# Sixers select Louis Williams at #45



## thaKEAF (Mar 8, 2004)

Really don't know anything about this guy, know that he's a point guard and he's a HS player.

Good job Billy King.  :curse:


----------



## southeasy (Jun 11, 2003)

draft.net describes him as an 'Allen Iverson'.


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

ThaWicketOne said:


> draft.net describes him as an 'Allen Iverson'.


Well draft.net also described Jerome Moiso as Kevin Garnett.


----------



## SixersFan (Dec 19, 2004)

PhillyPhanatic said:


> Well draft.net also described Jerome Moiso as Kevin Garnett.



That was a pretty accurate comparison. :biggrin:


----------



## ATLien (Jun 18, 2002)

It was a bad pick, but when you are that far down in the 2nd round, everything is a crap shoot anyways.


----------



## Kunlun (Jun 22, 2003)

Wow, I'm really disappointed in this selection. I thought we would address a need for the team, like the small forward position. 

I guess we could drop this guy in the NBDL because he won't be getting any playing time with Iverson and Green in front of him. When will we ever get out of this under sized shooting guard era? We may have just drafted Allen Iverson's future replacement.


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

TheATLien said:


> It was a bad pick, but when you are that far down in the 2nd round, everything is a crap shoot anyways.


Not this year, there were a lot of guys down there who will be able to contribute right away. This was a terrible move, because the Sixers gave up a future second round pick to draft this guy. If they didn't trade into the draft, I wouldn't have been this pissed off.


----------



## dcrono3 (Jan 6, 2004)

Am I the only one who likes this pick? AI isn't going to play forever, and what better way for a AI-like player to learn than under the real AI? Yes we could have went for some other players, but this is a pick for the future. If Williams turns into half the player AI is it would be a value pick. There are some undrafted FA we could go after, like Randolph Morris, Sean Banks, Jawad Williams, and John Gilchrist. The draft isn't the only way to fill our holes. Sometimes it might be better to invest in the high risk, high reward picks instead of going the safe route. To be honest, besides Ryan Gomes, I don't think any of the players picked after our pick would have helped the Sixers next year. Who knows, if we are lucky, maybe Louis Williams can show his potential next season. We swung for the fences, it remains to be seen if we made hard contact.


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

The thing is, Louis Williams two years from now won't be as good as John Gilchrist is right now, and I'm going to stick by that. If we were going for a PG go for Gilchrist, because he's big, strong, athletic and can shoot on top of the fact he can play the PG spot.

Louis Williams might have all the potential in the world, but even if he lives up to it, he'll be a smallish SG which even in the future isn't something the Sixers need. I can't remember the last time someone drafted someone for the sole purpose of being the future replacement of the team's franchise player (because he played the same style) that it worked out to the team's benefit.

I have no problem going with potential, but there were guys who were high risk who were still better than Williams.


----------



## SirCharles34 (Nov 16, 2004)

It didn't make me happy when the announcers said he can't shoot and he doesn't have any point guard skills. 

The guy picked right after us from France looked like he can play. 

The 1st Rd of the draft seemed to be pretty deep in talent this yr. Even the first few in the 2nd Rd looked good too but then the talent started to fade fast.

Personally, I was hoping we take a big man. I just hope AI can show this kid how to play.


----------



## Wu-banger (May 23, 2003)

PhillyPhanatic said:


> Not this year, there were a lot of guys down there who will be able to contribute right away. This was a terrible move, because the Sixers gave up a future second round pick to draft this guy. If they didn't trade into the draft, I wouldn't have been this pissed off.



This pretty much sums it up...... Gomes, Winston or Banks could all come in next year and help out, and we passed on all of them. We are looking at the exact same team as last year not filling any of our holes ...except coaching.

When will people realize that there is only one AI?? The NBA, NBDL, Europe, USBL, City LEagues, The Streets , and the jails are filled with 6' SG's, very few (Juan Dixon, Horace Jenkins, Delk, etc) make an impact. 

With players like Grainger (who would have helped this year) and Gerald Green falling to mid first round I would have loved to see them make a move up to fill an immediate need.


----------



## dcrono3 (Jan 6, 2004)

PhillyPhanatic said:


> The thing is, Louis Williams two years from now won't be as good as John Gilchrist is right now, and I'm going to stick by that. If we were going for a PG go for Gilchrist, because he's big, strong, athletic and can shoot on top of the fact he can play the PG spot.
> 
> Louis Williams might have all the potential in the world, but even if he lives up to it, he'll be a smallish SG which even in the future isn't something the Sixers need. I can't remember the last time someone drafted someone for the sole purpose of being the future replacement of the team's franchise player (because he played the same style) that it worked out to the team's benefit.
> 
> I have no problem going with potential, but there were guys who were high risk who were still better than Williams.


I understand what you are saying, but I still think Williams will become better than Gilchrist. Different preference of players, I guess. Are you sure he can't shoot? Because I recall some scouting reports I read having him as an above-average shooter from deep. Lets just wait and see, and we still have a chance for players like Gilchrist.


