Utah State transfer portal player breakdown — Garry Clark | Sports

Utah State’s first transfer portal addition, the former Texas A&M-Corpus Christ forward Garry Clark, fulfils part of the promise from head coach Jerrod Calhoun that the Aggies were going after players who could add scoring in the post. Clark is a versatile forward with a potential for high-end impact on the Aggies next season as they aim to extend their three-year streak of having at least 26 wins and run of five appearances in the last six NCAA Tournaments.

Here, we’ll do a deep dive into Clark, from the basic info and stats to the advanced metrics and some film to get the full picture on what he’s bringing to Logan and the things that attracted the eye of Calhoun in the first place.

As a note on source for stats in this piece. Basic averages (points, rebounds, etc.) come from Sports Reference, as do the advanced stats of Win Shares and Box Plus/Minus. Bayesian Performance Rating comes from EvanMiya.com as does any lineup data used. All stats referencing specific shot types (i.e. shots at rim or jump shots) along with play-specific shot attempts (such as post-ups or spot-up shooting) come from Synergy Sports.

Biographical Info

• Height: 6’8″
• Weight: 210 lbs
• Class: Graduate Senior (1 year of eligibility)
• Hometown: St. Louis, MO
• High School: Cardinal Ritter College Prep
• Previous Colleges: Western Texas College (2021-22), Tarleton State (2022-23), Texas A&M-Corpus Christi (2023-24 & 2024-25)

Clark has spent the majority of his life in the southern U.S., being raised and going to high school in Missouri and then four years of college across three different Texas-based colleges. He began his collegiate journey in the junior college ranks at Western Texas, quickly showcased Division I talent and then made the 70-mile journey from Snyder, Texas to Stephenville where he made an ultimately quick stop at Tarleton State. This one season at TSU would prove the be the one year in which Clark struggled to find his footing and fail to be a top producer on his team. He averaged what remains career-worst numbers in virtually every category, and these struggles likely led to his decision to transfer again. Clark travelled a significantly longer distance than his first transfer, but remained in the Lone Star State, landing at Texas A&M-Corpus Christi where he’s spent the last two years.

The Islanders saw moderate success with Clark on their team, a continuation of what is now four straight 20-win seasons. That streak has continued despite the departure of head coach Steve Lutz (who went to Western Kentucky and later to Oklahoma State) the offseason in which Clark arrived. The only success that didn’t stick was the NCAA Tournament appearances. Texas A&M-Corpus Christi made it both years Lutz was the head coach, but missed out the two years in which Clark was there.

Statistics

Here’s a summary of his advanced catch-all metrics, with context of his rank within Texas A&M-Corpus Christi and his conference (Southland).

• Box Plus/Minus (BPM): 2.3 (4th on team / 11th in Southland)
  • Offensive BPM: 3.2 (1st / 4th)
  • Defensive BPM: -0.9 (12th / 68th)
• Win Shares (WS): 4.4 (1st / 5th)
  • Offensive WS: 2.4 (1st / 7th)
  • Defensive WS: 2.0 (1st / 6th)
  • WS per 40 Minutes: 0.180 (1st / 5th)
• Bayesian Performance Rating (BPR): 2.54 (1st / 7th) 
  • Offensive BPR: 1.72 (1st / 9th)
  • Defensive BPR: 0.82 (2nd / 21st)

Strengths

• Rebounds at a solid level against all types of competition
• Positional versatility (can play both power forward and center for long periods)
• Efficient and productive post scorer
• Consistent scorer overall
• Decent jump shooting ability

Weaknesses

• Lacks high-end length, size or athleticism to dominate at higher levels of D1 basketball
• Could get physically dominated by bigger centers if matched up with one consistently
• Shooting could dip below average, impacting scoring ability

In-depth Scouting Report

Calhoun got himself a very solid all-around power forward by landing Clark. He clears any worries of being a tweener by possessing a capable combination of size and skill to perform duties as a forward and even as a small-ball center. Two aspects of Clark’s game stand out immediately and prominently — his scoring and rebounding — as he averaged 15 points and eight rebounds last year and tallying eight double-doubles.

Starting with the rebounding, there’s every expectation that he can rebound at a high level even when moving up from the lower end of the mid-majors to the fringe power league the Mountain West has become. His biggest strength is on the defensive glass where his 21.3 defensive rebounding percentage led the Southland Conference. Those solid percentages come despite a fair amount of high-level rebounding opponents Clark faced last season. Four Southland teams ranked inside the top 50 in offensive rebounding percentage with two non-conference opponents as well, accounting for 10 of Clarks’ 34 total games in 2024-25. In those 10 appearances against notable rebounding threats, he reeled in 8.5 boards per outing.

