# Sell me Marvin Williams...



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

I still don't really get this kid's hype. People just say Marvin Williams this, Marvin Williams that. He didn't even start on UNC. Will he start his first year in the NBA? Will he be better than Amare if he's a PF? Will he be better than KG? Or if he's a SF, will he be better than Lebron or T-Mac? If you answered yes to either of these questions, explain.

Give me your best sell.


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

*Ditto with me. As a Bucks fan, he could be ending up in Milwaukee. I really want to know why this kid is a better choice than Bogut. We all have seen players with all the potential in the world fail, tell me why Marvin is different.*


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Williams is different because the argument that he didn't start at UNC, so he isn't good is completely flawed first of all. Jackie Manuel was undeserving of the starting spot, but Roy idiotically stuck with the senior. Williams, in his limited minutes had fantastic stats and helped lift Carolina to a National Title. He was probably the 4th best player on the team, but he was behind Ray Felton, Rashad McCants, and Sean May and ahead of Jawad Williams (who will be a second round STEAL). He is an aggressive rebounder on both ends, he is 6'9'' but he plays above the rim, much higher than teamate Sean May for example, he has a really good shot out to at least the College 3-point line, so he can certainly extend it out to the NBA Line. In addition he is an unselfish player, despite his very good stats per minute he has absolutely no problem defering to a teamate. In fact it's amazing to see that he put up the stats he did on a team with Felton, McCants, May, and the other Williams with his unselfish nature. In addition he really only had 1 bad game all year, but unfortunately it was the National Championship game. Finally, he was rated as a mid-first rounder comming out of high school last year and was considered a much better prospect than Hornets rookie standout J.R. Smith. He was top 5 or so in a high school class that included Howard, Livingston, Telfair, J.R. Smith, Dorell Wright, Al Jefferson, Josh Smith, and that big white guy, oh and also Malik Hairston and the rest of the freshmen class from this year.

There's no Dwight Howard in this NBA Draft, but I think if you take current ability and weight it with legitimate potential future expectations, Williams is the top prospect. I didn't watch all Carolina games, so perhaps someone else can add a little more or say I'm wrong on a few points and that would definitely be welcome.

EDIT: I forgot to mention that he's long, can play multiple positions, is a solid defender, and can guard multiple positions.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

What is he going to end up playing in the NBA? Power forward or Small Forward?

And if he is going to be a small forward, will he be better than Josh Smith?
If he is a power forward, will he be better than Al Jefferson?


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Oh yeah sorry. I think he's a Shawn Marion type player, so he can't really be compared to a traditional 3 like Josh Smith or T-Mac, or a traditional 4 like Jefferson. I think he can be a stud at either 3 or 4 and the position he plays will depend more on what his team needs him to do than what he is fit for. I will say though, that I don't believe he is the best handler of the ball, so he won't be a T-Mac or Kobe type player, I really like the Marion comparison I saw and so I'll stick with it.


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

Nimreitz said:


> Oh yeah sorry. I think he's a Shawn Marion type player, so he can't really be compared to a traditional 3 like Josh Smith or T-Mac, or a traditional 4 like Jefferson. I think he can be a stud at either 3 or 4 and the position he plays will depend more on what his team needs him to do than what he is fit for. I will say though, that I don't believe he is the best handler of the ball, so he won't be a T-Mac or Kobe type player, I really like the Marion comparison I saw and so I'll stick with it.


*You have done a great job in explaining Williams. But, there are just too much I think's, and Could be's! Look at the Bucks' history or drafting players! Joel Przybilla seemed to be a manchild based on his potential, and ditto with Tractor Traylor. Don't even get me started on Marcus Haislip, he had ALL the potential in the world! 

We know what we are getting in Bogut! Tim Thomas could have been a great player, Kwame Brown could have been a great player, a lot of people thought they saw NBA superstardom on those guys based on their potential! I agree that Williams isn't Tim Thomas mentally, but why would we draft a project hoping to strike gold when we could draft Bogut and know we are at least getting silver!*


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

If he grows another couple inches, he should add weight and become a PF. He'd be a hell of a player at 6'11" 240/250, he certainly has the frame for it. And imagine that PF with already good dribbling and shooting skills at age 19? Scary.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

DHarris34Phan said:


> *You have done a great job in explaining Williams. But, there are just too much I think's, and Could be's! Look at the Bucks' history or drafting players! Joel Przybilla seemed to be a manchild based on his potential, and ditto with Tractor Traylor. Don't even get me started on Marcus Haislip, he had ALL the potential in the world! *


I think you're looking at it the wrong way. Pryz was just a retarded pick, I can't defend it, but I believe he was a late first round pick where you don't really expect a starter anyway. We traded the prospect for a known commodity in the Tractor Traylor draft! Everyone knew what Traylor could do after his 4 years at Michigan, and we traded a German kid who was all potential to Dallas for Tractor. Haislip is a bad example because the Bucks went in looking at 1 guy, Melvin Ely, but then Elgin Baylor (already with Brand and the earlier pick of Wilcox) took Ely cruelly away from the Bucks and we panicked and took Haislip, the next best PF prospect on the board. Ely hasn't matured because he hasn't really had a shot until I think this year, or maybe never, but Haislip wasn't really the guy we were looking at. The Bucks never take any chances, they always go for the known commodity and never take a risk because as humble midwest folks we respect that choice, but screw that. I want a superstar in Milwaukee, not Brad Miller. Also Bogut isn't a known commodity because if his offensive game isn't as good in the NBA he won't command a double team, which will kill his passing. Known commodities never excel except for the RARE Duncan. I mean, in the past few drafts there's been can't miss guys like Jay Williams, Drew Gooden, and Shane Battier.


----------



## Tersk (Apr 9, 2004)

Read this awesome post

http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?t=165819


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

> I think you're looking at it the wrong way. Pryz was just a retarded pick, I can't defend it, but I believe he was a late first round pick where you don't really expect a starter anyway.


Przy was drafted #9. What a bust. He is showing some worth now, but was completley worthless then.



> We traded the prospect for a known commodity in the Tractor Traylor draft! Everyone knew what Traylor could do after his 4 years at Michigan, and we traded a German kid who was all potential to Dallas for Tractor.


Dirk hadn't accomplished nearly what Bogut has. This argument actually kinda fuels picking Bogut more IMO, since Bogut is about the same age as Dirk was, and has accomplished WAY more. Plus, it isn't like Bogut doesn't have potential! He has just as much potential as Williams IMO!



> Haislip is a bad example because the Bucks went in looking at 1 guy, Melvin Ely, but then Elgin Baylor (already with Brand and the earlier pick of Wilcox) took Ely cruelly away from the Bucks and we panicked and took Haislip, the next best PF prospect on the board. Ely hasn't matured because he hasn't really had a shot until I think this year, or maybe never, but Haislip wasn't really the guy we were looking at.


Ok...but that doesn't take away the fact that we made the pick based totally on upside and potential, much like if we were to take Williams. Williams is probably more polished than Haislip was, but the same idea remains.


> The Bucks never take any chances, they always go for the known commodity and never take a risk because as humble midwest folks we respect that choice, but screw that. I want a superstar in Milwaukee, not Brad Miller. Also Bogut isn't a known commodity because if his offensive game isn't as good in the NBA he won't command a double team, which will kill his passing.


And you know this how? Bogut has already shown that he can dominate Centers, whether it be Rafael Arajuo, Matt Nelson, Randolph Morris + Chuck Hayes, and Channing Frye....not to mention what he did to Paul Davis in the World Championships. He also matched up very well as a 19 year old vs. Tim Duncan in Athens. The NCAA guys (Nelson, Hayes) are not the same players he will be seeing in the NBA, but with the way he dominated these guys, there is no reason not to think he will translate it to the NBA. I also think Bogut is a perfect SUPERSTAR for Milwaukee. He doesn't have the pressure on him of a NY or LA, and he would fit in perfectly with the team THIS YEAR!



> Known commodities never excel except for the RARE Duncan. I mean, in the past few drafts there's been can't miss guys like Jay Williams, Drew Gooden, and Shane Battier.


Come on. Please don't say this....there have been just as many (probably more) busts based on potential then the known commodity,


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

You didn't get the Dirk comparison at all. Traylor = Bogut, Dirk = Marv. Dirk was all potential and we threw it away for the known 4 year college guy.

Who are the superstars in this league? Let's just look at the players on the top of this forum huh? Up there we see AI, Nash, JO, Big Ben, TD, Yao, Shaq, Bron, Dirk, Kobe.

JO, Bron, Dirk, and Kobe were drafted at 18, as were KG and T-Mac who are inexplicably not up there. Nash and Big Ben I believe were second rounders, stars who weren't expected to do anything. Not necessarily potential guys, but hopefully they make the team guys, although I will say Big Ben was also drafted on potential. Yao, TD, Shaq, and AI were all 100% known commodities. So what I have is 12 NBA superstars (if you want to count Nash, who I don't, but since he won the MVP I will). 50% of them were straight out of high school drafted purely on potential, 17% were guys who blossomed out of nowhere and certainly weren't "can't miss" guys, and 33% were concensus #1's. Bogut falls into none of those categories because he's not a concensus #1 on par with Shaq, Duncan, AI, and Yao, but also doesn't have the potential of the high school picks. I'm just saying, if you want a superstar you don't draft conservatively!

You wanna throw Amare into the fold? Wade? Melo? Peja? Manu? It just skews it in my favor even more. All young guys or foreigners with question marks who could potentially be stars, but there were no guarantees. Drafted on POTENTIAL!


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

> You didn't get the Dirk comparison at all. Traylor = Bogut, Dirk = Marv. Dirk was all potential and we threw it away for the known 4 year college guy.


I did. I am just saying that Bogut has as much potential as Dirk, and Traylor was not even close to being the same prospect as Bogut. Marvin also has the potential of a Nowitzki, but to compare Bogut to Traylor, even without knowing Traylor as a pro, is just wrong IMO.



> Who are the superstars in this league? Let's just look at the players on the top of this forum huh? Up there we see AI, Nash, JO, Big Ben, TD, Yao, Shaq, Bron, Dirk, Kobe.
> 
> JO, Bron, Dirk, and Kobe were drafted at 18, as were KG and T-Mac who are inexplicably not up there. Nash and Big Ben I believe were second rounders, stars who weren't expected to do anything. Not necessarily potential guys, but hopefully they make the team guys, although I will say Big Ben was also drafted on potential. Yao, TD, Shaq, and AI were all 100% known commodities. So what I have is 12 NBA superstars (if you want to count Nash, who I don't, but since he won the MVP I will). 50% of them were straight out of high school drafted purely on potential, 17% were guys who blossomed out of nowhere and certainly weren't "can't miss" guys, and 33% were concensus #1's. * Bogut falls into none of those categories because he's not a concensus #1 on par with Shaq, Duncan, AI, and Yao, but also doesn't have the potential of the high school picks.* I'm just saying, if you want a superstar you don't draft conservatively!


I really don't see why Bogut shouldn't be considered a consensus #1 pick. What Bogut was doing in the MWC the last 2 years is very similar to what Yao was doing in China before he got drafted. Bogut has also played against competition internationally that makes up for the lack of it in the MWC. You can argue that Bogut is at the same level developmentally as Duncan was coming out of Wake Forest. There were people in San Antonio that wanted to draft Keith Van Horn over Duncan. Van Horn is very similar to Marvin Williams when I think of it.

Again, I don't see how Bogut is just a "conservative" pick. I think that Bogut has just as good of a chance to be a superstar in this league as Marvin Williams does.


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

> You wanna throw Amare into the fold? Wade? Melo? Peja? Manu? It just skews it in my favor even more. All young guys or foreigners with question marks who could potentially be stars, but there were no guarantees. Drafted on POTENTIAL!


*Of course...those are just the success stories though. For every Amare Stoudemire, there is a Disognia Diop, for every Peja Stojakovic there is a Jiri Welsch, for every Carmelo Anthony there is an Eddie Griffin, for every Dwayne Wade there is a Dajuan Wagner.....

Drafting on potential is hit or miss, and the Bucks are not in position to draft on potential, especialy when they have a guy like Bogut who could come in and be a 15/10 guy next year!*


----------



## HeinzGuderian (Jun 29, 2004)

No, it was not idiodic for Marvin to not start and to say so is foolish. UNC essentially had three big guys last year; Marvin, Jawad W., and May. Any two of those guys can hold down the 4/5 positions at the same time. You need stamina to run Roys secondary break, the bigs are vital to this system. If Marvin had started who is going to rotate into the PF or C positions? Sanders? UNC had plenty of capable wings last year: Noel, Manuel, Terry, McCants, Scott. Marvin would be taking minutes from other good players if he were to play the 3. Marvin not starting assured UNC that there would always be two McD AA post players on the court at the same time. You don't sound very smart when you say Roy was idiodic for doing something. He just won a title doing his idiodic things.


----------



## HeinzGuderian (Jun 29, 2004)

As far as Marvin Williams pro potential goes, I don't know what to say about it yet. He played the post in college, his style is more suited to the perimeter. Right now he certainly isn't strong enough to play the 4 in the NBA. I can say that he is all there in the mind. If he is a bust it isn't going to be because he's a headcase. He was full out intensity ever time he stepped on the court, and he is a great person off the court as well. His willingness to come off the bench says alot too.


----------



## ATLien (Jun 18, 2002)

Marvin reminds me alot of Jamison. I think that's the best comparison. Marvin is probably a little more athletic, and is so young he has the potential to be a little bit better. I don't think he'll be as good as a few of HS'rs last year such as Livingston, Howard, and Smith.


----------



## HeinzGuderian (Jun 29, 2004)

Marvins game doesn't really remind me a Jamison, I never got that comparison outside of them being UNC guys that are somehwere between the 3 and 4 positions. Jamison was better in college even as a freshman.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

In reading these responses, I'm going to build on the original question and ask this:

*Convince me that Marvin Williams isn't Tim Thomas all over again.*


----------



## HeinzGuderian (Jun 29, 2004)

cpawfan said:


> In reading these responses, I'm going to build on the original question and ask this:
> 
> *Convince me that Marvin Williams isn't Tim Thomas all over again.*


TT has a bad attitude and is unmotivated. Marvin has a good attitude.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

HeinzGuderian said:


> Marvins game doesn't really remind me a Jamison, I never got that comparison outside of them being UNC guys that are somehwere between the 3 and 4 positions. Jamison was better in college even as a freshman.


Agreed. Jamison is just a monster in the post because of his quick hops and quick shot release.

Marvin Williams is more Jamaal Mashburn. The only knock on him would be he has never been the lead dog. He is IMO better than Loul Deng who I think was the best rookie in Chicago. He is one of those guys that affects the game and the more I see him I see that fact. He changes the game.

Whether the Bucks take him or not is irrelevant because he won't get past Atlanta. As bad as ATL needs a PG, Knight will not let him get past Atlanta. I think he is and will be better than Josh Smith but I think he will be a PF in the NBA.


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

DHarris34Phan said:


> Ok...but that doesn't take away the fact that we made the pick based totally on upside and potential, much like if we were to take Williams. Williams is probably more polished than Haislip was, but the same idea remains.
> 
> Marvin's work ethic and desire are what set him apart from all the guys you keep mentioning. He wants it more than anyone else and has the talent to back it up. You obviously didn't watch too many UNC games besides the Tourney or you would know this
> 
> ...


