Lineup change....start Uhl??

[Ihawkhoops]

I don't see the benefit of playing Gesell and Clemmons together. Despite having two point guards on the floor, we are still plagued by sloppy ball handling and turnovers. At this point, Gesell and Clemmons are who they are, so no sense holding our breath to see something new. We need more athleticism and scoring versatility, which entails someone who can dribble drive, get put backs, and rebound. The starting lineup, as constituted today, gives us no matchup challenges outside of Uthoff and very little scoring punch from 1 & 2.

First choice would be to be to start Uhl, which would give us another long, athletic guy who can attack off the bounce, post up, rebound, and defend. He is no slouch from the perimeter and IMO, is a better option than Clemmons. Sub Wagner / Baer / Ellingson for Uhl / Uthoff / Jok / Woodbury and allocate PT based on flow of game and who is hot. With Uhl we can throw the baseline / inbounds lob like we did with White and have another guy who has the potential finish in transition vs. charge, get blocked, or attempt weak layup. In short, we are floor walkers with the starting 5 with the exception of Uthoff and we need more athleticism.

Thoughts?

 

[Mohawkeye]

I agree Sapp and Gessel aren't getting it done. I'd start Baer and bench one of them. I love Baer's game, brings rebounding, shooting and intangibles. The only thing he needs is experience.

 

[HawkLogic]

I agree Sapp and Gessel aren't getting it done. I'd start Baer and bench one of them. I love Baer's game, brings rebounding, shooting and intangibles. The only thing he needs is experience.

Baer is playing 3 isn't he? So Jok goes to 2-guard or Baer?

Clearly playing both Gesell and Clemmons at same time is loser lineup. Can't rebound, can't shoot.

Also, probably need more Uhl in post when Woody is getting abused as he was last night by much quicker opponent.

What do we do after Uthoff graduates?

 

[Ihawkhoops]

Baer is playing 3 isn't he? So Jok goes to 2-guard or Baer?

Clearly playing both Gesell and Clemmons at same time is loser lineup. Can't rebound, can't shoot.

Also, probably need more Uhl in post when Woody is getting abused as he was last night by much quicker opponent.

What do we do after Uthoff graduates?

I had the same thought last night. We remain deficient in guys who can get their own shot / create their own offense i.e. better caliber PG and SG. At this point I don't think we have anything to lose by getting these new guys on he floor for meaningful minutes vs. starting from scratch next year.

 

[DavenportHawk8]

I had the same thought last night. We remain deficient in guys who can get their own shot / create their own offense i.e. better caliber PG and SG. At this point I don't think we have anything to lose by getting these new guys on he floor for meaningful minutes vs. starting from scratch next year.

I think you will see a MAJOR step back next year. W/out Utoff or a viable PG and Post players we are going to be screwed. It could be a long year next year, unless Fran finds a transfer or JC player who can come in right away.

 

[Ihawkhoops]

I think you will see a MAJOR step back next year. W/out Utoff or a viable PG and Post players we are going to be screwed. It could be a long year next year, unless Fran finds a transfer or JC player who can come in right away.

 

[Ihawkhoops]

[/QUO

My 0-0 coaching record speaks for itself, but I am still scratching my head why the two most athletic guys in the last recruiting class are wearing suits vs. shorts for games. If all else fails, put athletes on the floor and be patient while they figure it out. We are not exactly setting the world on fire with our analytical starting 5.

 

[Steve Waite]

Why isn't Christian Williams getting any playing time? At this point he can't be any worse than our two Senior PG's.
We are playing two Seniors who are very mediocure and completely shit themselves when the game is on the line.
Not one of our 4 seniors has ever made a game winning shot. Granted Uthoff hasn't been here all 4 years, but
the other three. Pathetic! Bench them and let's play for the future.
I would love to see this starting lineup:
Williams
Jok
Uthoff
Baer
Uhl

Ellingson, Wagner & Flemming off the bench.

You have athleticism, shooters & rebounding.

I will miss Uthoff, the other three, good riddance.

 

[Curt Furence]

Why isn't Christian Williams getting any playing time? At this point he can't be any worse than our two Senior PG's.
We are playing two Seniors who are very mediocure and completely shit themselves when the game is on the line.
Not one of our 4 seniors has ever made a game winning shot. Granted Uthoff hasn't been here all 4 years, but
the other three. Pathetic! Bench them and let's play for the future.
I would love to see this starting lineup:
Williams
Jok
Uthoff
Baer
Uhl

Ellingson, Wagner & Flemming off the bench.

You have athleticism, shooters & rebounding.

I will miss Uthoff, the other three, good riddance.

 

[gablefan73]

I have said it from day 1 Sapp should be our 6th man. It has nothing to do with last nights game.