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

Loius should have gone to Georgia


----------



## Kunlun (Jun 22, 2003)

Louis Williams was the Naismith High School Player of the year. The award has only been given to High School aged men since 1987.

*Positive* - a lot of the players who won the award had outstanding NBA
careers.
*
Negative* - those that had those careers generally came in as a "top first
round" pick (of course many of them went to college first, but not all -
LeBron and Kobe).

I am sure the Sixers are hoping that Williams can develop into a special
player. The winners of the award before him:

1987 Dennis Scott
1988 Alonzo Mourning
1989 Kenny Anderson
1990 Damon Bailey
1991 Chris Webber
1992 Jason Kidd
1993 Randy Livingston
1994 Jerod Ward
1995 Ron Mercer
1996 Kobe Bryant
1997 Shane Battier
1998 Al Harrington
1999 Donnell Harvey
2000 Gerald Wallace
2001 Dajuan Wagner
2002 Raymond Felton
2003 LeBron James
2004 Dwight Howard

A very high "star" hit rate from 1987-1996. In the last 8 years, just LeBron, though a couple of "solid" NBA players.


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

I dont why everyone keeps hyping up this AI close wannabe. He can jump and score. Hes not that great a ballhandler and hes 6'2. Why do we want another small SG. Dont you all think its time to get with the times and get a legit sized 2, because this guy is not going to be a point


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Louis Williams is not a better player than John Gilchrist and when Gilchrist is starting by January (for the Cavaliers), this thread will look even worse.


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

HKF said:


> Louis Williams is not a better player than John Gilchrist and when Gilchrist is starting by January (for the Cavaliers), this thread will look even worse.


 Ive seen him play about 3 times in Louis Williams and I just dont know why he is so hyped. Is it because he gunned in high school and was the 1st, 2nd and 3rd options?


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

LOL @ AI showing him the ropes. What ropes? How to roll the fattest blunt?


----------



## UD40 (May 12, 2005)

ai2 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> loser williams


----------



## Mattjb34 (May 10, 2005)

My best hope for this kid, and our team, is that he takes a couple years in the NBDL and becomes a point guard. He has to be very athletic so hopefully he can become a defensive guard who just doesn't turn over the ball. I think the ideal players to emulate for him should be Lindsey Hunter and Daniel Ewing. If he can stroke the 3, get to the rack, play some D and not turn the ball over too much he might get some time in a few years. And if John Gilchrist is starting for the Cav's it will be for some awful reason, not b/c he's a stud. He's no better than Steve Blake and he still isn't getting any PT. This pick by Sixers was horrendous, if your going to draft a H.S. player why not get one of them with size (Amir Johnson, Andray Blatche, even C.J. Miles). I hope they bring in undrafted guys like Randolph Morris, Eddie Basden, and proven college players.


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

BEEZ said:


> LOL @ AI showing him the ropes. What ropes? How to roll the fattest blunt?


:laugh:


----------



## Like A Breath (Jun 16, 2003)

What surprised me about Louis Williams is that for such a small SG he has a pretty bad handle on the ball. He either guns it long range or drives straight to the rack using his athleticism. That won't fly as an NBA PG. I agree that John Gilchrist is and will always be better...he is a baller that will get better when he's surrounded with better players.


----------



## Mr. Hobbes (Jul 1, 2005)

It's clear with this pick that King wants to continue AI's legacy of an athletic, quick guard. Physically Williams is very similar to Iverson...

This is a good pick, and its not like there was much better talent at #45
(and no, Andray Blatche is not a better talent)


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

WTChan said:


> It's clear with this pick that King wants to continue AI's legacy of an athletic, quick guard. Physically Williams is very similar to Iverson...
> 
> This is a good pick, and its not like there was much better talent at #45
> (and no, Andray Blatche is not a better talent)


 So tell me, why would you want to continue the problems we have had for the lat 9 years of having a SG thats too small to defend his own position. It makes 0 sense. And yes there was better talent at what the Sixers needed right now, drafting from that position.


----------



## dcrono3 (Jan 6, 2004)

I just don't get why everyone can't give Louis Williams a chacne. Yeah youmight not like him now, but who knows what will happen in the future? We havn't even seen him play yet, why don't we wait until he at least plays in the summer leagues before we make a decision?


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

The thing is, its one thing to make a harsh decision on someone but its another to make a pointless draft pick. So we pick an "AI clone" where has the original gotten us. Small SG's unless they are AI dont stick. Why draft one, when hes not going to play for a few years and the team we are building is basically for right now


----------



## Mattjb34 (May 10, 2005)

I've read numerous times that BK drafted this kid with the intention of being a PG. He recognizes that he doesn't have PG skills right now but he's in no hurry to play this kid I'm sure. With that, you can't call him an A.I. clone, b/c if he is he'll never see an NBA court. I still don't like the pick, but at least he won't be playing SG for us anytime soon.