Then name some smart guy!


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

TheATLien said:


> Marvin reminds me alot of Jamison. I think that's the best comparison. Marvin is probably a little more athletic, and is so young he has the potential to be a little bit better. I don't think he'll be as good as a few of HS'rs last year such as Livingston, Howard, and Smith.


Josh Smith? LOL Hell I could guard Josh Smith. Just stand back and let him shoot 10-15 footers and he'll probably make about 25%. That guy is the biggest piece of hype-trash the NBA has. Wow, you can dunk, who gives a crap.


----------



## 2aid (May 6, 2005)

Nimreitz said:


> You didn't get the Dirk comparison at all. Traylor = Bogut, Dirk = Marv. Dirk was all potential and we threw it away for the known 4 year college guy.
> 
> Who are the superstars in this league? Let's just look at the players on the top of this forum huh? Up there we see AI, Nash, JO, Big Ben, TD, Yao, Shaq, Bron, Dirk, Kobe.
> 
> ...


steve nash was drafted in the 1st round (15th overall) and ben wallace was undrafted.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> Josh Smith? LOL Hell I could guard Josh Smith. Just stand back and let him shoot 10-15 footers and he'll probably make about 25%. That guy is the biggest piece of hype-trash the NBA has. Wow, you can dunk, who gives a crap.


Well no YOU couldn't guard him because he'd run you over if you're in the no-charge arc or just plain jump over you.

DHarris34Fan, just for you I'm going to do something I've wanted to analyze for a LOOOOOOONG time. I'm going to track every legitimately talked about 18 year old that was drafted in the first round with the expectation that they would come over and actually play in the league the next year. And I'll give you the percentages of busts there are in my opinion, and the percentages of superstars, and all-star caliber players. In addition I'll even let you know what percentage are still in the league. For a comparison I'll take every college junior or senior taken in the lottery(known commodities) and then compare the figures. Be back to you in an hour or so. I say the 95 draft is a good place to start so we get the 10 most recent drafts and KG kicks off the high schoolers.


----------



## Geaux Tigers (Apr 26, 2004)

Why would I want to sell you guys Marvin when I want the Hornets to buy him...:biggrin:


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

Nimreitz said:


> Well no YOU couldn't guard him because he'd run you over if you're in the no-charge arc or just plain jump over you.
> 
> DHarris34Fan, just for you I'm going to do something I've wanted to analyze for a LOOOOOOONG time. I'm going to track every legitimately talked about 18 year old that was drafted in the first round with the expectation that they would come over and actually play in the league the next year. And I'll give you the percentages of busts there are in my opinion, and the percentages of superstars, and all-star caliber players. In addition I'll even let you know what percentage are still in the league. For a comparison I'll take every college junior or senior taken in the lottery(known commodities) and then compare the figures. Be back to you in an hour or so. I say the 95 draft is a good place to start so we get the 10 most recent drafts and KG kicks off the high schoolers.


Thats why i'd stay outside the charge arc smart guy. At 6-6 250 I dont think he'd be going through me. He could try to go over, but I'd just take a charge. Guys like him are so freakin easy to guard it isn't even funny. Guys like him are the reason we lose to the euro teams in the olympics. No skill whatsoever.


----------



## jalen5 (Nov 19, 2004)

Nimreitz,

You are NOT going to be able to convince him that the Bucks should take Marvin over Bogut. Why? Because he thinks Bogut has just as much potential as Marvin and just as good a chance at being a superstar. If he thinks that, then there's no way he takes Marvin over Bogut b/c Bogut has produced for LONGER (just b/c he's played more). I guess he has the right to his opinion. IMO, I agree with you though. There's NO WAY Bogut has just as much superstar potential as Marvin Williams. I liked your argument when u lumped the superstars into categories. Bogut DOESN'T fit into any of those categories. Williams does. He's basically a more polished high schooler w/ TONS of potential. I see him being in the same league as Dwight Howard eventually. I think both will be stars in the league.

And also, while I love Josh Smith, all he is right now is a highlight reel. I'd let him shoot all day long. He's got to develop a better touch if he wants to be a star in the NBA. He's young tho so he still has time.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> Guys like him are the reason we lose to the euro teams in the olympics. No skill whatsoever.


Well, having Wade, Melo, Bron, and Amare on the bench doesn't help either; especially since we were at a weakened team as it was.

Well here's what I've found out about High School Seniors drafted on Potential in the first round, and Europeans under 20 when they were drafted and came over soon afterwards drafted on Potential. There are 41 of these players since 1996, 27 High Schoolers and 14 International Players; 20 is an arbitrary cutoff, but I feel that above 20 that's really really getting into college territory and there is more experience in the euros and therefore they aren't just pure potential picks.

Of the 41 players, 13 of them can't really be judged this soon (Perkins, Outlaw, Ebi, Swift, Telfair, Smith, Smith, Wright, Pavlovic, Planinic, Biedrins, Podkolzine, and Vujacic). That means there are 28 players we can judge. 8 of these players, or 28.6% the biggest piece of the pie, are superstars by my definition (KG, Kobe, JO, T-Mac, Amare, Lebron, Peja, and Dirk). The second biggest share is the category of players who aren't quite established yet, but have the potential to be the next wave of superstars, there are 5 of these guys, or 17.9% of the total (Howard, Livingston, Jefferson, Curry, and Darko). The next biggest group is the busts, there are 4 out and out busts that I identified making up 14.3% of the group (Diop, Kwame, Tskitishvili, and DMiles). After that there are three groups that are equal in size at 3, or 10.7%; the All-Stars (Lewis, Parker, Kirilenko), the Above Average NBA Starters (Nene, Harrington, Tyson Chandler), and the Average NBA Players (Stevenson, Bender, Krstic). Some of the guys are debatable, Krstic is young and has potential, maybe Harrington is only average, DMiles is average, whatever. Being the #3 overall pick really hurt DMiles. Finally we have the Uberbusts, the WORST picks of the bunch, the guys who aren't in the league anymore and never really were in the league, there are 2 of these guys, or 7.1% (Leon Smith and Dalibor Bagaric).

What I realized is that with players like this you have an amazing shot of getting a potential NBA Superstar. Almost half of these players could be the league MVP at some point. The 13 Superstars + Potential Superstars and Kirilenko. Plus you have very solid players like Rashard Lewis (I know he was second round, but he was 32nd overall and didn't fit with the DeAngelo Collins' and James Lang's of the world), Tony Parker, Nene, Tyson Chandler, and even Krstic if he continues to improve. With all this said, drafting based on potential seems to yield a greater than 50% shot of landing an All-Star caliber player. This isn't really unbalanced based on draft position in my favor either, the mean position of these players is 11.5 and the median is 9. In regards to the top 5 the superstar and potential superstar rate when drafting purely on potential is 6/12. In other words you get the same rate in the top 5 as you do in the rest of the draft, but actually it's slightly worse! And in fact only KG and Lebron have actually become bonified superstars. Very interesting.

But it doesn't prove anything, if anything it tells me that you SHOULD draft on potential in the top 5. In the top 5 the last 10 drafts there have been roughly 12 superstars give or take one or two depending on your personal opinions. So 12/50 as opposed to 6/12, and if I just do the top 5 non-high school or U-20 foreign players taken in the last 10 drafts the superstar rate is 6/50 or 12%. In relation to players drafted purely on what scouts have seen as amazing potential that's pathetic.

Marvin Williams is van Horn? WHAT ARE YOU SMOKING!? Dude, van Horn was a better college player than Bogut at Utah, but comming into the league was just laughable (and still is) in regards to athleticism, aggressiveness, and rebounding, all of which Marv has. I'm not saying Bogut will be worse than van Horn, I'm saying before you trot out your awards and stats in the precious MWC, just remember van Horn was a lot better.

Jalen, you're right and I'll be happy with whoever we take since they'll be an upgrade over what we have now, but I'd just be happier with Marvin Williams. Looking back right now I can't even remember why I wrote all of this stuff, just something I always wanted to analyze and take a look at I guess.


----------



## jalen5 (Nov 19, 2004)

Nimreitz,

You are NOT going to be able to convince him that the Bucks should take Marvin over Bogut. Why? Because he thinks Bogut has just as much potential as Marvin and just as good a chance at being a superstar. If he thinks that, then there's no way he takes Marvin over Bogut b/c Bogut has produced for LONGER (just b/c he's played more). I guess he has the right to his opinion. IMO, I agree with you though. There's NO WAY Bogut has just as much superstar potential as Marvin Williams. I liked your argument when u lumped the superstars into categories. Bogut DOESN'T fit into any of those categories. Williams does. He's basically a more polished high schooler w/ TONS of potential. I see him being in the same league as Dwight Howard eventually. I think both will be stars in the league.

And also, while I love Josh Smith, all he is right now is a highlight reel. I'd let him shoot all day long. He's got to develop a better touch if he wants to be a star in the NBA. He's young tho so he still has time.

OH, to whoever compared Marvin Williams to Jamal Mashburn -- ummm, NO. I don't see that at all. I don't like the Jamison comparisons either. Marvin will be one of a kind, IMO.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

Tim Thomas was a superstar in the making too. Potential is great, but you need to tap it.

Lets look at the top 3 picks of the 2000 draft. 1 was picked on production and 2 were picked on potential. Guess what, the guy that had produced, continued to produce, improved himself and made an All Star team. The other two, well, everyone is still waiting for them.

Proven production + upside + high BBall IQ = winning formula


----------



## ATLien (Jun 18, 2002)

For the Marvin fans, how good do you think he can be?

I don't think it's fair to compare him to McGrady. TMac is the type who can beat anyone he wants to off the dribble, can handle a little point guard. I don't see the same playmaking ability off the dribble in Marvin Williams.


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> Then name some smart guy!


I think you are asking me to name busts that were drafted based on potentiall....ok
*
1998*
Michaal Olowokandi- #1 Overall...BUST

Proven guys like Raef LaFrentz and Tractor Traylor were also picked in the top 10. They didn't live up to expectations, but at least they are still contributing in the league, which you can't say about some of the future busts I will mention.



*1999*
Jonathen Bender- #5 Overall....BUST
Alexander Radejovic- #13 Overall....BUST
William Avery- #14 Overall....BUST
Leon Smith- #29 Overall....BUST

Proven players like Elton Brand, Steve Francis, Wally Sczerbiak, Richard Hamilton, Andre Miller, Jason Terry, and Shawn Marion were all picked in the top 10. Outside of Trajan Langdon (#11), there was really no BIG bust among proven players.



*2000*
Darius Miles- #3 Overall
Joel Przybilla- #9
Keyon Dooling- #10
Deshawn Stevenson- #23

The proven players, Kenyon Martin and Stromile Swift, picked 1 and 2, have been way better choices right now than Darius Miles. 

Proven guys like Jerome Moiso, Mateen Cleaves, and Courtney Alexander have been busts, but 3 or 4 year guys like Desmond Mason, Jamaal Magloire, Morris Peterson, Eduardo Najera, Michael Redd and Brian Cardinal were all picked outside of the top 10, and have been good/great players.




*2001*
Kwame Brown - #1 Overall...BUST
Eddie Griffin- #7 Overall...BUST
Dasgagna Diop- #8 Overall...BUST
Rodney White- #9 Overall...BUST
Kendrick Perkins- #11 BUST

No "proven" players outside of Shane Battier were picked in the top 10, so there really weren't any majore busts. More proven guys picked after potential....Jason Collins, Jamaal Tinsley, Bobby Simmons, Earl Watson, Brendan Haywood.



*2002*
Nicholas Skita- #5 Overall
Dajuan Wagner- #6
Chris Wilcox- #8
Melvin Ely- #12
Marcus Haislip- #13
Bostjan Nachbar- #15
Jiri Welsch- #16
Qyntal Woods- #21

That is alot of busts, especiall when proven players like Tayshaun Prince, Dan Gadzuric, Carlos Boozer, Darius Songalia and Juan Dixon were all avaliable.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

I would like someone knowledgeable to tell me how the Bucks front office is analyzing T.J. Ford's status.I don't know the particulars,but if they believe that his spinal injury is career threatening then you can add Chris Paul to
the argument.Also any of the top three teams in the draft
could look for someone to overpay and move down.

Bogut is the best player available,but he's not going to be the second coming of anyone.Marvin Williams will be a very good player in time,but it's utterly ridiculous to compare him to Amare Stoudamire or anyone remotely comparable to Stoudamire.So far he hasn't proven anything
beyond his potential.Paul is the best of several very good point guards,but I'd move down and take Deron Williams
if I needed a point guard and someone made a good offer.

The best thing that the Bucks could do is try to bamboozle Charlotte into a trade,the top pick for their two lottery picks.I don't think that will happen unless Milwaukee adds in something substantial.Charlotte
needs everything and the oppurtunity to get two starters
can't be passed over easily.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

cpawfan said:


> Lets look at the top 3 picks of the 2000 draft. 1 was picked on production and 2 were picked on potential. Guess what, the guy that had produced, continued to produce, improved himself and made an All Star team. The other two, well, everyone is still waiting for them.


You're a bearcat fan, and so you chose K-Mart and biased the sample intentionally. You also know that the 2000 draft was the absolute WORST in the last 20 years right? It's not a typical draft, there are other drafts that actually have depth, but lack a clear cut #1 like this one.

Look guys, it's not like Marvin Williams hasn't produced, he was a vital cog in the national championship team! I mean, he's not Darius Miles or the Kandi Man. At the worst you know he has amazing athletic potential, a solid work ethic, a good grasp of the fundamentals, AND AND AND he did produce in college! He couldn't break into a team full of upperclass McDonald's All-Americans when the coach has always prefered older players, OH NO! He was the toast of the ACC this year and was dominant when given the chance.


----------



## JuniorNoboa (Jan 27, 2003)

Diable said:


> The best thing that the Bucks could do is try to bamboozle Charlotte into a trade,the top pick for their two lottery picks.I don't think that will happen unless Milwaukee adds in something substantial.Charlotte
> needs everything and the oppurtunity to get two starters
> can't be passed over easily.



5 and 13 will get you the 1 .... right.....


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

Nimreitz said:


> You're a bearcat fan, and so you chose K-Mart and biased the sample intentionally. You also know that the 2000 draft was the absolute WORST in the last 20 years right? It's not a typical draft, there are other drafts that actually have depth, but lack a clear cut #1 like this one.


No, I could have just as easily picked the 1999, 2001 or 2002 drafts. How is the sample biased? Why does it matter if the 2000 draft was bad? The first three selections were made in order of production, potential & potential.

The 2000 draft didn't have a clear cut #1 because Kenyon was coming off of a broken leg and several people were very high on the next KG, Darius Miles. The 2000 draft was bad in retrospect because of two factors 1) so few players lived up to their potential and 2) very dumb GMs.



> Look guys, it's not like Marvin Williams hasn't produced, he was a vital cog in the national championship team! I mean, he's not Darius Miles or the Kandi Man. At the worst you know he has amazing athletic potential, a solid work ethic, a good grasp of the fundamentals, AND AND AND he did produce in college! He couldn't break into a team full of upperclass McDonald's All-Americans when the coach has always prefered older players, OH NO! He was the toast of the ACC this year and was dominant when given the chance.


Tim Thomas produced more in his 1 year in college. Why isn't he Darius Miles? Darius was a higher ranked HS prospect and impressed people in 1 season of limited minutes in the NBA.