Calling Clark an elite rebounder would be a stretch — his rebounding percentage from last year (15.7) would rank second on the Aggies behind Karson Templin — but he’s clearly someone that is going to challenge for, and get, quite a few boards. Simply put, Clark is physical in the trenches, boxes out well and fights for rebounds well on both ends.

On the offensive side, Clark brings solid potential as an inside and outside scorer. His points come from, broadly speaking, three main types of attempts. The first is post-ups, which made up the highest percentage of his scoring attempts. Second to that is his role as a roaming/cutting big, making cuts into pockets of the defense to receive passes for open looks in the paint. And thirdly, there’s his spot-up attempts, which combines both his 3-point shooting and instances where he attacked close-out defenders and drove the paint for layups (he also drew a lot of his fouls this way).

You can immediately see his inside-outside potential in the very first possessions of Texas A&M-Corpus Christi’s game against New Mexico. When initially guarded by Lobos’ forward Mustapha Amzil, Clark backs him down and secures a post score.

And when UNM’s center, Nelly Junior Joseph, ends up on him the next play, Clark steps outside of the arc and drills a 3-pointer.

Starting with the post-up game, Clark isn’t as much of power back-down type of post scorer in the same archetype of guys like Great Osobor, Neemias Queta, Nelly Junior Joseph, Zach Edey or other notable post-up bigs Aggie fans will be familiar with. Clark will still remind you why his position is called power forward, but there’s a lot more speed and finesse required. Many times his speed gives him a step on the defender and then he uses his strength and physicality to carve out a spot around the rim to ensure an open window for a shot, but other times he’s paired against a smaller defender and will still bully his way to the basket when the situation calls for it.

Clark isn’t limited to just diving toward the basket in post-up situations as he has a jump shot he’ll pull out as another option to keep defenders on their toes. It’s part of an overall mid-range package Clark has in his game.

These kinds of shots can be very tricky to hit with enough consistency to be worth it. There’s a reason the analytics-based modern game has shunned mid-range shooting for all but high-end shot-makers (especially in college). Clark falls into the category of player who will justify volume attempts in the mid-range. Last year he shot 52.4 percent on jump shots under 17 feet and made 40.0 percent between 17 feet and the 3-point line. Combined, it means Clark makes 46.3 percent of his non-layup/non-hook shot 2-pointers, which is a very solid percentage, especially at the volume he puts up these shots (1-2 per game) and the fact many of them are partially guarded when coming from post-up attempts.

Out of 313 players last year that had at least 100 post-up scoring attempts last year, Clark ranked 105th in points per possession and was in the 77th percentile for with his 1.0 PPP. Like his rebounding numbers, that’s not elite, but still very respectable and is going to add to Utah State’s scoring versatility.

If there is a hang-up to those stats, it’s that Utah State brought in someone last year that boasted a similar efficiency and volume that Clark is bringing in this year, that previous addition being Aubin Gateretse. At Stetson in 2023-24, Gateretse averaged 0.921 PPP on post-ups and had elite efficiency on his hook shot, ranking 12th in field goal percentage on hook shots among those with as many attempts as him (49). We just noted that USU’s bigs, Gateretse among them, were not efficient in post scoring. Will Clark see a similar downturn in effectiveness as he moves from a low-major conference to the upper fringes of mid-major ball?

The best indication we’ll have for now regarding Clark’s ability to translate is likely his five games against teams ranked top 100 in KenPom (Houston, Purdue, New Mexico and twice against McNeese). We’ll specifically include post-ups, but while we’re at it we’ll look at other stats as well to get a full picture.

There’s some pretty positive indications in these numbers. The drop in field goal percentage is somewhat concerning, but few things mitigate that. First among these is the minimal drop in overall points per possession, which gives Clark credit for scoring via free throws and the fact that a 3-pointer is worth more than a 2-pointer. Other factors include an increase in scoring production and virtually non-existent change in rebound against teams with much more size and athleticism.

Clark’s performance against these better opponents provides some assurance that he won’t see the offensive dip Gateretse saw, especially as the same exercise we just did for Clark may have been able to predict some of Gateretse’s offensive struggles this year. In 2023-24 with Stetson, Gateretse had four games where he faced teams in the top 100 of KenPom. Here’s the same comparison we did with Clark (3-point shooting excluded since Gateretse wasn’t a regular outside shooter).