----------



## Kunlun (Jun 22, 2003)

Mattjb34 said:


> I've read numerous times that BK drafted this kid with the intention of being a PG. He recognizes that he doesn't have PG skills right now but he's in no hurry to play this kid I'm sure. With that, you can't call him an A.I. clone, b/c if he is he'll never see an NBA court. I still don't like the pick, but at least he won't be playing SG for us anytime soon.


Why would Billy King draft this guy to be a point guard? He could've just taken a point guard in the draft at our position like John Gilchrist. I don't think Louis Williams will ever develop into a real point guard because of his scoring instincts, kind of like Iverson, he never really learned how to play point guard. If Billy King was drafting for a point guard in the draft then he made a very very big mistake.


----------



## dcrono3 (Jan 6, 2004)

Kunlun said:


> Why would Billy King draft this guy to be a point guard? He could've just taken a point guard in the draft at our position like John Gilchrist. I don't think Louis Williams will ever develop into a real point guard because of his scoring instincts, kind of like Iverson, he never really learned how to play point guard. If Billy King was drafting for a point guard in the draft then he made a very very big mistake.



Well, I don't see anyone complaining about AI's play at PG this season. So if Louis Williams can develope and be a poor man's Iverson, then he could play point too. This is a pick for the future, and maybe Billy King thought that a converted Louis Williams would be better at point that Gilchrist. Or maybe he didn't want to touch Gilchrist's attitude and off-court troubles. So, even though AI never learned how to play pure PG, everyone loved his play there this year. If Louis Williams developes similairly, why couldn't he be a effective PG?


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

dcrono3 said:


> Well, I don't see anyone complaining about AI's play at PG this season. So if Louis Williams can develope and be a poor man's Iverson, then he could play point too. This is a pick for the future, and maybe Billy King thought that a converted Louis Williams would be better at point that Gilchrist. Or maybe he didn't want to touch Gilchrist's attitude and off-court troubles. So, even though AI never learned how to play pure PG, everyone loved his play there this year. If Louis Williams developes similairly, why couldn't he be a effective PG?


 Because people still complained about AI's play as a PG. Louis Williams neither has the handle nor speed that AI has now and thats at 30. Im the biggest AI fan I know and people still hate playing with him because of the amount of times he shoots. If you needed a PG, you draft Gilchrist. Whos bigger, plays the PG position better and is a helluva better defender. Its like people have become apologists for this kid. He didnt ask the Sixers to draft him no, but the excuses some of you are making are really holding little weight.

If the team is build for right now, why draft for the future? If we are building a team for the future there where other viable options other than PG play for the future. Next year is going to be a GREAT draft for PG's. If us regular posters and fans know this, then you know GM's know this. So why draft a guy that wont be ready for 3-4 years when you could have picked one of the many next year and they will be ready to go immediately?

Plain and simple Billy King dropped the ball. I hope Louis Williams has a good career and I wish him luck because he will need it, playing in Philly


----------



## Mattjb34 (May 10, 2005)

BEEZ said:


> Because people still complained about AI's play as a PG. Louis Williams neither has the handle nor speed that AI has now and thats at 30. Im the biggest AI fan I know and people still hate playing with him because of the amount of times he shoots. If you needed a PG, you draft Gilchrist. Whos bigger, plays the PG position better and is a helluva better defender. Its like people have become apologists for this kid. He didnt ask the Sixers to draft him no, but the excuses some of you are making are really holding little weight.
> 
> If the team is build for right now, why draft for the future? If we are building a team for the future there where other viable options other than PG play for the future. Next year is going to be a GREAT draft for PG's. If us regular posters and fans know this, then you know GM's know this. So why draft a guy that wont be ready for 3-4 years when you could have picked one of the many next year and they will be ready to go immediately?
> 
> Plain and simple Billy King dropped the ball. I hope Louis Williams has a good career and I wish him luck because he will need it, playing in Philly


Why is every1 on Gilchrist's jock? He played 1 1/2 good seasons at Maryland. Before p***ing off one of the most fundamental, and distinguished coaches in college basketball. He shoots too much to be a PG and never really showed the ability to distribute the ball. Some1 might have taken a chance on him if he didn't turn into a complete mistake with his attitude. I admit I liked him when he was at his prime in UM and was laying it down against Duke but then he ruined by becoming a shoot first PG with no passing skills. Louis Williams is a pick for the future and if he ever makes it to the L, he will be a PG. He was the 45th pick in the draft, he's not supposed to be great next year, or the year after. He will never be A.I. He won't play PG for us next year b/c he has no PG skills. Thats what the NBDL system if for now, so he can work on them and eventually progress to the point where he can play in this league as somewhat of a PG.


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

Mattjb34 said:


> Why is every1 on Gilchrist's jock? He played 1 1/2 good seasons at Maryland. Before p***ing off one of the most fundamental, and distinguished coaches in college basketball. He shoots too much to be a PG and never really showed the ability to distribute the ball. Some1 might have taken a chance on him if he didn't turn into a complete mistake with his attitude. I admit I liked him when he was at his prime in UM and was laying it down against Duke but then he ruined by becoming a shoot first PG with no passing skills. Louis Williams is a pick for the future and if he ever makes it to the L, he will be a PG. He was the 45th pick in the draft, he's not supposed to be great next year, or the year after. He will never be A.I. He won't play PG for us next year b/c he has no PG skills. Thats what the NBDL system if for now, so he can work on them and eventually progress to the point where he can play in this league as somewhat of a PG.