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

DHarris34Phan said:


> I think you are asking me to name busts that were drafted based on potentiall....ok
> *
> 1998*
> Michaal Olowokandi- #1 Overall...BUST
> ...


No, I was asking for the sure fire guys who ended up being superstars in the league as well as college.


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

DHarris34Phan:
You make a post about potential and blatently ignore people who don't fit your story. Off the top of my head, I can't see how you could miss Amare as not being a pick based off of potential. Previous year you ignore guys like chandler and gasol (who was a mystery at the time). You can't just find guys that fit your argument and ignore the rest.

---
to the rest of you

Marvin Williams has a strong work ethic and gets along with his team mates. These are intangibles that make groupings like potential or proven stupid. Being a star in the NBA requires mental strength to endure and not go crazy in the process of the spotlight. Marvin Williams can handle it.

Williams has potential to be a superstar but he is not raw.

Also in general I notice some of mentioning Williams potential as if he has no skills right now. The guy can nail jumpers all across the court, and additionally he has some post moves. He can play facing the basket and with his back to basket right now. He can improve more this as well. If you mention guys like Darius Miles with him your an idiot because Miles had no basketball skills and could only jump high. If you only think Williams can only jump high then you haven't seen him enough and it's worthless talking to you about him.

You are mistaking Williams potential with a lack of skills. Williams has more traditional basketball skills then most of the big men in this draft right now.


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

cpawfan said:


> No, I could have just as easily picked the 1999, 2001 or 2002 drafts. How is the sample biased? Why does it matter if the 2000 draft was bad? The first three selections were made in order of production, potential & potential.
> 
> The 2000 draft didn't have a clear cut #1 because Kenyon was coming off of a broken leg and several people were very high on the next KG, Darius Miles. The 2000 draft was bad in retrospect because of two factors 1) so few players lived up to their potential and 2) very dumb GMs.
> 
> ...


Why isn't he Darius Miles? Uh lets see. Marvin shot over 50% from 3pt land. Can Darius Miles make a 15 footer? Uh NO! 

One guy has basketball skills, the other guy has athleticism. Thats your difference.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

KennethTo said:


> DHarris34Phan:
> You make a post about potential and blatently ignore people who don't fit your story. Off the top of my head, I can't see how you could miss Amare as not being a pick based off of potential. Previous year you ignore guys like chandler and gasol (who was a mystery at the time). You can't just find guys that fit your argument and ignore the rest.


Reread the thread. He was ask to show the busts that were drafted on potential, not the successes.



> Also in general I notice some of mentioning Williams potential as if he has no skills right now. The guy can nail jumpers all across the court, and additionally he has some post moves. He can play facing the basket and with his back to basket right now. He can improve more this as well. If you mention guys like Darius Miles with him your an idiot because Miles had no basketball skills and could only jump high. If you only think Williams can only jump high then you haven't seen him enough and it's worthless talking to you about him.


Again, Tim Thomas was as impressive, if not more so, his freshman year.


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

KennethTo said:


> DHarris34Phan:
> You make a post about potential and blatently ignore people who don't fit your story. Off the top of my head, I can't see how you could miss Amare as not being a pick based off of potential. Previous year you ignore guys like chandler and gasol (who was a mystery at the time). You can't just find guys that fit your argument and ignore the rest.


*I am not ignoring the fact that players with potential have succeeded. I am fully aware of the fact. I am just saying, there have been FAR to many busts based on potential than busts when it comes to a proven talent.

The Bucks are in no position right now to take a chance on potential and fail. If we draft Marvin, and he is a bust, it sets the franchise back AT LEAST 5 years.
*


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

KennethTo said:


> Also in general I notice some of mentioning Williams potential as if he has no skills right now. The guy can nail jumpers all across the court, and additionally he has some post moves. He can play facing the basket and with his back to basket right now. He can improve more this as well. If you mention guys like Darius Miles with him your an idiot because Miles had no basketball skills and could only jump high. If you only think Williams can only jump high then you haven't seen him enough and it's worthless talking to you about him.
> 
> You are mistaking Williams potential with a lack of skills. Williams has more traditional basketball skills then most of the big men in this draft right now.


*See, that is the problem with people's idea of Bogut. People know that he has good skills, but think he has limited potentail. Why does he have limited potential? Tell me why Andrew Bogut can't turn into Tim Duncan. Please.*


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

DHarris34Phan said:


> *I am not ignoring the fact that players with potential have succeeded. I am fully aware of the fact. I am just saying, there have been FAR to many busts based on potential than busts when it comes to a proven talent.
> 
> The Bucks are in no position right now to take a chance on potential and fail. If we draft Marvin, and he is a bust, it sets the franchise back AT LEAST 5 years.
> *


There are more busts on potential because there aren't that many sure fire guys with proven talent. So there will be more players taken on potential and more guys on potential who flop. Very simple.


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> There are more busts on potential because there aren't that many sure fire guys with proven talent. So there will be more players taken on potential and more guys on potential who flop. Very simple.


*So...since the Bucks have the chance to draft the guy with proven talent and accomplishments in Bogut, and as much upside as Marvin IMO, why even risk a huge bust??*


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

DHarris34Phan said:


> *See, that is the problem with people's idea of Bogut. People know that he has good skills, but think he has limited potentail. Why does he have limited potential? Tell me why Andrew Bogut can't turn into Tim Duncan. Please.*


Weak frame and lack of athleticism/quickness= no potential in NBA scouts eyes and my eyes. Go ahead and take him number one, you'll have the next Illgauskas, which may be fine in your eyes.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> Why isn't he Darius Miles? Uh lets see. Marvin shot over 50% from 3pt land. Can Darius Miles make a 15 footer? Uh NO!
> 
> One guy has basketball skills, the other guy has athleticism. Thats your difference.


When did Marvin shoot over 50% from 3?


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

DHarris34Phan said:


> *So...since the Bucks have the chance to draft the guy with proven talent and accomplishments in Bogut, and as much upside as Marvin IMO, why even risk a huge bust??*


Bogut doesn't have any accomplishments. He dominated the MWC. Marvin is more surefire than Bogut, and is not anymore of a risk.


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

cpawfan said:


> When did Marvin shoot over 50% from 3?


LOL, for the whole season practically genius. It was only the last couple games of the tourney that dropped him below.


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> Bogut doesn't have any accomplishments. He dominated the MWC. Marvin is more surefire than Bogut, and is not anymore of a risk.


*Dominating International play, and putting up 11-8-1 against Tim Duncan in a very competative game doesn't mean anything to you? Averaging 26 and 17 versus the World's best at his age group in 2003 means nothing to you?

So, he has in fact produced against NBA talent and dominated outside of the MWC.

Marvin couldn't even put up numbers against Michigan State, whose bigman Paul Davis was totally dominated by Bogut in 2003. Illinois did a great job in shutting down Marvin...what happened?*


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

DHarris34Phan said:


> *Dominating International play, and putting up 11-8-1 against Tim Duncan in a very competative game doesn't mean anything to you? Averaging 26 and 17 versus the World's best at his age group in 2003 means nothing to you?
> 
> Marvin couldn't even put up numbers against Michigan State, whose bigman Paul Davis was totally dominated by Bogut in 2003. Illinois did a great job in shutting down Marvin...what happened?*


Now son, you can't take the games that work for you're argument and omit all of Marvs good games, and take all Boguts good games and omit his bad ones. That's not how an argument works. 

World games don't mean anything to me so, yes.

Marvin isn't a powerforward for one thing, he just played their to help the team. Even he said that. Secondly, they never ran any offense through him. They really didn't need to with May, McCants and Felton. hats the reason it appeared that Marvin got shut down, when really all he did was not force his offense.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> LOL, for the whole season practically genius. It was only the last couple games of the tourney that dropped him below.


43.2% for the season or 0.5 3's a game. Yeah, I'm excited over a 3 pointer every other game.

So, you're telling us, that when the pressure was on ("the last couple games of the tourney") Marvin couldn't hit from the college 3. Great, a choke artist.


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

cpawfan said:


> 43.2% for the season or 0.5 3's a game. Yeah, I'm excited over a 3 pointer every other game.
> 
> So, you're telling us, that when the pressure was on ("the last couple games of the tourney") Marvin couldn't hit from the college 3. Great, a choke artist.



I could have written that weak *** comeback before I wrote my original post. You can do better than that son.


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

cpawfan said:


> 43.2% for the season or 0.5 3's a game. Yeah, I'm excited over a 3 pointer every other game.
> 
> So, you're telling us, that when the pressure was on ("the last couple games of the tourney") Marvin couldn't hit from the college 3. Great, a choke artist.


Or we could do FT percentage if that makes you feel better? MW= 84%, what does D-Miles shoot? 

Again one guy has basketball skills the other doesn't. Even you might be able to understand that one. Or maybe not, we'll see.


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> Or we could do FT percentage if that makes you feel better? MW= 84%, what does D-Miles shoot?
> 
> Again one guy has basketball skills the other doesn't. Even you might be able to understand that one. Or maybe not, we'll see.


*Awesome...he is a good FT shooter!!!!!! 1st team All-NBA here we come!!!! I have seen the kid play when the pressure is on him, and his game went down a few notches. That doesn't mean he will not be a good or great NBA player, it just shows that he still has at least 1 year of development.

Bogut has upped his game when the stakes got higher, and I am confident he can step into the Bucks next year and be a 15/10 player. Regardless of what Marvin may be in the future, Bogut is ready to play, and has the same amount of potential to be a superstar than Williams.*


----------



## Cammo (May 24, 2005)

> Weak frame and lack of athleticism/quickness= no potential in NBA scouts eyes and my eyes. Go ahead and take him number one, you'll have the next Illgauskas, which may be fine in your eyes.


Weak frame? Are you kidding, he has a deceptively weak frame but you go watch the tapes and watch him over power everyone in the post. No athleticism/quickness? Tell me, what does a 7 footer need a whole heap of athleticism for again? What is the ring too high for them?



> Now son, you can't take the games that work for you're argument and omit all of Marvs good games, and take all Boguts good games and omit his bad ones. That's not how an argument works.


Thats the thing, Bogut didnt have a bad game all season. When teams thought that shutting down his scoring in the post would kill off Utah, Bogut simply handed it off the open man every time down the floor.



> World games don't mean anything to me so, yes.


*sigh* well thats a tick in the ignorance box if ive ever seen one. The world competition is much tougher than the NBA and is reflective of the way basketball should be played. Bogut pretty much won every award in the book this past going season, and i think there is a reason for that dont you think? Oh but wait, we can get Marvin Williams who averaged 11 and 5 off the bench because he has 'potential'. Are you kidding? Even i have got frieken potential, everybody is rating this kid purely on potential and i think its ridiculous. Nobody knew who the hell Bogut was in his first season, then he comes out of nowhere and becomes MVP of the NCAA. Doesnt that say something about his potential?


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

DHarris34Phan said:


> *Awesome...he is a good FT shooter!!!!!! 1st team All-NBA here we come!!!! I have seen the kid play when the pressure is on him, and his game went down a few notches. That doesn't mean he will not be a good or great NBA player, it just shows that he still has at least 1 year of development.
> 
> Bogut has upped his game when the stakes got higher, and I am confident he can step into the Bucks next year and be a 15/10 player. Regardless of what Marvin may be in the future, Bogut is ready to play, and has the same amount of potential to be a superstar than Williams.*


The argument was D-Miles vs. Marvin d*mbass. And how Marvin is different. Obviously your [strike]first grade intelligence level brain[/strike] can't follow that. I wasn't saying FT % makes him a star you moron.

But once again you bring Bogut into the mix. I think we have a serious man crush on our hands here.

That is your first warning, please stop with this now


----------



## RSP83 (Nov 24, 2002)

DHarris34Phan said:



> *See, that is the problem with people's idea of Bogut. People know that he has good skills, but think he has limited potentail. Why does he have limited potential? Tell me why Andrew Bogut can't turn into Tim Duncan. Please.*


yeah I understand your concern. I also don't understand why some people would say Bogut has lesser potential than say Marvin Williams. I always think that as long a player has good basketball skills they always have potential to be very good. Now, Bogut has very good basketball skills and he has great physical attributes. The sky is the limit for him.

As for what KennetTo said about mental strength, I agree that that plays a big part on how a player reach their potential. How far a player reach his potential really depends on his mental, attitude, and work ethic.

Dwyane Wade is an example. Who would've thought an undersized SG (6'4") who was has questionnable skill at PG turns out this good?


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> But once again you bring Bogut into the mix. I think we have a serious man crush on our hands here.


*Of course I am going to bring Bogut into the mix, because I am evaluating who my favorite team might pick! I want to know what Marvin has done to make him that much of a better pick. You can tell me the kid can jump out of the gym, has a great work ethic, and is unselfish, but I haven't seen it! This thread is supposed to be why Marvin is a better pick, and I haven't been sold.*


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> Or we could do FT percentage if that makes you feel better? MW= 84%, what does D-Miles shoot?
> 
> Again one guy has basketball skills the other doesn't. Even you might be able to understand that one. Or maybe not, we'll see.


Look, you threw a stat out there and where wrong. So Marvin can shoot better than Darius Miles, that doesn't mean he is going to produce better than Miles. Why does Marvin have more potential than Miles did at the same age? If Miles was a higher ranked High Schooler with out as many fundamentals, then according to the logic in this thread, that should make him a better choice.

Why will Marvin be able to get his shot off against NBA defenders? Miles put up over 9 points and 5 rebounds a game in 26 minutes as a rookie. Why will Marvin do better than that?



MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> I could have written that weak *** comeback before I wrote my original post. You can do better than that son.


Um, you're in the wrong place. This isn't a smack board. It isn't about doing better, it is about have a logical discussion. So cut the crap and don't respond like that again.


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

DHarris34Phan said:


> *Of course I am going to bring Bogut into the mix, because I am evaluating who my favorite team might pick! I want to know what Marvin has done to make him that much of a better pick. You can tell me the kid can jump out of the gym, has a great work ethic, and is unselfish, but I haven't seen it! This thread is supposed to be why Marvin is a better pick, and I haven't been sold.*


You haven't seen him jump? LOL 

How do you see his workethic? You can't, you take his teammates and coaches word for it.

You haven't seen his unselfishness? What do you call his entire freshman season? 

Nobody is interested in selling anything to someone who has no ability to listen, watch or comprehend. [strike]I doubt you even follow college baksetball, judging by your ignorant comments.[/strike]


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

cpawfan said:


> Look, you threw a stat out there and where wrong. So Marvin can shoot better than Darius Miles, that doesn't mean he is going to produce better than Miles. Why does Marvin have more potential than Miles did at the same age? If Miles was a higher ranked High Schooler with out as many fundamentals, then according to the logic in this thread, that should make him a better choice.
> 
> Why will Marvin be able to get his shot off against NBA defenders? Miles put up over 9 points and 5 rebounds a game in 26 minutes as a rookie. Why will Marvin do better than that?
> 
> ...


Or what, you gonna tell a mod?

And BTW my stats were not wrong. He was over 50% before the tourney.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> Or what, you gonna tell a mod?


No. I'm a Community Mod, so I don't need to tell anyone else.

The entire site is based upon respectful discourse. Please adapt to the guidelines.


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

> How do you see his workethic? You can't, you take his teammates and coaches word for it.


