical in a game. If a guy has a history of choking at the end of games, then he's going to draw attention. You continually give MG a pass, no matter how poorly he plays. There's always an excuse, and you cite your tired, "but look at his assists" as proof MG had a "great" game. You are like the baseball old timers who cite RBI and errors to "prove" their player is a great player. Stop getting so emotionally involved with a player you can't look at objective metrics which measure a players performance.
I like MG, but unlike you I'm able to call him what he is, an avg PG. This would be fine if Iowa didn't have an avg SG playing aside him who has the same skills deficit. Take the blinders off buddy. And please, stop with your misrepresentations of my comments. If you disagree with what I'm saying, then fine, make an argument based on what I said, not what you think I said. Then try to make a rebuttal argument based on something beside emotionalism.
Mike is an excellent athlete and has great hops. The dunk he did at Black and Gold Blowout was something from the Gerry Wright bag of tricks and MG is only 6'2" in heels. Just think if Woody had half of that jumping ability??? And some of that goes back on the coaching staff to not get some explosiveness from Woody during 4 years of work with professional trainers.
Back to MG, he will greatly missed. He takes outstanding care of the ball, makes good passes (you could argue that his assists should be much higher if he had confidence in the bigs like he did with the lob to White) and runs the offense as coached. I absolutely hate the delay stuff that Fran makes this team run and it puts Mike in a very bad spot many times. If you recall, Marble was asked to do the same thing two years ago, but had the advantage of being just a little bit quicker and at least 5 inches taller so he could get the jump shot off over guys. When MG ends up trying to drive to the basket in these situations, he is looking more to get fouled than to score and it looks really bad. MG hasn't really learned the trick of putting the ball high off the glass like many point guards do when they drive and thus it often is tipped.
Back to MG, he will greatly missed. He takes outstanding care of the ball, makes good passes (you could argue that his assists should be much higher if he had confidence in the bigs like he did with the lob to White) and runs the offense as coached. I absolutely hate the delay stuff that Fran makes this team run and it puts Mike in a very bad spot many times. If you recall, Marble was asked to do the same thing two years ago, but had the advantage of being just a little bit quicker and at least 5 inches taller so he could get the jump shot off over guys. When MG ends up trying to drive to the basket in these situations, he is looking more to get fouled than to score and it looks really bad. MG hasn't really learned the trick of putting the ball high off the glass like many point guards do when they drive and thus it often is tipped.