Pulling these two comparisons aside each other and you can see a bit of a trend. Gateretse had an outsized offensive impact against ASUN-level competition and dominated the paint and glass as well. Once pitted against higher level teams, his role shrunk down. His offensive and defensive roles shrunk a bit. Gateretse’s strengths inside the paint as a finisher and rebounder largely remained, but while his post-up efficiency technically went up, he saw a 48 percent decrease in his frequency of post-up scoring attempts (from 3.5 per game to 1.8). Clark, meanwhile, didn’t see his role change much at all. There was a 16 percent drop in his rate of post-ups (3.1 to 2.6), but it’s a much smaller drop and was still accompanied by an increase in efficiency.

Aside from the post-ups, the most notable scoring thrust Clark will present is as a shooter and the complimentary attacking-the-closeout drives he pulls out on a very regular basis. Clark attempted a decent number of 3-pointers, but he got almost as much mileage out of faking the long-range attempt and then rampaging down the lane. For reference, Mason Falslev drove to the basket 2.4 times per game last year and Clark, as a big-man, wasn’t that far behind at 1.9 per game. And even when stopped short of the cup, he’s able to finish with solid efficiency.

Bigs can very often struggle to put the ball on the floor and drive to the basket. Dribble-drives are not their forte as usually dribbling in general isn’t something bigs do. Bigs will often commit live-dribble turnovers or commit traveling violations when put into these situations. Clark does not find himself in those situations, at least anymore than the next capable driver. His turnover percentage on drives sits at 15.2 percent, which again is not far off from Falslev (13.4).

The thing that ultimately helps the dribble-drive game the most, though is Clark’s 3-point shooting. Without it, teams wouldn’t bite so hard on his pump fakes. And while Clark won’t keep opposing coaches awake at night with his percentage (career 30.5 and peaking at 33.3 at the D1 level), it’s perfectly enough that teams aren’t going to leave him alone out there. His high release and 6-foot-8 frame make for a very difficult challenge, something that also aids him greatly in his mid-range jump shots.

The main worry with Clark is whether his percentage will drop well below the NCAA average, which was 34 percent last year. Clark being slightly below that average a 33.3 percent is hardly a problem, but if he falls back to the 26.3 percent he shot as a junior that would be cause for alarm. For the optimist, his three other seasons of college should provide enough evidence that that low point was an anomaly. Between Clark’s other season at Texas A&M-Corpus Christi, his year at Tarleton State and the one at Western Texas, he made 36.7 percent of his threes.

One of the things that must be pointed out about Clark is his consistency, or more pointedly, his lack of really poor games statistically. Clark scored in double figures in 33 of his 34 games and shot at least 44 percent in 31 of 34 games. There’s even a hidden level of impressiveness in that Clark’s scoring average is pretty low compared to the players who usually have a high number double-digit scoring games. Clark was one of 27 players to have at least 33 games of 10+ points and he had the lowest scoring average of any of them, with all but six averaging at least 18 points. Night in and night out, Clark was getting his points and didn’t need an occasional 25-point game to bolster his scoring average.

Defensively there are some mixed reviews and this will also feed into some of the weaknesses for Clark. On film, Clark is pretty active as a backside help defender. He’s quick to help off his man and provide backside rim protection and/or get in the path of a driving defender to try and scare him off a drive and force a kick-out where the defense can then recover from. It’s sound fundamentally, but beyond that it’s hard to pinpoint an aspect of defense where Clark really stands out. He has, at times, been a steals merchant in the paint, averaging 1.0 swipes as a freshman playing JUCO ball and then 1.1 as a junior, but he dipped to 0.7 last year. Advanced metrics have a hard time figuring out whether he’s a decently positive defender or an underwhelming one with BPR citing him as the second-most impactful defender on the team and 12th-best in the Southland to Defensive BPM slating him as one of the worst on his team and the conference as a whole.

As a post defender, there are aspects to be worried about, especially when he plays small-ball center. The Aggies struggled to defend in the post and Clark had his own struggles when going 1v1 with guys that possess size and length that he just can’t match. Here’s another example from the New Mexico game where Atiki Ally Atiki just muscles right by him.

This is probably the biggest and most glaring potential weakness for Clark, his lack of elite physical attributes. His 6-foot-8 height is solid, especially for power forward, but his 210-pound listing is concerning depending on its accuracy. It almost certainly isn’t accurate, given it’s the same reported weight Dexter Akanno had with the Aggies last year and watching Clark he simply does not look to be close to the same weight as Akanno so someone is probably lying. But it’s pretty clear on film that Clark isn’t a 240-plus pound paint bully. Barring matchups against smaller forwards and guards, he will not have a massive size advantage. And if he spend significant time at center, he’ll run into plenty of players he is notably smaller then.