 Re-read my post Im on no player jock. Once again if we were looking for a PG why not take one. Thats the point this isnt about Gilchrist who 1 didnt shoot too much, Gary Williams demanded that he shot more so be correct about that. 2ndly, you drafted a guy to become a PG? What part of hes a terrible passer and his handle isnt great you cant understand. IF we needed a PG for the future Billy King should have drafted one next year in the deepest PG draft in years and took a player thats been playing that position. Picking Williams this year was pointless as I have pointed out. Gilchrist as in most peoples arguements are for if you needed a PG why not take him. I can name 6 other players I would have rather them drafted. Sorry try again, it was a bad pick


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

Mattjb34 said:


> Why is every1 on Gilchrist's jock? He played 1 1/2 good seasons at Maryland. Before p***ing off one of the most fundamental, and distinguished coaches in college basketball. He shoots too much to be a PG and never really showed the ability to distribute the ball. Some1 might have taken a chance on him if he didn't turn into a complete mistake with his attitude. I admit I liked him when he was at his prime in UM and was laying it down against Duke but then he ruined by becoming a shoot first PG with no passing skills. Louis Williams is a pick for the future and if he ever makes it to the L, he will be a PG. He was the 45th pick in the draft, he's not supposed to be great next year, or the year after. He will never be A.I. He won't play PG for us next year b/c he has no PG skills. Thats what the NBDL system if for now, so he can work on them and eventually progress to the point where he can play in this league as somewhat of a PG.


 Also you have quite a few double negatives in your post as well


----------



## Mattjb34 (May 10, 2005)

OK, the spelling lesson is cool and all. Louis Williams is just out of high school. Sometimes teams do this thing we call grooming players. It's harder to groom John Gilchrist for two reasons: 
1) He's set in his way b/c he's been playing ball this way in High School and College. He's in his mid 20's probably and can't take the couple years off to become a true point. He didn't play like a true point when he was in college.
2) He's already showed that he can be a ******* and was kicked of the team or left the team, not on good terms. 
P.S. How do u know Gary Williams told him to shoot more, were you in the huddles?

Louis Williams can become a PG b/c:
1) He's only 17/18 years old and can LEARN (say it with me) to pass the ball better and handle the ball better. These are things that can be taught. With things called drills. He can be groomed as PG for many years before he has to play for the Sixers. There is no pressure for him to step in and play anytime soon. What do you think people can't change their skill sets? Get a clue. The kids not going to play as a 6'2 SG unless he's got unbelieveable skills, which he doesn't have. He isn't going to be Lebron or Amare and step right in, his schedule will probably be to sit on the pine or NBDL for at least 3 years and develop like Jermaine O'Neal, Rashard Lewis, or T-Mac. I'm not saying he will be as good as them but his career will be in that fashion. 

I'm sure BK, or any1 else for that matter, doesn't care that you can think of 6 players you would rather they've chosen. Just for clarification, I never once stated that this was a good pick, rather I was pointing out some of the things the Sixers scouts might be thinking with this pick (b/c they were the ones that watched him play and choose him, not BK, if you listened to the post draft press conference).


----------



## Mr. Hobbes (Jul 1, 2005)

BEEZ said:


> And yes there was better talent at what the Sixers needed right now, drafting from that position.


List them, sans Gilchrist


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

Mattjb34 said:


> OK, the spelling lesson is cool and all. Louis Williams is just out of high school. Sometimes teams do this thing we call grooming players. It's harder to groom John Gilchrist for two reasons:
> 1) He's set in his way b/c he's been playing ball this way in High School and College. He's in his mid 20's probably and can't take the couple years off to become a true point. He didn't play like a true point when he was in college.
> 2) He's already showed that he can be a ******* and was kicked of the team or left the team, not on good terms.
> P.S. How do u know Gary Williams told him to shoot more, were you in the huddles?
> ...


 I really like your post because you really are strengthening my arguement. You say Louis Williams can become a better PG because of and you list all of these thing but do you also know that most Guards by the age of 18 already have a handle and is good at handling the ball because they are guards and shorter, so you want me to believe that a 6'2 guard handle is going to improve that dramatically in 2-3 years? 

What do you mean about Gilchrist? When did just turning 21 mean that you are in your mid twenties? And its not neccesary for him to take time of to become a true point because he already is one. You are not able to distinguish from the fact that hes a true point that can score the ball. Hes not a scoring point guard that passes. How do I know Gary Williams wanted him to score more. Gary Williams said it, countless times in interviews and such so thats how I know.