The fact that he went from being a practically unknown player from Austrailia to becoming a top 3 prospect in the NBA draft speaks for itself IMO. The kid earned everything that is coming his way, and he earned it through hard work. So yeah, I am assuming Bogut has a great work ethic.



> Nobody is interested in selling anything to someone who has no ability to listen, watch or comprehend. I doubt you even follow college baksetball, judging by your ignorant comments.


I actually watch ALOT of college basketball, but selling me the fact that Marvin is based soley on potential raises red flags in my books.


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

cpawfan said:


> No. I'm a Community Mod, so I don't need to tell anyone else.
> 
> The entire site is based upon respectful discourse. Please adapt to the guidelines.


You haven't proven that you deserve any respect. The ignorant comments eliminated any reward of respect.


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

DHarris34Phan said:


> The fact that he went from being a practically unknown player from Austrailia to becoming a top 3 prospect in the NBA draft speaks for itself IMO. The kid earned everything that is coming his way, and he earned it through hard work. So yeah, I am assuming Bogut has a great work ethic.


I was talking about MW not Bogut.


I actually watch ALOT of college basketball, but selling me the fact that Marvin is based soley on potential raises red flags in my books.[/QUOTE]

12 and 7 on the national champions in 22 minutes is a little more than "solely potential"


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> You haven't proven that you deserve any respect. The ignorant comments eliminated any reward of respect.


I don't care about your respect or lack there of. The sites guidelines are the guidelines and you need to follow them.


----------



## sherwin (Mar 21, 2005)

DHarris34Phan said:


> *You have done a great job in explaining Williams. But, there are just too much I think's, and Could be's! Look at the Bucks' history or drafting players! Joel Przybilla seemed to be a manchild based on his potential, and ditto with Tractor Traylor. Don't even get me started on Marcus Haislip, he had ALL the potential in the world!
> 
> We know what we are getting in Bogut! Tim Thomas could have been a great player, Kwame Brown could have been a great player, a lot of people thought they saw NBA superstardom on those guys based on their potential! I agree that Williams isn't Tim Thomas mentally, but why would we draft a project hoping to strike gold when we could draft Bogut and know we are at least getting silver!*


What makes you so confident in Bogut??


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

cpawfan said:


> I don't care about your respect or lack there of. The sites guidelines are the guidelines and you need to follow them.


You follow them, and then I will follow them.


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

sherwin said:


> What makes you so confident in Bogut??


*His accomplishments and track record speaks for itself.*


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

DHarris34Phan said:


> *His accomplishments and track record speaks for itself.*


Ya, dominating the MWC and scoring 11 on Duncan one time makes him a future allstar! LMFAO


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> Ya, dominating the MWC and scoring 11 on Duncan one time makes him a future allstar! LMFAO


*No...playing internationally for the last 3 years, and going up against the World's best. It's not like he never played against quality opponents at Utah. Putting up 11-8-1 against Tim Duncan as a 19 year old is pretty impressive...kinda looks like Marvin's averages at UNC, right?*


----------



## Cammo (May 24, 2005)

> Ya, dominating the MWC and scoring 11 on Duncan one time makes him a future allstar! LMFAO


*cough* Wooden, Naismith etc etc. awards *cough* Ignorance anybody?


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

Cammo said:


> *cough* Wooden, Naismith etc etc. awards *cough* Ignorance anybody?


Ya, cause awards really guarantee success at the next level. Heisman winners cough- Moron cough-


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> You follow them, and then I will follow them.


Cpawfan has been following them, while it's ok to talk down about a player since this is a discussion board, you can do the same to other members, but all that does is get you suspended and banned.

-Petey


----------



## Cammo (May 24, 2005)

> Ya, cause awards really guarantee success at the next level. Heisman winners cough- Moron cough-


And "potential" does? You want to talk about accomplishments etc. What are Marvin Williams' accomplishments? Yes, he was on the team that won the national title...And no, "most hyped up ESPN poster boy" doesnt count. The general consensus from NBA GM's experts etc. is that Bogut is the most ready made player in the draft


----------



## AZwildcats4 (Feb 9, 2004)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> Ya, cause awards really guarantee success at the next level. Heisman winners cough- Moron cough-



Um...wrong sport there son.

I am actually quite impressed with your extensive knowledge on Marvin Williams, but some of your comments on Bogut are incredibly off base. Saying he has no accomplishments is just absurd. When you look at Utah's roster it is clear that they would be nothing without him. He carried that team on his back. The conference he played in isn't important. Also I don't know what makes you think international competition is meaningless. In international play Bogut has been successful against competition far superior to anything Marvin Williams has ever seen. That is a fact.

btw, are you going to change your name when Bogut goes #1?


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Bogut and Williams will both be great players in this league...There is no point in arguing who will be better, because we won't find out until they get in the league and play....The best player to come out of this draft could very well be a 2nd rounder or a late 1st....Thats why they play the game, players aren't made on the internet arguing over who will be better......

Whether Bogut or Williams go #1 or #2 is a pretty stupid thing to be arguing about, neither of these players are like Darko...Both teams will get good players, whichever way they decide to go in the draft..


oh ya, and to the people who think Bogut is over-rated, tell me of another 7footer who has came out of the draft who is as developed and all-around solid as he is....I mean c'mon the guy can even stroke the 3...


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

zagsfan20 said:


> oh ya, and to the people who think Bogut is over-rated, tell me of another 7footer who has came out of the draft who is as developed and all-around solid as he is....I mean c'mon the guy can even stroke the 3...


*BUT HE DOESN'T HAVE POTENTIAL!!!!!!*


----------



## AZwildcats4 (Feb 9, 2004)

DHarris34Phan said:


> *BUT HE DOESN'T HAVE POTENTIAL!!!!!!*


I disagree. Why does a player have to be a great athlete to have potential? Athleticism and improvement are not mutually exclusive. Look at how much Bogut has improved even from just last year. What makes you think that upward trend can't continue? Do you honestly think he has peaked at 20? Bogut will continue to work his tail off, and he will get better.


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

AZwildcats4 said:


> I disagree. Why does a player have to be a great athlete to have potential? Athleticism and improvement are not mutually exclusive. Look at how much Bogut has improved even from just last year. What makes you think that upward trend can't continue? Do you honestly think he has peaked at 20? Bogut will continue to work his tail off, and he will get better.


*LOL...I was being sarcastic. I totally agree with you.*


----------



## AZwildcats4 (Feb 9, 2004)

my bad :laugh:


----------



## Debt Collector (Mar 13, 2003)

judging from this thread i have a somewhat different take on williams. people think of him like he is a HS player, like he has some type of unbelievable upside, i dont see it. i think he's the proverbial "does everything well" player, nice scoring abillity, can board abit, good defensive skills, but nothing out of this world. his athleticism is good but nothing extraordinary at the NBA level. i think the fact that he is young tends to overhype him; just because you are a young player, doesnt mean you have some type of unbelievable potential. at best i see him as a 20/9/4 player on 45-50% shooting. which is fine and good but nothing to drool over.

i think if you want someone to compare him to, compare him to carmelo. both are similar size players, both have good athleticism, both have somewhat similar offensive games, both won national championships their freshman years. carmelo was more prominently featured and was a more agressive offensive player, he doubled williams' production with less efficiency. fast forward, in all likelihood carmelo is at best the third best player in his draft class. i dont think williams will be as good as carmelo, he doesnt have the demeanor really. so if i was a GM i ask myself do i want to spend a #1 or #2 on a guy who isnt likely to be the #1 or #2 best player in his draft class.


----------



## The Mad Viking (Jun 12, 2003)

jalen5 said:


> Nimreitz,
> 
> You are NOT going to be able to convince him that the Bucks should take Marvin over Bogut. Why? Because he thinks Bogut has just as much potential as Marvin and just as good a chance at being a superstar. If he thinks that, then there's no way he takes Marvin over Bogut b/c Bogut has produced for LONGER (just b/c he's played more). I guess he has the right to his opinion. IMO, I agree with you though. There's NO WAY Bogut has just as much superstar potential as Marvin Williams. I liked your argument when u lumped the superstars into categories. Bogut DOESN'T fit into any of those categories. Williams does. He's basically a more polished high schooler w/ TONS of potential. I see him being in the same league as Dwight Howard eventually. I think both will be stars in the league.
> 
> And also, while I love Josh Smith, all he is right now is a highlight reel. I'd let him shoot all day long. He's got to develop a better touch if he wants to be a star in the NBA. He's young tho so he still has time.


How many championship teams have been built around a 6-9 small forward? 

How many have been built around a skilled 7-footer?

It's not even close.

Marvin will be a great player. But Bogut is another Tim Duncan. Quietly intense warrior-assassin. Complete team player. Multitudinous skils. Very tough, physically and mentally. You put a team on his back and he carries it.


----------



## The Mad Viking (Jun 12, 2003)

Okay, selling Marvin Williams. 

He rebounds like a power forward, but has the handles, jumpshot and lateral quickness of shooting guard.

Because he is so multi-talented, he has multiple paths of possible stardom in the NBA. This makes him a much better bet than a single-path player.

He is quick enough to guard NBA shooting guards. He may be an elite defensive stopper.

His shooting mechanics are exceptional. He will be a very good 3-point shooter in the NBA, and he is an exceptional FT shooter.

He is unselfish, very smart, and hardworking. He bought into the team concept at UNC, and CHOSE UNC when he could have been the star starter on many other colleges that recruited him. And he was rewarded with a National Championship, confirming in his psyche that team-first wins.

He's going to be very, very good.


----------



## HeinzGuderian (Jun 29, 2004)

Something I always thought was impressive is how he always seems to be at the right place at the right time. Most notably, the Duke in CH and Nat. Championship game against Illinois. At Duke he was having a bad game overall, but never gave up and hit the go ahead bucket off of a rebound... and then calmly sunk the FT afterward. Against Illinois he was having an okay game and then but somehow managed to be in the right spot for the go ahead tip in that put UNC up ahead for good. (UNC freshman hitting clutch baskets to win national championships sound familiar? yeah I just had to say it.) This kid doesn't give up. Speaking of his FTs, he is a very good FT shooter especially for a big guy.


----------



## PHXSPORTS4LIFE (May 8, 2003)

i see tim thomas potential.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Tim Thomas potential isn't a bad thing. If TT could have put it together he would have been amazing.

Now, I've noticed a few assumptions and flat out in accuracies in the whole "on Bogut's nuts" crew. First of all, he was an unknown player out of Australia? Well I guess you can't use international stats, becase he was well established internationally, he wasn't some 7 foot kid with no game at all who became the Wooden Award winner in 2 years. He was a big skilled 7 footer who was going to dominate the MWC from the moment he signed with Utah.

NBA Starlevel potential is always going to go hand in hand with potential. Here's something no one has brought up, Yao Ming. Yao Ming isn't athletic, but he is incredibly sound fundamentally, in everyone's mind Yao is the better prospect and will always be the better player. Yao Ming hasn't risen to the level a lot of people expected of him, and he probably never will. Yao is a better passing big man too! He's also a much better shooter. So everyone thinking of the ceiling for Bogut, just take Yao and then lower it considerably. He will never be a DOMINANT center in the league, just as Yao might never dominate the game. He will be solid and great to have on your team, but no stud.

Next, the 2003 Junior World Championships that you keep touting is not good competition at ALL!! Do you understand this is a U-19 Competition? You want me to tell you the 12 players that made the US Team? Maurice Ager, De'Angelo Alexander, Dee Brown, Graham Brown, David Burgess, Paul Davis, Ryan Hollins, Kevin Pittsnogle, J.J. Redick, Mustafa Shakur, C.J. Watson, and Deron Williams. So the big men he was going against were Paul Davis, Kevin Pittsnogle, and Graham Brown! OOOOH, murderers row there! Pittsnogle in the post, WATCH OUT! The games were consistently in the 120s, so his 20+ points and 10+ rebounds don't really look that impressive considering he was playing really poor teams and was by far the best player on his team. It's also not the elite international competition that you've been making it out to be.

Bogut's 11-8 against Tim Duncan is not impressive, no. So when I draft him I'm going to get an 11-8 guy who history has shown won't get THAT much better? Sounds like #1 overall material to me! 11 points? How many were freethrows? 8 rebounds is not impressive either considering this kid is probably playing all 40 minutes, and TD only had 11, so it's not like the boards were being hogged or anything.

And finally, the assumption that Williams won't be a star because he wasn't a star in college, or that he isn't very good now, just because he has the potential to be truely great. Both a bad assumptions. He's being treated like a high schooler when he went to college! And by the way in the class of 2004 which was incredible, he would have been a first rounder, probably ahead of the Smiths too, but he chose to go to college for a year, and that maturity is either ignored or overlooked by you guys. He averaged 12-7 in limited time and playing out of position. You guys just need to realize that when you're scouting for the next level it isn't always WHAT you do, but HOW you do it, and this isn't just a basketball phenomenon, it exists in soccer, football, baseball, etc. Freddy Adu isn't an uberprospect because he scored 3 goals last year, it's because he has the athletic tools and has room to grow, he's not going to do anything now, but in the future he could be the best player in the world.

And with all that said, Marvin Williams isn't an unknown commodity. You know at the least what he'll give you. Who cares if he does or does not match D-Miles' production from his rookie year, they're different players in different situations. And DHarris34Phan, you are speaking as if the Bucks are one piece away (Bogut) from being an elite team in the east. We're NOT! We have the time to develop a superstar, we're not going to take this pick and become a 55 win team, we were sixth worst in the NBA last year! And it's not a situation like the Suns last year when they didn't have Amare and then went out and signed 2 proven vets, we're in the same situation, but we had all of our players healthy last year (except TJ, but admittedly no Amare), and no one we draft is going to be of the quality of Q or Nash. We need to think 3 years ahead, not for next year.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

Nimreitz said:


> Tim Thomas potential isn't a bad thing. If TT could have put it together he would have been amazing.


Ummm, that is the point. Thomas never has put it together and is still full of all that potential. I forsee many threads asking, is this the year Marvin breaks through? Any time a player is compared to Tim Thomas, that is a bad thing

If you have to knock Bogut to attempt to sell Marvin, then you have already lost.


----------



## HeinzGuderian (Jun 29, 2004)

cpawfan said:


> Ummm, that is the point. Thomas never has put it together and is still full of all that potential. I forsee many threads asking, is this the year Marvin breaks through? Any time a player is compared to Tim Thomas, that is a bad thing


I think they are comparing his style of play, not their attitudes. It has been said over and over that Marvin has a great attitude. If he is a bust it isn't going to be for the same reasons as TT.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

I sold him on page 1, this thread is no longer about selling marvin williams, but about arguing who's better. If it still was about selling Marv, we can just delete everything about Bogut.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

HeinzGuderian said:


> I think they are comparing his style of play, not their attitudes. It has been said over and over that Marvin has a great attitude. If he is a bust it isn't going to be for the same reasons as TT.