All of those notes about Clark’s defense does leave out one key consideration, and that’s the scheme. Texas A&M-Corpus Christi played exclusively man defense, with no meaningful zone in sight. The Aggies are closer to the opposite with about a 70-30 split in favor of Eric Haut’s matchup zone. The activity Clark shows off-ball is a very good sign that he should be able to pick this scheme up rather quickly and find success in it. And with his excellent positional fit (more on that later), he could have a high impact, even if statistically he’s unlikely to be spectacular. Advanced metrics and the good ole eye test may very well pick up on it, though.

Fit with Utah State

Adding Clark is a very good move for Utah State as it gives the Aggies more physicality and rebounding in the frontcourt while not giving up much in the way of perimeter skill. Utah State had issues with rebounding through much of the season, but not for a lack of good rebounders. 

Having good rebounders on the team isn’t something Utah State’s been lacking, though. Templin and Gateretse worked rather well in that regard, with Isaac Johnson and Isaac Davis being decent as well in the few minutes they played. But aside from the early part of the season when the Johnson/Gateretse pairing saw time on the floor, those four players basically didn’t play alongside each other. It meant the Aggies would run one center, usually Templin or Gateretse, and rest of the lineup would consist of guards. And while tough-nosed rebounding guards like Falslev really helps, not having multiple bigs on the court is something that can occasionally be incredibly problematic and the Aggies found that out in a big way as the season progressed when facing bigger teams like Boise State, Colorado State and UCLA.

What Utah State lacked most last year was a player that could perform all, or even most, of the duties of a modern power forward. In the modern game, the PF needs to be able to live in the paint for things like rebounding or secondary rim protection, but also be able to step outside the arc and hit 3-pointers, and also have the ability to put the ball on the floor and attack a closeout. The Aggies only had guys that could fulfil part of those requirements. Tucker Anderson and Dexter Akanno had the perimeter skill but not the impact in the paint. Templin and Isaac Davis were able to muck it up in the paint but had little perimeter skill. Clark will be able to step in and do all of those things. Even if his perimeter skill and speed isn’t at an elite level, he’s viable in those skills, something none of Templin, Davis, Gateretse or Johnson could quite say. Teams will respect Clark’s 3-point shooting and his film and turnover rate provide ample evidence of his ability to move with the ball in his hands in small, but meaningful doses.

The important thing about the combination of skills and attributes Clark brings is that it means he’ll be able to play next to any other player in USU’s frontcourt. The trio of Templin, Gateretse and Davis were all basically incompatible with each other, not playing a single non-garbage possession together the entire season. Clark could play alongside any one of USU’s other three bigs currently on the 2025-26 roster (Templin, Davis and incoming freshman David Iweze). That would mean multiple rebounding bigs on the court, having multiple post defenders and just more length overall. All of those things were showcased as shortcomings for USU late in the season and adding Clark addresses those.

Playing alongside another big is something Clark did a lot of last year and there’s every bit of evidence to show he can work well in tandem with those bigs. He even showcased some pretty solid passing to his fellow bigs. In this clip against Houston, Clark cleared out of the paint to create space, but immediately found a passing lane for his teammate in the paint and set up a score against a very tough Cougars defense.

Clark’s ability to hit the 3-pointer allows him to create this space since teams have to at least respect his ability to hit from the outside. That is incredibly useful for his power forward minutes but could get most interesting if Clark spends meaningful time at center. Having a five-out lineup for significant portions of a game is not something the Aggies have done much in recent years. They could have done that, since they’ve had a 3-point shooting seven-footer, Isaac Johnson, on the roster for three years, but his skillset went underutilized in Logan. It’s unlikely that USU will run five-out lineups for bulk minutes (Clark will likely spend most of his time paired with one of USU’s non 3-point shooting bigs) but in the event the Aggies run into an in-game situation where going five-out creates a massive advantage, the option will be there in a way it hasn’t been since Clark will play bulk minutes in a way Johnson rarely ever did.

Clark’s post scoring will also add a new element to Utah State’s offense (provided it’s able to translate to a higher level as noted above). The Aggies were 330th in total post-up plays at just 84 the entire year, or 2.47 per game. Gateretse, Templin and Johnson made up the majority of those and, unfortunately, that trio largely justified the low volume by shooting just 35.7 percent and averaging 0.662 points per possession on post-ups (for some hope, Templin was the best of the three, ranking just above average at 0.870 PPP on post-ups). Clark will change that dynamic drastically this upcoming season. While USU had 84 post-ups as a team last year, Clark had 103 by himself and far out-performed the Aggies in per-possession efficiency (1.0 PPP vs 0.655).