 

[DewHawk]

I certainly believe either AC or MG needs to be out of the starting rotation. My choice would be MG as the backup because I have more confidence in AC in being able to penetrate/dish off and breakdown a defense, not to mention he is a better shooter as well. I think if Fran handed the keys to AC we would be very pleasantly surprised at how good he can be managing the offense.

MG tries to "play too fast" and is out of control way too often and he is really not a PG IMO. He really has not improved his game much in 4 years and is still doing the "bull in the china closet drives to the basket". I cannot remember any time that he has driven to the basket under control and laid the ball off to an open player, other than the baseline wild passes which fail about 9 out of 10 times.

As far as the new starter, I agree with either Baer or Uhl and move Jok to the 2 position. I think that lineup gives us a much better rebounding team and just as good, if not better, shooting team.

Having said all that, I doubt Fran changes the lineup because like KF he tends to stick with certain folks too long and a quick trigger on others for whatever reason(s).

 

[Ihawkhoops]

I think our view as fans of MG and FM's view of him are night and day. This is the guy FM refers to as "Money Mike" because of his clutch play. Not going to pile on MG, he plays his ___ off every game, but the guy logs major minutes every game against faster, stronger, more athletic guys and by the final 5, I suspect his tank is nearing empty. Not making excuses for lack of late game heroics, but we have seen this movie for 4 years now and the ending is the same.

Uhl and Williams need to get more PT. Sorry if this cuts into one of the senior's PT, but the starting 5 have underwhelmed thus far.

 

[PhantomFlyer]

The problem with starting Uhl is he'll hurt you defensively. I guess it would depend on matchups. MG is far from great but he's the best PG on the team and it's not really close. The offense doesn't flow as well with him on the bench. The problem, in a game against a quick, athletic, defense, is MG has to play so many minutes and he gets sloppy.

If AG didn't start, you could use him at the point to give MG some minutes to rest. MG pretty much has to carry the entire load as PG because Fran has been unable/unwilling to bring in a quality PG to backup (or leap over) MG. Gesell can play 37-38 minutes against teams that walk the ball up the court and play zone, etc. However, when you are pushing the ball up the court or playing against an opponent who's quick, who plays tight defense, it's a lot of ask MG to play that many minutes.

 

[HawkLogic]

The problem with starting Uhl is he'll hurt you defensively. I guess it would depend on matchups. MG is far from great but he's the best PG on the team and it's not really close. The offense doesn't flow as well with him on the bench. The problem, in a game against a quick, athletic, defense, is MG has to play so many minutes and he gets sloppy.

If AG didn't start, you could use him at the point to give MG some minutes to rest. MG pretty much has to carry the entire load as PG because Fran has been unable/unwilling to bring in a quality PG to backup (or leap over) MG. Gesell can play 37-38 minutes against teams that walk the ball up the court and play zone, etc. However, when you are pushing the ball up the court or playing against an opponent who's quick, who plays tight defense, it's a lot of ask MG to play that many minutes.

Mikey had most of his TO's while fresh. He had 5 TO's in game, only one came at end when he drove and threw a pass into the stands. The decision to hold the ball and go iso with Mikey to see him throw up wild shot that missed the rim, that has to be either Gesell or Fran deciding on letting Mike play hero ball. Ordinarily you want the ball in your PG's hands to close games...puttting ball in MG's hands over his 4 years has usually ended in seeing his shot get swatted, him missing the rim, him throwing the ball into the backboard, or him getting fouled and missing his FT's.

 

[brfhilltop]

To bad Jones got hurt. If he would have played Iowa wins easily. Didn't MG recently get engaged, about the time he started playing poorly. I hope that newness wears off soon or Fran may want to get a preacher down at the court. I agree AC should be 6th man.

 

[Mohawkeye]

Baer is playing 3 isn't he? So Jok goes to 2-guard or Baer?

Clearly playing both Gesell and Clemmons at same time is loser lineup. Can't rebound, can't shoot.

Also, probably need more Uhl in post when Woody is getting abused as he was last night by much quicker opponent.

What do we do after Uthoff graduates?

I would. think Jok would play 2 on offense and guard the 3 on defense. Baer is a better perimeter defender. Not that it matters much, especially in a zone defense.

 

[RocknRollface]

I certainly believe either AC or MG needs to be out of the starting rotation. My choice would be MG as the backup because I have more confidence in AC in being able to penetrate/dish off and breakdown a defense, not to mention he is a better shooter as well. I think if Fran handed the keys to AC we would be very pleasantly surprised at how good he can be managing the offense.

MG tries to "play too fast" and is out of control way too often and he is really not a PG IMO. He really has not improved his game much in 4 years and is still doing the "bull in the china closet drives to the basket". I cannot remember any time that he has driven to the basket under control and laid the ball off to an open player, other than the baseline wild passes which fail about 9 out of 10 times.