TT wasn't considered an attitude problem coming out of college

http://www.ibiblio.org/craig/draft/1997_draft/scout/pf.html



> Tim Thomas is being rated in this draft mostly on potential, which I can't say he is any closer to reaching since he came out of high school one year ago. Many scouts had him pegged as a lottery pick back then, ahead of Air Kobe.
> 
> His potential, however, is nothing to sniff at. Absolutely superior quickness, as well as excellent ball-handling skills, are tantalizingly packaged in his 6-10 frame. He looks great running the floor. Any polished half court skills are not so apparent. He's only a freshman, but so was Shareef Abdur-Rahim.
> 
> ...


and 



> Tim had a very solid freshman year at Villanova. He showed flashes of greatness, but sometimes he dissapeared. At times he would just settle for 3 pointers and never looked for penatration. When he concentrated on getting a good shot he would get one most of the time. Tim is very quick and athletic. He makes steals and has potential to block a shot or 2two here and there in the NBA. He was not selfish and never hogged the credit for wins. One worry I have though is his performance against Ron Mercer and Kentucky.
> 
> Who I compare him to-Shareef Abdur-Rahim
> The worst he could be-Charles Smith


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

Nimreitz said:


> I sold him on page 1, this thread is no longer about selling marvin williams, but about arguing who's better. If it still was about selling Marv, we can just delete everything about Bogut.


Then you are a poor salesmen because I'm not convinced.


----------



## Cammo (May 24, 2005)

> NBA Starlevel potential is always going to go hand in hand with potential. Here's something no one has brought up, Yao Ming. Yao Ming isn't athletic, but he is incredibly sound fundamentally, in everyone's mind Yao is the better prospect and will always be the better player. Yao Ming hasn't risen to the level a lot of people expected of him, and he probably never will. Yao is a better passing big man too! He's also a much better shooter. So everyone thinking of the ceiling for Bogut, just take Yao and then lower it considerably. He will never be a DOMINANT center in the league, just as Yao might never dominate the game. He will be solid and great to have on your team, but no stud.


Funnt that, when i mentioned Bogut some time back to mockdraft sites who didnt have him in their drafts they said the same thing. What you forget about Yao is that he has near zero agression, Bogut has much more.



> Bogut's 11-8 against Tim Duncan is not impressive, no. So when I draft him I'm going to get an 11-8 guy who history has shown won't get THAT much better? Sounds like #1 overall material to me! 11 points? How many were freethrows? 8 rebounds is not impressive either considering this kid is probably playing all 40 minutes, and TD only had 11, so it's not like the boards were being hogged or anything.


Averaging 14 and 8 in the Olympics including 11 and 7 against Duncan isnt impressive...but Williams averaging 11 and 7 in the college system is?  Bogut has just as much potential as Williams, to say that he does is completely ridiculous, he is only one year older than Williams and has already achieved much more than he has. Bogut IS an international player, Australian and European aspects of basketball clearly have influenced his game to go along with the American aggression that he learnt in the US. So go ahead, take your 11 and 7 guy with all the "potential" in the world over the long list of credentials of an international player whilst I sit here laughing at the expense of the Bucks. Bogut is in Washington working his *** off at the moment and from what i hear he has put an extra 20 pounds on his "weak frame", he knows his weaknesses and is finding ways to improve on them every week. All you have to do is look at the improvements he has made from his 1st year at College to his second, imagine how much he will improve in the NBA! To me, that is scary.


----------



## HeinzGuderian (Jun 29, 2004)

cpawfan said:


> TT wasn't considered an attitude problem coming out of college


There is a difference between not having an attitude problem and being an outstanding person. By all indications Marvin is one of those outstanding people; humble off the court but incredibly intense on the court. There are plenty of stories about it, and just listening to him in postgame conferences he is impressive.
I don't feel like searching very much, but here are a couple articles focusing on this aspect of him.
http://www.news-record.com/sports/acc/uncbkb_marvin_032505.htm
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/levesque/218557_leve02.html


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

> Tim Thomas potential isn't a bad thing. If TT could have put it together he would have been amazing.


So if Marvin Williams doesn't put it together, what is the difference? I am certain that Marvin won't be a TT, like you said, but the story is all too common IMO.


> Now, I've noticed a few assumptions and flat out in accuracies in the whole "on Bogut's nuts" crew. First of all, he was an unknown player out of Australia? Well I guess you can't use international stats, becase he was well established internationally, he wasn't some 7 foot kid with no game at all who became the Wooden Award winner in 2 years. He was a big skilled 7 footer who was going to dominate the MWC from the moment he signed with Utah.


He wasn't a well known player. For chrissakes he still isn't well known. Plus, before he showed up on the scene, in the 2003 WJC, NO ONE knew his name. I really don't know anyone that knew he was going to dominate from the moment he signed, but that is just me. Still, the fact of the matter is, Andrew Bogut was winning World Championships while people we're already jumping on the Marvin Williams bandwagon, who was dominated high school players in Washington.



> NBA Starlevel potential is always going to go hand in hand with potential. Here's something no one has brought up, Yao Ming. Yao Ming isn't athletic, but he is incredibly sound fundamentally, in everyone's mind Yao is the better prospect and will always be the better player. Yao Ming hasn't risen to the level a lot of people expected of him, and he probably never will. Yao is a better passing big man too! He's also a much better shooter. So everyone thinking of the ceiling for Bogut, just take Yao and then lower it considerably. He will never be a DOMINANT center in the league, just as Yao might never dominate the game. He will be solid and great to have on your team, but no stud.


I did bring up Yao earlier in the thread. I said that what Bogut has done at Utah, for some people, is what Yao was doing in China before he came over. People questioned the competition in China, as people are questioning Bogut's competition. The comparisons stop there, though. Bogut is much more atheltic, has a much better all around shooting game, is a better rebounder, and plays with a fire and passion that Yao is only beginning to show. Even if Yao won't drop 40-20 on teams, he creates matchup problems that allows the rest of the team to get better, much like Bogut would do IMO.



> Next, the 2003 Junior World Championships that you keep touting is not good competition at ALL!! Do you understand this is a U-19 Competition? You want me to tell you the 12 players that made the US Team? Maurice Ager, De'Angelo Alexander, Dee Brown, Graham Brown, David Burgess, Paul Davis, Ryan Hollins, Kevin Pittsnogle, J.J. Redick, Mustafa Shakur, C.J. Watson, and Deron Williams. So the big men he was going against were Paul Davis, Kevin Pittsnogle, and Graham Brown! OOOOH, murderers row there! Pittsnogle in the post, WATCH OUT! The games were consistently in the 120s, so his 20+ points and 10+ rebounds don't really look that impressive considering he was playing really poor teams and was by far the best player on his team. It's also not the elite international competition that you've been making it out to be.


I am COMPLETLEY aware that this was just an Under 19 tournament. But yes, the compitition was still outstanding. It is a great indicator of where players are at for their age, instead of just looking at their "potential", these guys went out and showed who could play. The fact that Bogut single handlely carried an Austrailian team that without him wouldn't even make the tournament to the Gold Medal is VERY impressive. And the games weren't constantly in the 120's....USA only had 1 game where they broke 100. Other players that were in the tournment include Linas Klieza, Rono Luki-Unic, Ezram Lorbek, Peter Ramos, and Drago Pasalic. Not your NBA All Stars, but definitly good competition! 

Put a US HSer's name on top of Bogut's 2003 WJC performances, and the guy would be a sure fire #1 pick, and people would be punching his ticket to the Hall of Fame!


> Bogut's 11-8 against Tim Duncan is not impressive, no. So when I draft him I'm going to get an 11-8 guy who history has shown won't get THAT much better? Sounds like #1 overall material to me! 11 points? How many were freethrows? 8 rebounds is not impressive either considering this kid is probably playing all 40 minutes, and TD only had 11, so it's not like the boards were being hogged or anything.


Marvin Williams puts up 8, 6, and 2 point performances in the biggest 3 games on his life, while Andrew Bogut puts up double doubles in the Olympics, and over 25/15 in a HIGHLY prestegious tourney, and we are supposed to be sold on Marvin? Come on! He faces Tim Duncan, puts up a very respectable performance for a 19 year old kid, and you still have to knock him....I don't understand.




> And finally, the assumption that Williams won't be a star because he wasn't a star in college, or that he isn't very good now, just because he has the potential to be truely great. Both a bad assumptions. He's being treated like a high schooler when he went to college! And by the way in the class of 2004 which was incredible, he would have been a first rounder, probably ahead of the Smiths too, but he chose to go to college for a year, and that maturity is either ignored or overlooked by you guys. He averaged 12-7 in limited time and playing out of position. You guys just need to realize that when you're scouting for the next level it isn't always WHAT you do, but HOW you do it, and this isn't just a basketball phenomenon, it exists in soccer, football, baseball, etc. Freddy Adu isn't an uberprospect because he scored 3 goals last year, it's because he has the athletic tools and has room to grow, he's not going to do anything now, but in the future he could be the best player in the world.


And Andrew Bogut is being treated like an International Stiff even though he went to college! And yes, scouting is baed on HOW YOU DO IT, and Bogut has shown in every big game of his life that he raises his game, his intensity, he finds a way for a way for his team to win. Utah getting to the sweet 16 is a perfect example. Considering the talent Utah had, that is like winning the National Championship!



> And with all that said, Marvin Williams isn't an unknown commodity. You know at the least what he'll give you. Who cares if he does or does not match D-Miles' production from his rookie year, they're different players in different situations. And DHarris34Phan, you are speaking as if the Bucks are one piece away (Bogut) from being an elite team in the east. We're NOT! We have the time to develop a superstar, we're not going to take this pick and become a 55 win team, we were sixth worst in the NBA last year! And it's not a situation like the Suns last year when they didn't have Amare and then went out and signed 2 proven vets, we're in the same situation, but we had all of our players healthy last year (except TJ, but admittedly no Amare), and no one we draft is going to be of the quality of Q or Nash. We need to think 3 years ahead, not for next year.


WE DON'T HAVE TIME TO DEVELOP A SUPERSTAR! Another season like this, and Terry Porter is fired, and Larry Harris loses his job. On top of that, Herb Kohl would probably want to sell the team. Andrew Bogut ensures us of a playoff birth IMO, and we still have money for another top tier FA! If the 2003/04 Bucks can make the playoffs, than there is no doubt in my mind that the 05/06 Bucks, with Bogut and another FA, will easily make the playoffs, and has POTENTIAL to be a great team in the East. With the foundation of Ford, Redd, and Bogut, put role players around them (ala Detroit) and I think we would have a legitimate shot at a title.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

DHarris34Phan said:


> He wasn't a well known player. For chrissakes he still isn't well known. Plus, before he showed up on the scene, in the 2003 WJC, NO ONE knew his name. I really don't know anyone that knew he was going to dominate from the moment he signed, but that is just me. Still, the fact of the matter is, Andrew Bogut was winning World Championships while people we're already jumping on the Marvin Williams bandwagon, who was dominated high school players in Washington.
> 
> 
> I did bring up Yao earlier in the thread. I said that what Bogut has done at Utah, for some people, is what Yao was doing in China before he came over. People questioned the competition in China, as people are questioning Bogut's competition. The comparisons stop there, though. Bogut is much more atheltic, has a much better all around shooting game, is a better rebounder, and plays with a fire and passion that Yao is only beginning to show. Even if Yao won't drop 40-20 on teams, he creates matchup problems that allows the rest of the team to get better, much like Bogut would do IMO.
> ...


Bogut still isn't well known? He won the Wooden Award! And the 2003 WJC were before he stepped foot on the court at Utah, so if the tournament is as "prestigious" as you say it is, then you're just completely wrong. The tournament isn't prestigious, Leinas Kleiza? Peter John Ramos? Ezram Lorbek!? Didn't he back up Paul Davis!? Is there a first round big man in this tournament?! I mean, give me a break. And you painting is as a world championship is just a farce. If the 2004 High School Class played instead of the group of stiffs actually there the US would have come away on top. But that's speculative and doesn't really mean anything.

Bogut is a better shooter and rebounder than Yao Ming?! Are you ****ing kidding me!!! Yao Ming doesn't miss a mid range jump shot!! He's also a better passer, and by the way... 7 FOOT FREAKIN 6!! Bogut won't be better and certainly not dominant!!

Put a Bogut's stats on a US High Schooler and he's hyped as a hall of famer?! Would you give actual scouts some respect!! Scouts are not paid to consider hype, if GMs buy into dumb hype they lose their job. Telfair's hype was crazy, but by the time we actually got to the draft he was considered a major reach at 13. And if you're looking for a US High Schooler to throw the hype machine label on, I don't think you can find a better candidate than Bassy.

Marv disappeared in the 3 biggest game of his life and Bogut responded, yeah absolutely. Are you so blind that you are only looking at a handful of games instead of the entire package? Dude, ask anyone who knows anything about basketball and they'll tell you that Marvin Williams is a freak; he's considered a much better prospect than TT was when he came out!

I'm not treating Bogut like a stiff, I'm treating him like the SECOND best prospect in the draft, which he is. I don't think anyone is doubting Bogut's skill, just his ability to be an NBA star, which is a very legitimate concern. If you got the Vegas odds for who will become an NBA Star Marvin Williams would be favored, it's just that easy.

And finally we DO have time to develop a superstar. You're thinking like a guy who's content with a 5 seed and maybe advancing to the second round every year. You don't win the whole thing without gambling! Suns...Amare, Spurs...like every international player, Heat...6-4 point guard with limited handles DWade, Pistons...Darko & trading for a super head case like Sheed AND trading for unproven athletic freak Big Ben, Dallas....Dirk, LA...Kobe, and it goes on. Minny...KG. Terry Porter might get fired sure, but you're not him. Who cares if the coach gets fired if we get someone better? I love Ned Yost, but who cares if he gets fired after another 68 win season? But that is all in Harris' hands, and when given talent Porter can use it, so I don't think a poor year next season kills his job. And GMs are judged in the LOOOOOOOONG term, Harris will NOT get fired if we have a few more bad years. We have the time, but it doesn't even matter because Marvin Williams can come in right away and prodcuce. He can come in and grab 8 boards, he can come in and knock down the open J, or pick up easy dunks on the break. He can play 25 minutes a night, and from a rookie regardless of draft position, that's fantastic.

And I hate to break it to you, but given a few more signings we will not contend like Detroit. That's is just blind homer faith. TJ can't defend anyone, DMase is about 4 inches too small for his position, even with Bogut or Williams our front line is weak. As a team our defense is poor. The last time we did anything we had 2 stars, Big Dog (former #1) and Ray Ray, and then we supported them with role players, but what you need to realize about this strategy is that it only works if you actually have a star. Andrew Bogut will never be a 25 and 12 guy, I'm sorry, but he just won't. You can't build around an average/above average center and just give him role players. And incidentally, after we resign Mike Redd, we won't really have cap space to go out and get a second tier player.

An aside comment though, I played College Hoops 2k5 tonight against a friend, he was North Carolina and I was Utah and we played in Utah. I won by 12 points with Bogut going for 24 points, 15 rebounds, 9 assists, and 5 blocks. That was pretty damn cool.


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

> Bogut still isn't well known? He won the Wooden Award! And the 2003 WJC were before he stepped foot on the court at Utah, so if the tournament is as "prestigious" as you say it is, then you're just completely wrong. The tournament isn't prestigious, Leinas Kleiza? Peter John Ramos? Ezram Lorbek!? Didn't he back up Paul Davis!? Is there a first round big man in this tournament?! I mean, give me a break. And you painting is as a world championship is just a farce. If the 2004 High School Class played instead of the group of stiffs actually there the US would have come away on top. But that's speculative and doesn't really mean anything.