Back to your comments on Williams. LOL @ you tellling me to get a clue but your points are pointless. As I stated earlier if we were looking for a PG of the future one could have been drafted next year. Gilchrist was just everyones "pick" because of him being a recognizable name. Everyone thats upset were never about "drafting" Gilchrist, it was just a comparison. 

Did you also know that Louis Williams doesnt have the best of atitudes either, which caused him to slip as well. He was originally thought to be a mid to late round pick. He doesnt have the best attitude as well. So you shouldnt be so quick to pass judgement on the other guy without knowing everything about the current.

Also in what world do you know that "Scouts" draft players? That is the most ridiculous thing I have heard to date


----------



## Mattjb34 (May 10, 2005)

People's skills dont grow in 2-3 years? How do guys like Jermaine O'Neal, Sammy D, and Rashard Lewis go from not playing to contributing at a highly effective level???

John Gilchrist isn't going to be anything better than maybe a decent backup PG anyway. Maybe we can draft a kid with the 45th pick that has a chance to be something more. 

Please show me something that says Louis Williams had attitude problems. He was dead set on joining the NBA no matter where he was chosen, even tho his stocked dropped after poor performances in H.S. All Star games. According to all recruiting sites, he never had any intentions of honoring his Letter of Intent to Georgia. Not attitude problems, just naive. 

When it comes to drafting PG next year. Yeah, we could've done that, we still might do that. But we have this pick this year, that we have to use also and why not take a chance on a high schooler with very good athleticism that has a chance to be something special since they prob. didn't see any1 they liked. 
I'm pretty sure GM's have to listen to their scouts when it comes to draft picks like this, b/c thats what they hired them to do, scout players that is.


----------



## Spell Checker (Oct 3, 2002)

Mattjb34 said:


> People's skills dont grow in 2-3 years? How do guys like Jermaine O'Neal, Sammy D, and Rashard Lewis go from not playing to contributing at a highly effective level???
> 
> John Gilchrist isn't going to be anything better than maybe a decent backup PG anyway. Maybe we can draft a kid with the 45th pick that has a chance to be something more.
> 
> ...


You were just badly owned in the previous post and PhillyPhanatic and Beez have been owning you in every thread that you have posted in here. Maybe you should do further research and then come back. I also want to laugh at you for trying to compare high school big men to an undersized highschool SG. And Louis Williams I am better than everyone attitude has been talked about before. Go check the NBA draft forum and search his name.


----------



## Mattjb34 (May 10, 2005)

Yeah maybe your right. I just think you clowns are way off if you think John Gilchrist (or any1 else picked at the 45th spot) is going to make the Sixers better next year...


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

Mattjb34 said:


> Yeah maybe your right. I just think you clowns are way off if you think John Gilchrist (or any1 else picked at the 45th spot) is going to make the Sixers better next year...


 WOW, I never called you a name yet Im a clown, yet you couldnt suffciently support your own arguement? But Im the clown. LOL


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

What you don't get is this, if the Sixers drafted someone who all they did next year was compete for playing time pushing one of the top eight to protect their job it would've made this team better.

The fact that we passed on guys who'll most likely contribute next season, making their teams better makes this even worse. The way you're talking is as if no player drafted at 45 has ever made an impact in the league, so the Sixers might as well have gone after an undersized project.

What you are missing is that it doesn't matter where the pick is, there's always a chance to make your team better with that pick. I don't care if it's the 60th pick, hell the Dallas Mavericks two years ago made themselves better with the acquisition of Marquis Daniels and he went undrafted!

When Gilchrist is making money and plays up in Cleveland, I'm sure you'll be saying if it wasn't for LeBron he wouldn't be doing anything. This was a guy who was a top 30 talent in this draft, who slipped because he clashed with his coach, while playing on a pretty bad team in terms of talent. That said, like BEEZ alluded to, it wasn't like John Gilchrist was #1 on my wish list (or anyone elses). I just have a feeling that at least six players who were on the board after we picked that will contribute on the next level.


----------



## Mattjb34 (May 10, 2005)

No, I do get that, and there are a bunch of undrafted FA's I would love to see them bring in to compete. Them not having a Summer League team to evaluate the UFA is another subject. I know the history of the 2nd round w/ guys like Willie Green, Michael Redd, Marquis Daniels, and so on. There are a lot of second round guys that do contribute. I just don't see why we would draft for this year at PG, when A.I. is set to do his thing there again (I believe Cheeks is going to play him there again, I could be wrong) and he plays practically the whole game. As much as we would like to see Aaron Mckie go with that big contract, he's still going to be here and most likely Willie Green is going to be here. Iggy can play the two also if needed. Just doesn't make sense to draft a PG and have him sit and not play likely until A.I. retires. This way were in no hurry to get this kid on the court. He's only like 17/18. I wish they would've gone after some UFA's like Randolph Morris or Eddie Basden, and it's interesting to see who they send down to the NBDL to progress, I think each team is alloted a certain amount of players that can play under their representation? Any1 know the number?


----------



## Sliccat (Oct 16, 2004)

Um, I actually like the pick.