As far as the new starter, I agree with either Baer or Uhl and move Jok to the 2 position. I think that lineup gives us a much better rebounding team and just as good, if not better, shooting team.

Having said all that, I doubt Fran changes the lineup because like KF he tends to stick with certain folks too long and a quick trigger on others for whatever reason(s).

This.

People think it's because he lacks athleticism, but that's not it at all.

He just lacks the feel rhythm and vision of a pg and tries to make up for it by going to fast and ends up out of control.

A good pg knows how to draw and manipulate defenders, instinctually. Mikes instinct seems to be to always try to get to the basket as quickly as possible no matter what.

 

[hawkeye_fan321]

I also think Baer or Uhl should be our 5th starter.

But IF Fran wants to play two guards at once, why not play Williams with either Clemmons or Gesell? This would get him experience for next year without having to be the guy having to process everything a point guard needs to before he's ready.
It would also leave Clemmons or Gesell running the second team.

It'd be interesting to see how Clemmons and Gesell run the offense knowing that they're the only point guard on the court (whether it be first or second team).

 

[KeyWest Tim]

I'd like to see some different starting combinations before the Big Ten.

 

[ZaHawks]

Uhl will never start over Woody. Promises were made, and those promises will be kept.

 

[Ihawkhoops]

I agree that Uhl won't start over Woodbury and don't think he has to or needs to. I would rather see him start in place of Clemmons because I don't see the benefit of two point guards and because I think we could benefit from some length and athleticism. Not knocking Clemmons, just think Uhl might provide a dimension we are lacking.

Agree with hawkfan321 that it would be nice to see Williams on the floor for a few minutes each half as the off guard to get him some PT. He is a tough guard with his size and would be someone else to crash the boards, etc.

 

[HeRKeYHoPeFuL]

There are a lot of posters apparently using the eye test in this thread. We are actually not plagued by turnovers and sloppy ball handling as much as many of our B1G opponents.

Fans think that because our guys are Div I players there should be zero mistakes. Coaches realize that the other guys on the court also happen to be Div I players, and sometimes errors are forced by the opponent. If it was so easy to avoid turnovers, every team would only have 1 or 2 per game.

Do people think this is a bad team? Right now advanced metrics have us as one of the top 15 programs in the country. Get some perspective, people. Look what is happening in Madison, Minneapolis, and Columbus. The sky is not falling.

 

[thewop]

I don't see the benefit of playing Gesell and Clemmons together. Despite having two point guards on the floor, we are still plagued by sloppy ball handling and turnovers. At this point, Gesell and Clemmons are who they are, so no sense holding our breath to see something new. We need more athleticism and scoring versatility, which entails someone who can dribble drive, get put backs, and rebound. The starting lineup, as constituted today, gives us no matchup challenges outside of Uthoff and very little scoring punch from 1 & 2.

First choice would be to be to start Uhl, which would give us another long, athletic guy who can attack off the bounce, post up, rebound, and defend. He is no slouch from the perimeter and IMO, is a better option than Clemmons. Sub Wagner / Baer / Ellingson for Uhl / Uthoff / Jok / Woodbury and allocate PT based on flow of game and who is hot. With Uhl we can throw the baseline / inbounds lob like we did with White and have another guy who has the potential finish in transition vs. charge, get blocked, or attempt weak layup. In short, we are floor walkers with the starting 5 with the exception of Uthoff and we need more athleticism.

Thoughts?

Actually, against ISU we did quite well at the beginning with Clemmons/Gesell in at the same time. Our problems began when we brought the bench guys in, and our offense flat out doesn't run as well without Gesell at the point. Our offense stalls when people quit moving, regardless of who's at PG, but it is running well, MG is running it.

 

[RocknRollface]

There are a lot of posters apparently using the eye test in this thread. We are actually not plagued by turnovers and sloppy ball handling as much as many of our B1G opponents.

Fans think that because our guys are Div I players there should be zero mistakes. Coaches realize that the other guys on the court also happen to be Div I players, and sometimes errors are forced by the opponent. If it was so easy to avoid turnovers, every team would only have 1 or 2 per game.

Do people think this is a bad team? Right now advanced metrics have us as one of the top 15 programs in the country. Get some perspective, people. Look what is happening in Madison, Minneapolis, and Columbus. The sky is not falling.

The turnovers Iowa was making in the last ten minutes of that game were not normal for a college basketball team.

They were turnovers of panic that could have mostly been avoided simply by remaining calm and continuing to move.

 

[HeRKeYHoPeFuL]

I agree, they were NOT NORMAL, as you said yourself. On the season, we turn the ball over less than 16% of the time. We turned it over 22% in that game.

My point was that MG and Clemmons playing together appears to be an advantage so far statistically.