He was unknown after the WJC because the common fan doesn't pay attention to international basketball! I for one didn't know Bogut after the WJC. Leinas Kleiza, Peter Jon Ramos and Ezram Lorbek are all better players than anyone Marvin Williams played against in High School.

You are calling DeRon Williams, JJ Redick, and Mustafa Shakur, all possible 1st round picks stiifs. Even Paul Davis really isn't a "stiff". He is a better player than anyone Marvin ever faced in HS.



> Bogut is a better shooter and rebounder than Yao Ming?! Are you ****ing kidding me!!! Yao Ming doesn't miss a mid range jump shot!! He's also a better passer, and by the way... 7 FOOT FREAKIN 6!! Bogut won't be better and certainly not dominant!!


Bogut is as good, if not a better shooter than Yao Ming IMO. I won't bore you with stats, but from what I have seen, Bogut has range almost out to the NBA 3 pointer, and shoots a good percentage. Bogut is a better rebounder than Yao. That has been a HUGE flaw in Yao's game. He isn't a consistent rebounder. Bogut has all the tools necessary to be a good rebounder, and on top of it, he has proven he is a good rebounder!!!




> Put a Bogut's stats on a US High Schooler and he's hyped as a hall of famer?! Would you give actual scouts some respect!! Scouts are not paid to consider hype, if GMs buy into dumb hype they lose their job. Telfair's hype was crazy, but by the time we actually got to the draft he was considered a major reach at 13. And if you're looking for a US High Schooler to throw the hype machine label on, I don't think you can find a better candidate than Bassy.


I stand by my statement. If a US HSer went overseas and put up a 26/17 average while leading the US to a Gold Medal, all at the age of 18, then yes, people here would be drooling. GMs do buy into hype. That is how Busts are made.



> Marv disappeared in the 3 biggest game of his life and Bogut responded, yeah absolutely. Are you so blind that you are only looking at a handful of games instead of the entire package? Dude, ask anyone who knows anything about basketball and they'll tell you that Marvin Williams is a freak; he's considered a much better prospect than TT was when he came out!


I realize Marvin had many great games during the season, but that fact is, great players step up in big games. Marvin hasn't showed me that he can play in a big NCAA game, so what makes me think he can play in the NBA? Bogut has proved to me that the pressure of a big game doesn't faize him, and that he is capable of carrying a team on his back to success. Marvin has failed to even remotley do this.


> I'm not treating Bogut like a stiff, I'm treating him like the SECOND best prospect in the draft, which he is. I don't think anyone is doubting Bogut's skill, just his ability to be an NBA star, which is a very legitimate concern. If you got the Vegas odds for who will become an NBA Star Marvin Williams would be favored, it's just that easy.


Because why? There is nothing that I see that leads me to believe that Marvin Williams will be come a bigger star, or is even the best prospect at this point! Why was Darko Milicic picked ahead of Dwayne Wade? Well, Darko just had this great potential to become a 7-1 player that can do everything, while Dwayne was just an undersized SG, who dominated a lower-tier conference in Conference USA. Better potential doesn't make you a better player. Plain and simple.



> And finally we DO have time to develop a superstar. You're thinking like a guy who's content with a 5 seed and maybe advancing to the second round every year. You don't win the whole thing without gambling! Suns...Amare, Spurs...like every international player, Heat...6-4 point guard with limited handles DWade, Pistons...Darko & trading for a super head case like Sheed AND trading for unproven athletic freak Big Ben, Dallas....Dirk, LA...Kobe, and it goes on. Minny...KG. Terry Porter might get fired sure, but you're not him. Who cares if the coach gets fired if we get someone better? I love Ned Yost, but who cares if he gets fired after another 68 win season? But that is all in Harris' hands, and when given talent Porter can use it, so I don't think a poor year next season kills his job. And GMs are judged in the LOOOOOOOONG term, Harris will NOT get fired if we have a few more bad years. We have the time, but it doesn't even matter because Marvin Williams can come in right away and prodcuce. He can come in and grab 8 boards, he can come in and knock down the open J, or pick up easy dunks on the break. He can play 25 minutes a night, and from a rookie regardless of draft position, that's fantastic.


What you are saying at the top of your post is that Big Men are what makes good teams better. Wade is awesome, but do you see the heat winning 60+ games without Shaq? Phoenix is great, but they are showing that a big fundamental player in Tim Duncan can beat an athletic freak. The Pistons got over the hump when the traded for Rasheed Wallace, another big man that posses very good fundamenal skiils, and isn't what I would call an Atheltic Freak. Kobe is proving to be just an above average player without Shaq. Look at how TMac has flourished with a Big Man in Yao. The Rockets are going to be great for years not just because they have TMac, but because they have Yao.

My Point is, you can be an athletic freak like Kobe Bryant, Tracy McGrady, and Dominique Wilkins, but if you don't have a legitimate big man to anchor the post, your team will not have playoff success. The one exception to this rule is Michael Jordan, who is the best player of all time. 



> And I hate to break it to you, but given a few more signings we will not contend like Detroit. That's is just blind homer faith. TJ can't defend anyone, DMase is about 4 inches too small for his position, even with Bogut or Williams our front line is weak. As a team our defense is poor. The last time we did anything we had 2 stars, Big Dog (former #1) and Ray Ray, and then we supported them with role players, but what you need to realize about this strategy is that it only works if you actually have a star. Andrew Bogut will never be a 25 and 12 guy, I'm sorry, but he just won't. You can't build around an average/above average center and just give him role players. And incidentally, after we resign Mike Redd, we won't really have cap space to go out and get a second tier player.


Can I ask you...who is Detroits SuperStar player? If you say Ben Wallace, then we need a guy like Bogut who can compete with him. Marvin Williams won't in a million years be able to cover Wallace, but I think that Bogut can. Their team is built around big men, and they are winning championships because of it. Rip Hamilton, Tayshaun Prince, and Chauncey Billups aren't what you would call athletic freaks, but with legitimate big men, it makes the game that much easier for them. I think that with Bogut, Michael Redd and especially Desmond Mason will play alot better, and we can emulate Detroit's recipe for success.

Plus, after we resign Redd, he, Andrew Bogut, and TJ Ford are the only players locked up after 2006/2007. Joe Smith, Desmond Mason, Calvin Booth all expire in two years. So yes, we will have alot of caproom, with a great young foundation to build upon.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

I'm not going to put down Williams or sell Bogut.
All I am offering is my opinion and I'll give it at retail
value.The reason I like Bogut more doesn't have anything to do with stats or size.I think he's the best player for the
same reason I looked at Lebron in High School and thought
he was going to be a superstar.

Now LeBron is a freak and Bogut isn't...Comparing
them would be idiotic.I do not believe that Bogut is going
to be the cornerstone of a title contending team.What I do
believe is that he has the ability to make the correct play
and do it willingly.That is LeBron's best quality,although
he obviously lost a lot of faith in his teammates during their dreadful second half of the season.

Basketball is a team sport,even in the NBA where
the league values everything above substance.Williams is
going to be a very good player,but I honestly do not see him making a major contribution to making his team better
in the next several seasons.Potential is great if you want to
be the Clippers,but if you want to win playoff games you
better have someone who can contribute.Bogut is going
to be able to draw double teams and then he is both willing
and able to find the open man.In the Bucks place I would
put him and Redd on the same side of the floor for spacing.

Again I do not think any of the players in this draft are even potential Hall of Famers.I suspect the best player may be the one who wants to be the best more than the others...And I certainly can not look into the souls of men.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

No offense DHarris34Phan, you don't know as much as you think you know. Thanks for not boring me with statistics, but maybe the stat that Yao was 3rd in the NBA this season in Field Goal percentage trailing only Shaq and Amare, or that his career FG percentage is 52.5%! Yeah, Bogut's better than that.

Why are you talking about Shukur and Deron Williams? They had nothing to do with Bogut in the U-19 Championships. Unless you can prove to me that Deron or Mustafa was guarding Bogut, they don't belong in the discussion at all. I can't understand why any knowledgeable person would defend Bogut's competition by listing off Point guards!

Why are you talking about Marvin Williams' high school competition? He's proven himself in college! Clearly it's because that's where he was when Bogut was playing in the WJCs, but why does that matter at all? And you're all over the board on Marv too. In earlier posts you talk about him facing other big men, and then you're talking about him not being a big man, just make a decision or maybe get a clue. He is a combo forward, not a center. How he plays against Paul Davis or Deron Williams doesn't mean anything, it's how he plays against his matchup.

Bogut's proven he is a good rebounder? Where? Against the USA when he picked up a mere 8 garbage rebounds in the olympics? In the MWC against 6'8'' Centers? COME ON!! He hasn't proven a damn thing!

First of all Sheed doesn't play like a bigman, so it's not like Detroit traded for a big man in Sheed and he put them over the hump. Ben Wallace is their center and he's 6'8''. And by the way, you don't need a big man like Bogut to compete with Ben Wallace. I mean, it's not like he's an offensive threat, and going at Ben with Bogut is just dumb. Focus the game somewhere that takes the Defensive Player of the Year out of the game, not somewhere that sheds the spotlight on him.

STOP knocking Darko. When he's one of the top 10 players in the league I reserve the right to punch every single one of you haters in the face.

And going back to what you said earlier in this thread... "So if Marvin Williams doesn't put it together, what is the difference? I am certain that Marvin won't be a TT, like you said, but the story is all too common IMO."

You know what story is even more common? Trajen Langdon, Miles Simon, Khalid El-Amein, CHRISTIAN LAETTNER, Bobby Hurley, Danny Fortson, Robert Traylor, Michael Doleac, Keith Van Horn, Raef Lafrentz, Wally Szerbiak, Mateen Cleaves, Shane Battier, Kirk Haston, Ed O'Bannon, Eric Montross, Calbert Cheney, Big Country Reeves (OK State all the way to the Final Four!?).

These guys were all "gamers" and rose to the occasion on the amature level... Where are they now? I'd rather have Tim Thomas than any player on that list with the possible exception of Battier, but just because he's so unselfish. You have to look at potential, it's just not possible to have a good draft if you don't. And a lot of the guys on the list are top 5 guys, and almost all of them were drafted top 10. Don't TELL ME that a guy has proven himself and rises to the occasion, because that doesn't mean ANYTHING in the NBA.


----------



## DomJamesToTheBasket (Apr 20, 2005)

DHarris34Phan said:


> *Ditto with me. As a Bucks fan, he could be ending up in Milwaukee. I really want to know why this kid is a better choice than Bogut. We all have seen players with all the potential in the world fail, tell me why Marvin is different.*


"but the most impressive part about Marvin Williams, and we can’t stress this enough, are his intangibles. Ask any of his current or former coaches and they will all tell you Marvin has an incredible attitude, motor, work ethic, and understanding of basketball. His basketball IQ is extremely high (he grew up watching Dean Smith instructional videos). He understands what to do and where to go at all times, and is extremely unselfish. Marvin plays with a passion and desire that is hard to find these days and is very driven but not consumed by basketball. For a player his age, he has shown that he is very mature. The fact that he never once complained about his role or playing time his freshman year and the fact that he understood and embraced his role speak volumes about his maturity. He plays within the team and within his abilities at all times. "

That is why.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

Arguing that Marvin Williams has proven something already, and then turning around and arguing that Bogut hasn't proven anything...is completely absurd. Anyone attempting to argue that Marvin Williams has proven more already has completely lost their objectivity.

Bogut was generally regarded as the best college basketball player last year. As evidenced by his awards to that fact, despite not playing for a big program and not being on television constantly.


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

> Why are you talking about Shukur and Deron Williams? They had nothing to do with Bogut in the U-19 Championships. Unless you can prove to me that Deron or Mustafa was guarding Bogut, they don't belong in the discussion at all. I can't understand why any knowledgeable person would defend Bogut's competition by listing off Point guards!


I am not saying that they were guarding Bogut, or that a PG's stats should be comparable to a Centers. I am just saying that Bogut took over the tournament, while highly regarded players like Williams and Shakur (who could have been a 1st round pick outta HS) really didn't. If the Worldwide competition was as bad as think it was, then there is no reason for Deron Williams not to put up 25 and 10 assists IMO.



> Why are you talking about Marvin Williams' high school competition? He's proven himself in college! Clearly it's because that's where he was when Bogut was playing in the WJCs, but why does that matter at all? And you're all over the board on Marv too. In earlier posts you talk about him facing other big men, and then you're talking about him not being a big man, just make a decision or maybe get a clue. He is a combo forward, not a center. How he plays against Paul Davis or Deron Williams doesn't mean anything, it's how he plays against his matchup.


Marvin hasn't proved himself in college to the point where you know he is going to be a Superstar in the NBA. Carmelo Anthony proved himself in college as a Frosh. Marvin hasn't done that. I look at Marvin's games versus bigmen because inevitably in the NBA he will have to matchup against bigmen, ESPECIALLY on the Bucks. If he hasn't been able to prove himself against 6-10 players in college (Paul Davis, Sheldon Williams, even Zach Morley of UW) then what makes me think he is going to step in and compete with the Big guys of the Central Division? He might never be able to! Read my post in the Milwaukee Bucks Forum on why we should draft Bogut. 



> Bogut's proven he is a good rebounder? Where? Against the USA when he picked up a mere 8 garbage rebounds in the olympics? In the MWC against 6'8'' Centers? COME ON!! He hasn't proven a damn thing!


LOL...Grabbing 8 rebounds, which weren't garbage rebounds considering it was a VERY competative game, is nothing to laugh at. The kid was 19 years old, competing against Tim Duncan! 

The MWC is full of 6'10, 6'11 centers. Again, they aren't your best players, but it isn't like Bogut was rebounding over High Schoolers. Don't tell me that Bogut hasn't proved a damn thing, because that is just wrong. 




> First of all Sheed doesn't play like a bigman, so it's not like Detroit traded for a big man in Sheed and he put them over the hump. Ben Wallace is their center and he's 6'8''. And by the way, you don't need a big man like Bogut to compete with Ben Wallace. I mean, it's not like he's an offensive threat, and going at Ben with Bogut is just dumb. Focus the game somewhere that takes the Defensive Player of the Year out of the game, not somewhere that sheds the spotlight on him.


All teams don't need a player like Bogut to compete with Big Ben, but sure as hell the Bucks do, especially on the defensive end. Without Bogut, Ben just steamrolls over Dan Gadzuric and Zaza Pachulia. Bogut would be able to at least neutralize him! On the offensive end, Bogut creates matchup nightmares, as he can stroke it out to the 3 point line, and he can put the ball on the floor. His passing ability makes his post game that much better, as he can hit the cutters all day. Desmond Mason will be Andrew Bogut's #1 fan.



> STOP knocking Darko. When he's one of the top 10 players in the league I reserve the right to punch every single one of you haters in the face.


I am not hating on Darko. I want to see the kid succeed as well. I just want to know why there is such a huge difference RIGHT NOW between Darko and Bogut?




> You know what story is even more common? Trajen Langdon, Miles Simon, Khalid El-Amein, CHRISTIAN LAETTNER, Bobby Hurley, Danny Fortson, Robert Traylor, Michael Doleac, Keith Van Horn, Raef Lafrentz, Wally Szerbiak, Mateen Cleaves, Shane Battier, Kirk Haston, Ed O'Bannon, Eric Montross, Calbert Cheney, Big Country Reeves (OK State all the way to the Final Four!?).
> 
> These guys were all "gamers" and rose to the occasion on the amature level... Where are they now? I'd rather have Tim Thomas than any player on that list with the possible exception of Battier, but just because he's so unselfish. You have to look at potential, it's just not possible to have a good draft if you don't. And a lot of the guys on the list are top 5 guys, and almost all of them were drafted top 10. Don't TELL ME that a guy has proven himself and rises to the occasion, because that doesn't mean ANYTHING in the NBA.