Maybe he doesn't have AI's skills yet. Wow. I haven't seen anybody in the league who does. They're not going to get another AI, because no one ever has. But, in a second round pick, they got a player who might start at PG in five years. Keep in mind, they traded a FUTURE second round pick for this one, or it would've gone to detroit. So, they got a player who could contribute in the FUTURE. I don't see the problem. He'll probably be ready to play by the time that pick they traded would come anyways.

Also, sometimes you've got to have some balls when you make a move. This whole board has been criticising Billy King for being too passive of a GM, not having a vision, and trading the present for the future. He was the opposite of every complaint you've had of him, and you STILL criticize him. Maybe he's not the greatest GM ever, but get off his nuts for a half a second, please.

By the way, how come nobody's complained about him not getting VC yet? With what the Nets gave the raptors, don't you think that King could've gotten Vince for Robinson('s expiring contract) and Willie Green? Maybe a Jax throw in? He could've done it. Imagine it...

AI
Iggy
VC
CWebb
Dalembert

*sigh*


----------



## Mattjb34 (May 10, 2005)

Finally, some one gets it. Not sure about the VC trade just b/c he doesn't or didn't play hard every night but he is a tremendous talent.


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

sliccat said:


> Um, I actually like the pick.
> 
> Maybe he doesn't have AI's skills yet. Wow. I haven't seen anybody in the league who does. They're not going to get another AI, because no one ever has. But, in a second round pick, they got a player who might start at PG in five years. Keep in mind, they traded a FUTURE second round pick for this one, or it would've gone to detroit. So, they got a player who could contribute in the FUTURE. I don't see the problem. He'll probably be ready to play by the time that pick they traded would come anyways.
> 
> ...


 Im going to go out on the limb here and say that both of you are under 20 and dont know the entire history of this franchise and the moves that this man makes. I clearly stated reasons as to why this pick makes absolutely no sense. GM's are supposed to look ahead and if thats what he was doing he sure has tunnel vision. Its not about agreeing with me but you 2 are the only ones in the minority here. Everyone else has laid out reasons why, its your choice not to accept them at least understand them.


----------



## Mattjb34 (May 10, 2005)

I know enough of the history, I know the bad trades/draft picks. I just don't see it as the horrific pick that all of you do. It's not the best pick and I see what all of you are saying but I just don't see it as the disaster that all of you do.


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

sliccat said:


> Um, I actually like the pick.
> 
> Maybe he doesn't have AI's skills yet. Wow. I haven't seen anybody in the league who does. They're not going to get another AI, because no one ever has. But, in a second round pick, they got a player who might start at PG in five years. Keep in mind, they traded a FUTURE second round pick for this one, or it would've gone to detroit. So, they got a player who could contribute in the FUTURE. I don't see the problem. He'll probably be ready to play by the time that pick they traded would come anyways.
> 
> Also, sometimes you've got to have some balls when you make a move. This whole board has been criticising Billy King for being too passive of a GM, not having a vision, and trading the present for the future. He was the opposite of every complaint you've had of him, and you STILL criticize him. Maybe he's not the greatest GM ever, but get off his nuts for a half a second, please.


What frustrates me is the team traded a future second rounder to get this pick. My problem is Amir Johnson is a guy who the Pistons drafted after Williams was off the board, will most likely be better, as well as Andray Blatche who went to Washington. Both players were also High Schoolers, who had size.

You say he picks a guy for the future, but that doesn't neccessarily mean he has a vision. What type of vision does a GM have to fail to field a summer league squad? I don't remember anyone saying he was passive, they were saying he just doesn't make smart moves, and then when those moves washout he uses someone else as a scapegoat.

The true point guard is back.. and yet this team is still caught up in trying to turn an undersized two guard into a point. :sigh:



> By the way, how come nobody's complained about him not getting VC yet? With what the Nets gave the raptors, don't you think that King could've gotten Vince for Robinson('s expiring contract) and Willie Green? Maybe a Jax throw in? He could've done it. Imagine it...
> 
> AI
> Iggy
> ...


FWIW, King did say he offered Toronto a better deal than New Jersey and they didn't take it. They most likely balked because New Jersey had a surplus of draft picks (via the Kenyon Martin trade) which were more attractive to the Raptors. Doesn't bother me, I'm not a big Vince Carter fan anyway.


----------



## Rhubarb (Mar 19, 2005)

Haven't seen it be posted here, but an article on the man in question:



> Philadelphia 76ers: As the nation's top high school basketball player, Louis Williams fully expected to be selected in the first round of last month's NBA draft.
> 
> When he slipped into the second round, all the way down to the Sixers at No. 45, Williams was stunned.
> 
> "I heard a lot of negative talk about holes in my game," Williams said Thursday. "Maybe that's why I went in the second round, I don't know. I feel like I should have been taken earlier."