Are you saying there would be less panic by removing a ball handler from the line up?

 

[unIowa]

I have said it from day 1 Sapp should be our 6th man. It has nothing to do with last nights game.

He should be our 6th man bc bench leadership is needed and i think he has it.

 

[PhantomFlyer]

There are a lot of posters apparently using the eye test in this thread. We are actually not plagued by turnovers and sloppy ball handling as much as many of our B1G opponents.

Fans think that because our guys are Div I players there should be zero mistakes. Coaches realize that the other guys on the court also happen to be Div I players, and sometimes errors are forced by the opponent. If it was so easy to avoid turnovers, every team would only have 1 or 2 per game.

Do people think this is a bad team? Right now advanced metrics have us as one of the top 15 programs in the country. Get some perspective, people. Look what is happening in Madison, Minneapolis, and Columbus. The sky is not falling.

Those schools aren't starting 4 seniors and a junior. Of course, you expect more growing pains, mistakes, with younger players (like Iowa will be next year). You don't expect that to be the case with a veteran team that has played a lot of games together.

I don't know anyone here who thinks this is a bad team, but this also isn't a top 15 team, no matter what the advanced metrics say. This team will likely make the NCAA tournament and might win a game. I'd say they are an above avg/elite PG from being good enough to win the B1G. There is a lot of talent on this team and you can't underestimate the value of senior experience. These guys have played so much together they should know each others moves before they even do them.

 

[Ladell-hawk]

I don't see the benefit of playing Gesell and Clemmons together. Despite having two point guards on the floor, we are still plagued by sloppy ball handling and turnovers. At this point, Gesell and Clemmons are who they are, so no sense holding our breath to see something new. We need more athleticism and scoring versatility, which entails someone who can dribble drive, get put backs, and rebound. The starting lineup, as constituted today, gives us no matchup challenges outside of Uthoff and very little scoring punch from 1 & 2.

First choice would be to be to start Uhl, which would give us another long, athletic guy who can attack off the bounce, post up, rebound, and defend. He is no slouch from the perimeter and IMO, is a better option than Clemmons. Sub Wagner / Baer / Ellingson for Uhl / Uthoff / Jok / Woodbury and allocate PT based on flow of game and who is hot. With Uhl we can throw the baseline / inbounds lob like we did with White and have another guy who has the potential finish in transition vs. charge, get blocked, or attempt weak layup. In short, we are floor walkers with the starting 5 with the exception of Uthoff and we need more athleticism.

Thoughts?

We need to get more scoring and especially rebounding out of Uhl, and he needs to pick up his defense.

 

[hawkeyeguy69]

He should be our 6th man bc bench leadership is needed and i think he has it.

That could be a good point. AC is a quality starter IMO. But what we have coming off the bench just doesn't have it. Uhl does not quite cut it. Baer will some day, maybe this season still, but not yet. Ellingson is a no.

For the purpose of 'team' we have AC come off the bench. Now who starts?? I would love to have Jones slide in, unfortunately that will have to be next year(how did his surgery go, btw?) . That leaves Uhl & Baer. Neither is ready for that. But would starting one of them make things different? Maybe? Uhl started one game and he did well on the stat sheet....

If we start Uhl, where do the others fall in? Uthoff moves to the 3, Jok to the 2, with Uhl at the 4? It is worth a shot. But that experiment better start now. Before the B1G season begins.

 

[binsfeldcyhawk2]

Wow...this thread delivers.

 

[RocknRollface]

I agree, they were NOT NORMAL, as you said yourself. On the season, we turn the ball over less than 16% of the time. We turned it over 22% in that game.

My point was that MG and Clemmons playing together appears to be an advantage so far statistically.

Are you saying there would be less panic by removing a ball handler from the line up?

I never made a comment on changing lineups.

My point was there is a huge difference between not expecting normal mistakes and not expecting mistakes of panic disarray and terrible decision making out of seniors.

There was absolutely no excuse to lose that game.

 

[IronFist1776]

Lots of good ideas on this thread. I too think maybe Fran shows a little too much loyalty by sticking w/ struggling players (McCabe). I want to see Williams out there learning and getting some experience. As inconsistent as Gessel is, he is our best PG but once Williams, Bohannon and Connor get going, we should be set for awhile. Gessel's problem isn't tgat he's not fast enough or athletic enough, it's that he doesn't have the mindset of a PG or a consistent jumper to keep defenders honest. Hopefully our newcomers won't have those kind of deficiencies. Would love to see Uhl or Baer start w/ Sapp and/or Williams coming off the bench. Does Fran kniw best? Well, no shit but he's not infallible and he admitted that he neglected our bench in the ISU surrender. Williams/Wagner/Baer all need minutes. OK, flame away.