All of those guys were 4 year seniors that were products of their college systems. It isn't like Bogut is a 23 year old senior! He is a 20 year old kid that in his short time in the NCAAs, has taken it by storm, and proved that he has great potential. None of those guys had the International experience of Bogut, either. To you, International play doesn't mean squat, but to me, it is huge, especailly after the 2004 Olympics.


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

I don't want to make this a rip on Tim Thomas thread but some things have to be cleared up here. Marvin Williams was NOT considered the top prospect in his class as both Howard and Livington were rated higher. By the end of his senior year a lot of guys seemed to be at his level: JR Smith - who came from out of nowhere but quickly established himself, Josh Smith, Telfar.

Tim Thomas was actually rated higher then Kobe by a lot of scouts in high school. While that year's class obviulsy wasn't as good as last years, TT was as highly touted if not more then Williams


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

Pioneer10 said:


> I don't want to make this a rip on Tim Thomas thread but some things have to be cleared up here. Marvin Williams was NOT considered the top prospect in his class as both Howard and Livington were rated higher. By the end of his senior year a lot of guys seemed to be at his level: JR Smith - who came from out of nowhere but quickly established himself, Josh Smith, Telfar.
> 
> Tim Thomas was actually rated higher then Kobe by a lot of scouts in high school. While that year's class obviulsy wasn't as good as last years, TT was as highly touted if not more then Williams


Even coming out of college Tim Thomas was highly touted. The guy has tremendous skills. And you thought he had the mindset to put them together. But it never happened.

Tim Thomas still has a ton of potential. He can still play really well. But he's as inconsistent as he ever was.


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

futuristxen said:


> Even coming out of college Tim Thomas was highly touted. The guy has tremendous skills. And you thought he had the mindset to put them together. But it never happened.
> 
> Tim Thomas still has a ton of potential. He can still play really well. But he's as inconsistent as he ever was.


 I remember of all people Ray Allen kept saying that Tim Thomas easily had the ability and talent to be the best player in the league. I guess he falls in the Derrick Coleman mode of guys who just don't care enough


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Marvin Williams = Jamal Mashburn (with no injuries). I'd advise anyone to look at NBA.com and check out Mashburn's numbers, when not injured and see that a guy who avg. 21-23 ppg, 6-8 rpg, 4-5 apg, 1 spg during his best seasons.

Now if Marvin Williams becomes a 21/7/4/1 player, wouldn't you be happy? People think that my comparing him to Mashburn is doing him a disservice, but then you realize that 80% of the NBA could never put up those numbers in their wildest dreams.


----------



## Tooeasy (Nov 4, 2003)

HKF said:


> Marvin Williams = Jamal Mashburn (with no injuries). I'd advise anyone to look at NBA.com and check out Mashburn's numbers, when not injured and see that a guy who avg. 21-23 ppg, 6-8 rpg, 4-5 apg, 1 spg during his best seasons.
> 
> Now if Marvin Williams becomes a 21/7/4/1 player, wouldn't you be happy? People think that my comparing him to Mashburn is doing him a disservice, but then you realize that 80% of the NBA could never put up those numbers in their wildest dreams.


monster mash has always been one of my personal favs in the generation of players that I have grown up watching. He had such a silky smooth jumper, and really was solid in that he played both ends of the court with passion. Its a shame to see him go out the way he did, however there is speculation that he may try and return next season, although I would definately recommend against it. He was qouted as having trouble just walking around disneyland with his daughter last summer, to have no cartilage left in your knee and still attempt to play a contact sport is setting yourself up for serious failure in the longrun. 
The craziest thing for me to think about, is how good the hornets could have been in that 2002-2003 season when mashburn had a career year. We had argueably top 5 players in 3 positions(mags,davis,mash) and a solid bench. If this team could have been healthy in the playoffs, I truly feel they would've made the eastern conference finals.


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

So...ON A GOOD NOTE! MarvinWilliams#1in2005 got banned! :banana: :banana:


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

Nimreitz, or whoever wants to answer, what makes Andrew Bogut any different than Tim Duncan coming out of college?


----------



## Tooeasy (Nov 4, 2003)

DHarris34Phan said:


> Nimreitz, or whoever wants to answer, what makes Andrew Bogut any different than Tim Duncan coming out of college?


hes australian.... and to another extent, hes white. Seriously, I've heard people question his athleticism quite a few times, and although he certainly is no amare, his bball iq is through the roof, and he can still run the floor amazingly well. He showcased this in that opening round game against UAB in the tourney this year, he played outstanding, with like 28 and 11.


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

Tooeasy said:


> hes australian.... and to another extent, hes white. Seriously, I've heard people question his athleticism quite a few times, and although he certainly is no amare, his bball iq is through the roof, and he can still run the floor amazingly well. He showcased this in that opening round game against UAB in the tourney this year, he played outstanding, with like 28 and 11.


It was against UTEP ....but am I wrong to think that Bogut's game is similar to Duncan's, and he could have that type of impact?


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

Bogut's certainly no less the athlete that Duncan has been the last few years.


----------



## Perfection (May 10, 2004)

Nimreitz said:


> I think you're looking at it the wrong way. Pryz was just a retarded pick, I can't defend it, but I believe he was a late first round pick where you don't really expect a starter anyway. .



Hmm...Portland would like to disagree. He's been a stud as a starter for us. We just hope that we can retain him with the MLE. He's the type of banging trashman center we need to get all the hustle plays and rebounds.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Really? You hear that DHarris34Phan?

What makes Bogut different from Duncan? I don't know, but I just don't see him as the same type of player. For one I don't think Bogut could ever guard a Kevin Garnett, in fact I scouted Bogut's game during an MWC affair this year and while I was generally impressed I didn't think his defense was very good at all. His jumper isn't as good as you're making it out to be either. So he hit a few wide open 22 footers in the tournament, big deal. When he gets pushed away from the basket his offense gets a lot worse and he can easily be handled by on player. Duncan on the other hand has always been a good midrange shooter, that Bank is still open and unguardable.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Bogut is not the defensive presence or the rebounder Tim Duncan is. Let's not go nuts. Tim Duncan was as Can't Miss an NBA HOF as it gets coming out of college. The league wanted him after his freshman year for goodness sake.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

DHarris34Phan said:


> It was against UTEP ....but am I wrong to think that Bogut's game is similar to Duncan's, and he could have that type of impact?


Yes, you are wrong. He is not going to be Tim Duncan or even close (since Tim is arguably one of the top 10 best players/winners in NBA history).

Hope for Bogut to be a healthy Bill Walton and you've got something IMO.


----------



## Tooeasy (Nov 4, 2003)

DHarris34Phan said:


> It was against UTEP ?


my bad, don't know where i pulled UAB from/


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

HKF said:


> Yes, you are wrong. He is not going to be Tim Duncan or even close (since Tim is arguably one of the top 10 best players/winners in NBA history).
> 
> Hope for Bogut to be a healthy Bill Walton and you've got something IMO.


I can see how you don't think Bogut will turn into Duncan because of Duncan's acheivements in the League. But look at their collegeiate and international track record before coming into the league, they are so very similar. And, IMO, their styles of play are identical. I really think that Bogut will become AT LEAST become a poor man's Tim Duncan, which is still pretty darn good, and perfectly capable of building a championship team around.

Why can't Bogut reach levels of success like Duncan, while Marvin Williams is being touted as a the next big superstar, without doing nearly what Bogut has. I don't think it is because of his age, because Bogut is only 1 year older than Marvin...

I really want to know why people think Andrew Bogut can't have bigtime success in the league, when Tim Duncan, who isn't the most athletic big man I have ever seen, is dominating the League.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Bring up the same points that you've stated in every post in this ginormous thread again why don't you? Look, he's just not Tim Duncan, can't you understand that? For one he isn't as mobile as Duncan, not the defender, not the shooter, not as long, and simply not as good! And while he will yell up the court that doesn't automatically mean he's an intense player, Duncan might be the most intense player in the NBA only most people don't notice because he doesn't yell and scream and jump around and pop his jersey. How many more respected NBADraft forum posters need to tell you Bogut isn't close to TD for you to believe it? What most of us have learned over a few years here is to take HKF's word for a lot of things because he puts in a lot of work and just has an eye for talent, he had Deron pegged as a star before anyone even knew who he was. And I'm not just saying that because he's more or less on my side right now, or at least in regards to Bogut's potential.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

HKF said:


> Hope for Bogut to be a healthy Bill Walton and you've got something IMO.


A healthy Bill Walton is as good as Tim Duncan.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

When Bill Walton was healthy he was the second best center in the league and he was better than most centers after the injuries.Dr Jack Ramsey would have loved to have seen a healthy Bill Walton out on the floor for him.I doubt that he'd come out of retirement for Andrew Bogut.In fact I doubt that Andrew Bogut and his little brother together will ever compare to any Hall of Fame type center.


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

> Bring up the same points that you've stated in every post in this ginormous thread again why don't you? Look, he's just not Tim Duncan, can't you understand that?


I bring up the same points every time because I feel like the same argument can be said for Andrew Bogut. Marvin Williams has a lot of doubts to him right now IMO, and thus he needs more explaining.



> For one he isn't as mobile as Duncan, not the defender, not the shooter, not as long, and simply not as good! And while he will yell up the court that doesn't automatically mean he's an intense player, Duncan might be the most intense player in the NBA only most people don't notice because he doesn't yell and scream and jump around and pop his jersey.


His mobility IS UNDERRATED!!!! People act like this guy is a 40 year old Arvydas Sabonis running up and down the court. If you have watched him play, assuming you have, the guy runs up and down the court all game at a very good pace, and can curl off pick and rolls very well. I really don't think Tim Duncan is all that more mobile than Andrew Bogut. You are right, Bogut isn't the defender that Duncan is or may well ever be, but he has shown that he has the potential to be an above average defender in the league. Because he yells up and down the court doesn't make him intense. The fact that you can see in his eyes that he has the will to win, and he will do everything in his power to prove doubters like you wrong. While Duncan is quiet in this aspect, Bogut shows his emotion, which I like to be honest with you. HE IS A MEAN, INTESNE PLAYER. 



> How many more respected NBADraft forum posters need to tell you Bogut isn't close to TD for you to believe it? What most of us have learned over a few years here is to take HKF's word for a lot of things because he puts in a lot of work and just has an eye for talent, he had Deron pegged as a star before anyone even knew who he was. And I'm not just saying that because he's more or less on my side right now, or at least in regards to Bogut's potential.


I highly respect HKF's word, and I respect yous, but what has Bogut done to not tell me that he can't turn into a Tim-Duncan like (not Tim Duncan, a comparable style of play) player. Reading from both scouting reports coming into the draft, hell they sound identical. Bogut also rose to prominence much like Duncan. Duncan earned his way to the top by busting his *** on the International circuit, and came over and busted his *** in the NCAAs, much like Bogut. I know there were people back in 1997 doubting Duncan's potentail to be a SUPERSTAR, but knew he would make a great NBA player. There were guys like TMac and Tim Thomas in his draft class, but the Spurs made the right choice to pick the guy that would come in right away and make his teammates better. That is what I think Bogut is capable of doing.

You can tell me that Marvin Williams has the potential to be a superstar like Tracy McGrady, but I will take a Tim Duncan style of player over a superstar like that any day.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

DHarris34Phan said:


> I really want to know why people think Andrew Bogut can't have bigtime success in the league, when Tim Duncan, who isn't the most athletic big man I have ever seen, is dominating the League.


This is a misconception. When Duncan came into the league he was much more mobile then he is now. He was playing SF for the Spurs and Pop would routinely use him to play the oppositions PG.

Bogut is never, ever going to be on that level or close to that level. Bogut needs to set his sights on Big Z , if he reaches that level I will call him a success.


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

MemphisX said:


> Bogut is never, ever going to be on that level or close to that level. Bogut needs to set his sights on Big Z , if he reaches that level I will call him a success.


Because Big Z isn't mobile at all, wheres Bogut is 100x more athletic and mobile than him? No way.

Tim Duncan didn't play SF, ever. He came into the league as a PF alongside Robinson.


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

DHarris34Phan said:


> Because Big Z isn't mobile at all, wheres Bogut is 100x more athletic and mobile than him? No way.
> 
> Tim Duncan didn't play SF, ever. He came into the league as a PF alongside Robinson.


That shows how little you know. Ever remember the tripple towers with Duncan, Robinson and Purdue, a real basketball fan would.


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> That shows how little you know. Ever remember the tripple towers with Duncan, Robinson and Purdue, a real basketball fan would.


Duncan was a versitile Power Forward....so I wouldn't consider him a Small Forward when he came into the league. The fact that he would guard Small Forwards does not make him a Small Forward. What it says is San Antonio had an influx of good bigmen, and Duncan was the only player they had to defend the opposing 3.


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

DHarris34Phan said:


> Duncan was a versitile Power Forward....so I wouldn't consider him a Small Forward when he came into the league. The fact that he would guard Small Forwards does not make him a Small Forward. What it says is San Antonio had an influx of good bigmen, and Duncan was the only player they had to defend the opposing 3.


So if you're comparing Bogut and Duncans athletic ability and saying that they are equal, then you think Bogut can guard 3's? LMFAO, he's too slow to guard most NBA centers. Mainly because you will see that position turn more and more to the Amare Stoudamire style of play. Guys like Bogut and Big Z are far too slow and awkward to guard todays versatile bigmen.


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> So if you're comparing Bogut and Duncans athletic ability and saying that they are equal, then you think Bogut can guard 3's? LMFAO, he's too slow to guard most NBA centers. Mainly because you will see that position turn more and more to the Amare Stoudamire style of play. Guys like Bogut and Big Z are far too slow and awkward to guard todays versatile bigmen.


I have said Duncan's more mobile than Bogut. What I am saying is that for the past 3-4 now Duncan is playing MVP basketball while not looking to be as mobile in younger days. Heck, he is playing MVP basketball with a sprained ankle. It is a true testament to Duncan, but it also shows, IMO, that you don't need to be the most athletic player to be play great basketball for a center.

Comparing Bogut to Z is exageratting. While not on TD's or Amares level, Bogut will have average to above average mobility in the league.


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

DHarris34Phan said:


> I have said Duncan's more mobile than Bogut. What I am saying is that for the past 3-4 now Duncan is playing MVP basketball while not looking to be as mobile in younger days. Heck, he is playing MVP basketball with a sprained ankle. It is a true testament to Duncan, but it also shows, IMO, that you don't need to be the most athletic player to be play great basketball for a center.
> 
> Comparing Bogut to Z is exageratting. While not on TD's or Amares level, Bogut will have average to above average mobility in the league.


Saying that he has above average mobility is the exageration. He's on the exact same level as Big Z. You are the only person on this board I've seen try to refute that.


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

BTW DHarris, if you're still looking to become convinced about Marvin Williams (like you claim you are) go read the first post on the "Marvin Williams A superstar in the making....." Thats all anyone can say about the guy, and if that doesn't give you some sense of how special a player he is then nothing will. If you still aren't convinced thats fine, take Big Z part deuce, and stop beating this dead horse.