Linkage


----------



## dcrono3 (Jan 6, 2004)

PhillyPhanatic, if I understand correctly you think that if the Sixers were to draft for the future, they shouldn't have picked a PG, right? You think that a big man would have been better, and I wouldn't argue against you for that. However, I wouldn't say that if we were to get a PG of the future we should have waited until next year. I'm not too sure next year would be a great year for PG. Lots of players who look good could disappoint and have their stocks drop a lot. Gilchrist himself is a perfect example. Right after the 2004 draft Gilchrist was considered by most to be a top-10 pick. One year later, he is undrafted. IMO if you are targeting a position, you shouldn't wait for a future draft. Also, you may think that Gilchrist's off-court troubles aren't that serious, buut BK might think differently. Only time will tell who is correct.


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

No, I didn't say draft a PG next year, that's what BEEZ said. I'm saying don't pass up size with potential.


----------



## Mattjb34 (May 10, 2005)

Yeah, I agree. I don't know the particulars about the H.S. big men but I would've liked to see them take one. I know Amir Johnson was available. I think Andray Blatche was right around their pick. I wouldn't have been angry about Randolph Morris even tho he went undrafted. It would've been nice to snag one but I'm not as upset as every1 about the Louis Williams pick...


----------



## Mr. Hobbes (Jul 1, 2005)

King picked Louis Williams to be a 2, not a PG
I have a hunch that the next young player to join the Sixers would be a Snow-type floor general/defensive stopper
They had a fair amount of success in 2000 (or some year they were in the finals), with Snow/Iverson/Mutombo
They're trying to win with Snow-type-player/Williams/Dalembert
as their core.
They're already set at the 3 with Iguodala (I think he'll move to the 3)
Korver's probably gone, but that's just another hunch.


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

WTChan said:


> King picked Louis Williams to be a 2, not a PG
> I have a hunch that the next young player to join the Sixers would be a Snow-type floor general/defensive stopper
> They had a fair amount of success in 2000 (or some year they were in the finals), with Snow/Iverson/Mutombo
> They're trying to win with Snow-type-player/Williams/Dalembert
> ...


I surely hope that's not the case. The East is getting stronger, in the next ten years a team won't be able to win the East with that formula.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Iggy is the SG of the future and they draft Louis Williams to be the 2 of the future? :raised_ey 

I don't think anyone in their right man would say that Louis will be better than Iggy.


----------



## dcrono3 (Jan 6, 2004)

PhillyPhanatic said:


> No, I didn't say draft a PG next year, that's what BEEZ said. I'm saying don't pass up size with potential.


My bad. However, maybe King didn't see as much potential in Blanche or Amir than Louis Williams. At least we should give Williams a chance to prove himself.


----------



## DWest Superstar (Jun 30, 2005)

Louis Williams= Best player of the future in the 2nd round of this years draft.


----------



## thekid (Apr 3, 2003)

Definitely should have gone to college.


----------



## Kunlun (Jun 22, 2003)

A thought just popped into my mind, actually more of a question. Anyone who has seen Louis Williams and Monta Ellis play, who's better?


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

Kunlun said:


> A thought just popped into my mind, actually more of a question. Anyone who has seen Louis Williams and Monta Ellis play, who's better?


 Monta Ellis is better IMO


----------



## (-) 0 † § I-I () † (Jun 11, 2002)

Now as appealing as this argument is, I am not going to be able to hold my ground that strong because my knowledge on this matter is not as strong as some of you guys. With that being said I will give my thoughts.

While all true basketball fans know, there is a lot of talent left after the first round, most casual fans dont give a **** who their team takes in the 2nd round. Because they havent heard of half the guys. An arena is filled with casual fans, while there are many true fans out there , who know the game well, I would say they are the minority.

As a general manager Billy King gets paid to make money. Winning is not the only thing he gets paid to do, a team can win, and have no fans. A team can be horrific, but exciting enough to bring in a lot of fans. Depending on the owners and teams, winning and bringing in money can be prioritized differently.

Allen Iverson brings fans. Personally, I do not think we will ever win a championship with AI. If it was going to happen, it would have happened. Now does that mean Billy should get rid of him? No. because hes arguably them most exciting player in the game. Ive been to lotttttttts of AI's games, and in about every one of those games, I saw something that made my jaw drop. Fans love that, especially casual fans, the ones who bring the money.

So looking at pick 45, Billy had to decide, do I select someone who will help my team more, or do I select someone who will still help out my team, but who might also be a bit more exciting. If this were the first round, I think he would without a doubt go with talent, in order to win. But being that its later in the draft, and nobody is really a sure thing, I think he went high school. 

Drafting a high school player gives those casual fans hope. Because in the back of their minds, he could be the next TMAC, Jermaine O'neal, Rashard Lewis. Someone who develops. 

Personally I think Williams athleticism will bring excitement. Even if he is garbage, if he can jump throw one down, have some games where he puts up points and gives people glimpses of the AI inside him, then those fans will be happy. Gilchrist on the other hand, would most likelyhave been a more consistent, scoring, passing, under control player who wouldnt really have made a difference to the fans.

Now I dont like Billy King, but thats my guess as to his reasoning.

Ideally for me, Louis Williams will develop into Jason Terry. A scoring guard who can run, but also handle the point. Quickness, speed, athleticism.

Who did I want? Ryan Gomes, but I am not that angry over it. Money is a difference maker.


----------



## Mattjb34 (May 10, 2005)

For the L. Williams/Monta Ellis comparison: I've never seen either play but have read a good amount from recruiting sites. Ellis has more skills that are already in progress. Passing, is by far a better shooter, and is taller. From what I understand, Williams lacks these tools and rides off his incredible athleticism. He isn't as athletic as A.I. but they make it sound like he's on that level. Williams started his Sr. year as the best recruit but dropped down and I think Ellis ended up better. 

Gomes would've been a nice pick but I'm not sure where he would've played b/c that SG or SF spot is occupied by Willie Green, Korver, Mckie, and Iggy. They could've drafted him to beat out one of those players but then your paying 5, or more guys, for the same position.


----------



## UD40 (May 12, 2005)

*The up side of having Louis....*

is that you can have Bow Wow player for you!! Lol, I was watching MTV Cribs earlyer and Bow wow was on, he was in his game room and was like, "this is my man, Lou Will" Louis turned, looked like a deer in the head lights, lol, he was SCARED.


----------



## Sixerfanforlife (Jun 23, 2005)

*Re: The up side of having Louis....*

Given the situation, if your a casual fan that merely clicks on Comcast Sportsnet to see Allen Iverson (I am that type of fan, don't get me wrong I hate the 43-39 record, but I love seeing Ai play) Then this is a pick for that type of fanbase, however when will King learn that money is not important.

And if King truly believes Money is important, why is he wasting valuable Chit-ching (75 million!!) On a mere Center who could develop into an All-star or could be Jerome James, having that been said I'll be questioning this move for alot of reasons.

If Billy King honestly wanted A point guard (Which even NBATV knew they needed) Why didn't he move up to at least the 29th pick (Honestly is there anyone who wants a 'david harrison') Why Louis Williams? Why not Ryan Gomes? Why not someone who can contribute right away?

Simply put there are many questions to be asked about the draft, while I shall admit that these skills can be greatly improved 3-5 years down the road, will they be good enough to say ' he was a worthy risk in 2004' I seriously doubt it, he'll be 'okay' at the most, but he'll never be good, or even great, don't even say 'superstar' or 'all star' It's not going to happen.

Him being Jason Terry? Do you honestly believe we should compare Dallas' Best possible replacment for Nash to a guy whom reportedly 1)Has no ball handling 2) Isn't a good passer 3)Just overall sucks?

I don't believe in that crap, I also don't believe in drafting possible 'potential'.

Drafting Dunks does not mean drafting the next Tim Duncan, someone who's a true 'star' And a star is one who contributes to the team, does whatever it takes and helps them out and feels the pain.

Iverson only did this type of thing once in the 01-02 season and if you recall that's when we lost to the Lakers 4-1.

Okay sure, Iverson has matured greatly and has improved his ability to play the PG quite well, but is it a position for him in the long run?

Personally I liked how he burned the Magic for 60 Points, I even liked how he disrupted whatever Milwaukee bucks defense there was for 45-50 Points a game. (Series won 4-0) but can he slow the game down?

The average point guard can slow the game down, play some hard nosed defense, and stays with his man, many complain about Eric Snow, but in my opinion, the best pg, we've had in the 2000' era.

If anything else the best King at this point can do is focus on our flaws in Free agency, I know not (yes I'm writing like Shakesspear deal the **** with it!) how much money we contain but I do know that it's little to none so King must be smart this season.

Who did I want? Well I wanted Ian Mahamini, He was a project and 1-2 years down the road could've easily replaced Webber, and Allowed AI to have a true 2nd scoring option and a true complement on the starting lineup.

Don't mean to tell me we couldn't acquire at least a 25th round Pick?

I liked this guy every much I liked Williams (Because he was the high schooler, and I was thinking at least Stephon Marbury).

But given the draft Prospects, this move flat out sucks Period.


----------



## The Effin One (Jul 22, 2005)

i think we're forgetting about the NBDL, and the fact that it is certainly going to increase the trade value of young 'potential' players.

Say we send Louis Williams to the NBDL and he looks like a star, but we already have Iverson. We can trade him for a player that better fits the system just because of that.

It happens in baseball's minor league system all the time, I don't see why the Sixers wouldn't do that with him. Wasn't he projected to be a lottery pick at the beginning of the year?

of course, I'm sure this isn't what was going through Billy King's head, with our luck he'll be on the roster and not in the NBDL, but this is the only logical reason i can think of that they would select Louis Williams.


----------



## Kunlun (Jun 22, 2003)

The Effin One said:


> i think we're forgetting about the NBDL, and the fact that it is certainly going to increase the trade value of young 'potential' players.
> 
> Say we send Louis Williams to the NBDL and he looks like a star, but we already have Iverson. We can trade him for a player that better fits the system just because of that.
> 
> ...


That's an excellent plan and I think one that is on the minds of Sixers management.


----------