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> Saying that he has above average mobility is the exageration. He's on the exact same level as Big Z. You are the only person on this board I've seen try to refute that.


Please...Z has bad knees, loafs around, usually camps outside of the paint, and doesn't play with any emotion or passion. Bogut is in a way better physicall condition than Z, and although you may not agree, the passion and emotion that Bogut plays with IMO will him more versitile. He 110%, and he will get the job done because he wants it more than you. That is the kind of thing that athletiscm alone doesn't do for you.


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

Blazer Freak said:


> So...ON A GOOD NOTE! MarvinWilliams#1in2005 got banned! :banana: :banana:


Did I now


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> BTW DHarris, if you're still looking to become convinced about Marvin Williams (like you claim you are) go read the first post on the "Marvin Williams A superstar in the making....." Thats all anyone can say about the guy, and if that doesn't give you some sense of how special a player he is then nothing will. If you still aren't convinced thats fine, take Big Z part deuce, and stop beating this dead horse.


I have read the thread. I just want to know why Andrew Bogut isn't on the same level as Marvin Williams when it comes NBA stardom, and overall impact to a team, a championship calibur team. So, if you can answer me that question, please do. The only thing that people can say about Marvin right now that they can't say about Bogut is that he has more potential. To me, that isn't evidence enough that he is clearly a better player than Bogut.


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

DHarris34Phan said:


> Please...Z has bad knees, loafs around, usually camps outside of the paint, and doesn't play with any emotion or passion. Bogut is in a way better physicall condition than Z, and although you may not agree, the passion and emotion that Bogut plays with IMO will him more versitile. He 110%, and he will get the job done because he wants it more than you. That is the kind of thing that athletiscm alone doesn't do for you.


What exactly do you expect of him then? He'd be lucky to be able to put up Big Z type numbers. He's not a star or a go to player and will never be. He's a solid NBA center, nothing more, nothing less. If thats what you want then draft him.


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

DHarris34Phan said:


> I have read the thread. I just want to know why Andrew Bogut isn't on the same level as Marvin Williams when it comes NBA stardom, and overall impact to a team, a championship calibur team. So, if you can answer me that question, please do. The only thing that people can say about Marvin right now that they can't say about Bogut is that he has more potential. To me, that isn't evidence enough that he is clearly a better player than Bogut.


They are actually fairly even on skill level, but it's Marvins versatility and athletic ability that makes him have more potential.


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> They are actually fairly even on skill level, but it's Marvins versatility and athletic ability that makes him have more potential.


Right now...all I have to say to that is to have a player with great athletic ability like TMac or Kobe will put you on ESPN, but a true big man will win you championships.

You may not agree with me that Bogut is going to be a great bigman, but as a Bucks fan, and seeing how a championship team is built, it is only logical IMO to take a bigman if we want to be a contender, especially in the Central Division.

I explain it more in the Bucks Forum, but that is my mindset.


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

DHarris34Phan said:


> Right now...all I have to say to that is to have a player with great athletic ability like TMac or Kobe will put you on ESPN, but a true big man will win you championships.
> 
> You may not agree with me that Bogut is going to be a great bigman, but as a Bucks fan, and seeing how a championship team is built, it is only logical IMO to take a bigman if we want to be a contender, especially in the Central Division.
> 
> I explain it more in the Bucks Forum, but that is my mindset.


Ask Michael Jordan and Larry Bird if you needed great bigmen to win championships. There are many ways to complete the puzzle of a championship, there is no one magic formula. You honestly believe Shaq would have won without Kobe? LMFAO


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> Ask Michael Jordan and Larry Bird if you needed great bigmen to win championships. There are many ways to complete the puzzle of a championship, there is no one magic formula. You honestly believe Shaq would have won without Kobe? LMFAO


Larry Bird had a very good big men in Parish and McHale. Without those guys, it would be much harder for Bird to carry the Celtics to the title against the likes of Kareem.

Michael is the one of the few exceptions, but he is the best player ever, so I think there can be an exception to my rule for him.

I didn't say Shaq couldn't win one without Kobe, but I said most definitly that Kobe couldn't win it without Shaq. 

Quality big men make you whole team better, so guys like Michael Redd and Desmond Mason will be much better players with a quality big man down in the paint. With a core of Ford, Redd, and Bogut. IMO, that is a FOUNDATION for a championship contender.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

Jordan won all six of his titles with Phil,Tex Winter
and the Triple Post offense.In the triangle the center is 
primarily a passer so it's not necessary to have a terrific
offensive player at center.All of Chicago's title teams played
very good interior defense however.Of course Jordan always
forgot how the triangle worked when it suited him and noone said much about it.


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

DHarris34Phan said:


> Larry Bird had a very good big men in Parish and McHale. Without those guys, it would be much harder for Bird to carry the Celtics to the title against the likes of Kareem.
> 
> Michael is the one of the few exceptions, but he is the best player ever, so I think there can be an exception to my rule for him.
> 
> ...


Ya, McHale and Parrish were good bigmen not great. 

Your rule is agrbage so you dont need any exceptions

Shaw couldn't win w/o Kobe or Dwyane Wade maybe. 

Bogut is a quality big man, but hardly a great big man like you claim he is. 

You guys won't be around championship contension with that squad. Thats for darn sure. You'll be lucky to make the playoffs, which I believe half the league does anyways.


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> Ya, McHale and Parrish were good bigmen not great.
> 
> Your rule is agrbage so you dont need any exceptions
> 
> ...


No...my rule is not garbage. You are just so infatuated with Marvin Williams that you have neglected to see the fact that the 3 is such a loaded position in the NBA, that you don't need the best of the best SF to be a championship contender. Having one of the best Centers in the league surrounded by talented players can make you a contender. I will take my chances on making my team a championship calibur team rather than getting on the highlight reels every night.


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

DHarris34Phan said:


> No...my rule is not garbage. You are just so infatuated with Marvin Williams that you have neglected to see the fact that the 3 is such a loaded position in the NBA, that you don't need the best of the best SF to be a championship contender. Having one of the best Centers in the league surrounded by talented players can make you a contender. I will take my chances on making my team a championship calibur team rather than getting on the highlight reels every night.


What makes you think Marvin is a hi-light reel player?

What makes you so sure Bogut is one of the best centers in the NBA when he hasn't played a damn game.

You don't have to worry about the Bucks being a championship caliber team anytime soon. You have no star player, no defense, one offensive threat who is gonna be a FA, and the number 1 pick in one of the weakest drafts in the last 10 years! Congrats on nothing!


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

> What makes you think Marvin is a hi-light reel player?


For where he is developmentally, from what I have read and seen about him, that is all he will be for at least his first 2 seasons, ala Josh Smith and JR Smith. Not saying he won't be averaging 20/8/4 in his prime, but for the first 2 or 3 years, that is what I expect from him..



> What makes you so sure Bogut is one of the best centers in the NBA when he hasn't played a damn game.


He has proved, beyond a reasonable doubt, that he will be a good, if not great center in the NBA. Considering there are only a few legitimate centers in today's game, that makes me think he will be one of the best.



> You don't have to worry about the Bucks being a championship caliber team anytime soon. You have no star player, no defense, one offensive threat who is gonna be a FA, and the number 1 pick in one of the weakest drafts in the last 10 years! Congrats on nothing!


This is just a garbage comment. There is no need responding to this.


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

DHarris34Phan said:


> For where he is developmentally, from what I have read and seen about him, that is all he will be for at least his first 2 seasons, ala Josh Smith and JR Smith. Not saying he won't be averaging 20/8/4 in his prime, but for the first 2 or 3 years, that is what I expect from him..
> 
> 
> He has proved, beyond a reasonable doubt, that he will be a good, if not great center in the NBA. Considering there are only a few legitimate centers in today's game, that makes me think he will be one of the best.
> ...


Not garbage, the absolute truth, please attempt to refute it! Ya can't!


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> Not garbage, the absolute truth, please attempt to refute it! Ya can't!


If your statement had absolutley any truth to it, then I would refute it.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> the number 1 pick in one of the weakest drafts in the last 10 years! Congrats on nothing!


I think that's flat our wrong. It's not going to be as good a draft as maybe the last two years drafts. But it's not going ot be the Kwame Brown draft either.

It's an excellent draft for point guards. And on the hole seems like a pretty normal draft. There are good picks to be had. Not everyone will walk home with a winner, but if they draft smart they can get a solid player.

Also. For some reason I thought you got banned.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> BTW DHarris, if you're still looking to become convinced about Marvin Williams (like you claim you are) go read the first post on the "Marvin Williams A superstar in the making....." Thats all anyone can say about the guy, and if that doesn't give you some sense of how special a player he is then nothing will. If you still aren't convinced thats fine, take Big Z part deuce, and stop beating this dead horse.


A true basketball fan would know that Z before his foot injuries was an exceptional player, who led the Cavs to a very suprising record.

How come all the players you compare Bogut to are still better than the low end of what Tim Thomas errr Marvin Williams can be.

A healthy Big Z was well on his way to become a poor man's Big Z. And would have been the number 1 pick in this draft as well. Just like this year's version, Bogut, the new poor man's Sabonis, will be the number 1 pick in this draft.

A healthy Z challenges Shaq for best center title.


----------



## Debt Collector (Mar 13, 2003)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> Ya, McHale and Parrish were good bigmen not great.


they dont let guys into the hall of fame who are just "good".


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

MemphisX said:


> This is a misconception. When Duncan came into the league he was much more mobile then he is now. He was playing SF for the Spurs and Pop would routinely use him to play the oppositions PG.


You miss the point. The point isn't how athletic Tim Duncan was when he came into the leage. It's how athletic he is right now as a top 3 player in the league, leading his team to possibly another championiship. Which is, not incredibly athletic. He can barely dunk the ball consistently right now. But he is having no problem putting up close to 30 and getting 15 boards per game against Amare.

The point is that one does not need to be athletic to succeed at the center position. And it's foolish to assert otherwise. It helps to be in shape. But even then, Shaq and Yao both challenge the need for that.

The NBA center position is about having good hands, having good footwork, being aggressive, and if you are playing Shaq, being able to hit the 15 foot jump shot. And if you can pass out of the post, then you can be a star at center.

Such is the situation at Center in the NBA.

You all are comparing Bogut to the idea of power forward. Not a center. Though it's forgivable because it's been awhile since we've had a true top tier center coming into the draft, who is ready to go from day one. Yao is the closest thing. But Bogut is much better than Yao was coming into the league.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> You don't have to worry about the Bucks being a championship caliber team anytime soon. You have no star player, no defense, one offensive threat who is gonna be a FA, and the number 1 pick in one of the weakest drafts in the last 10 years! Congrats on nothing!



Bogut=Star Player
Defense=Bogut shores it up, makes Mason into Tayshaun Prince level defender.
One offensive threat who is a FA=They plan to sign Redd. Bogut makes two. Ford makes an offensive threat out of someone else, so that's three. Mason is four. And if they re-sign Toni Kukoc that's a fifth coming off the bench. If you think the Bucks have problems scoring, then you haven't been paying attention to the Bucks the last few years under Terry Porter. And I already addressed the weakest draft comment.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> Did I now



Yes. I remember now. You were banned. It said banned, right under your name. I think it was for that whole section where you were talking garbage to a community moderator.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

futuristxen said:


> You miss the point. The point isn't how athletic Tim Duncan was when he came into the leage. It's how athletic he is right now as a top 3 player in the league, leading his team to possibly another championiship. Which is, not incredibly athletic. He can barely dunk the ball consistently right now. But he is having no problem putting up close to 30 and getting 15 boards per game against Amare.
> 
> The point is that one does not need to be athletic to succeed at the center position. And it's foolish to assert otherwise. It helps to be in shape. But even then, Shaq and Yao both challenge the need for that.
> 
> ...


Duncan can barely dunk? Do you even keep up with the NBA? He is playing on two bad ankles. The NBA center position is also about denying post position and establishing post position and Bogut struggles to do that in college. Big men who go on to do anything in the NBA in the post can establish position easily in college...usually. He is a drifter. He moves to the perimeter at the first sign of physical play. *IMO that is a huge red flag!* 

To say he doesn't need to be athletic and then compare him to similarily athletic players that weigh at least 50 lbs more and are taller is crazy. Heck, even Duncan had about 20 lbs on him coming out of college. They were about the same age so to think Bogut is just going to add lbs does not make sense. Read this boards comments about Channing Frye and how he is too small to play the 5 in the league...._He is bigger than Bogut!_ He is supposed to play center at the same size as Pau Gasol with less athleticism. Good luck with that!


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

I don't see how 7 foot 242 pounds is not big enough to play center in the league especially whent the kid is only 20 years old! He definitely has a frame where he looks like he will put on weight i.e. unlike KG. 

I think Marvin Williams will be a good player and the people who he keeps being mentioned with Mashburn, Thomas, and Jamison are all good players even maybe borderline stars. However, I would take a 15/10 center who can guard other C over those three he's compared with any day. Bogut isn't Olawakindi who absolutey has the heart of a mouse and he's got good skills. If you think that Williams has the chance to be as good as somebody like KG or Lebron then I can understand but I don't see him reaching that level


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

futuristxen said:


> Bogut=Star Player
> Defense=Bogut shores it up, makes Mason into Tayshaun Prince level defender.
> One offensive threat who is a FA=They plan to sign Redd. Bogut makes two. Ford makes an offensive threat out of someone else, so that's three. Mason is four. And if they re-sign Toni Kukoc that's a fifth coming off the bench. If you think the Bucks have problems scoring, then you haven't been paying attention to the Bucks the last few years under Terry Porter. And I already addressed the weakest draft comment.


He will have zero inside presence. He's far too frail. Bogut=a good NBA center, not a star or even close to a star


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

futuristxen said:


> Bogut=Star Player
> Defense=Bogut shores it up, makes Mason into Tayshaun Prince level defender.
> One offensive threat who is a FA=They plan to sign Redd. Bogut makes two. Ford makes an offensive threat out of someone else, so that's three. Mason is four. And if they re-sign Toni Kukoc that's a fifth coming off the bench. If you think the Bucks have problems scoring, then you haven't been paying attention to the Bucks the last few years under Terry Porter. And I already addressed the weakest draft comment.


He will have zero inside presence. He's far too frail. Bogut=a good NBA center, not a star or even close to a star.

Like I said, you have ONE offensive threat who's gonna be playing with Lebron next year. You'll be the Hawks very soon.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

futuristxen said:


> A healthy Bill Walton is as good as Tim Duncan.


Tim Duncan is a much better (and highly regarded) player than Bill Walton. Walton IMO got to the HOF because of his college exploits, not so much his NBA career. A healthy Walton, still wouldn't be a top 10 player in NBA history, whereas Tim Duncan is (provided he captures that 3rd ring of course, leading his team). 

I think Bogut is a better passer than Timmy, but defensively and rebounding Duncan is such a game changer out there. There are times where you can't get in the lane because of the shots he deflects or alters. Not to mention, he doesn't commit fouls (since they never call over the backs on him).

Look I love Bogut, but if people think he's as good as Tim Duncan coming out of college (when Duncan would have gone over McDyess, Stackhouse, Rasheed, Joe Smith and Kevin Garnett in '95), they're just a little bit too excited.

Again, if he can be a healthy Bill Walton, he'll be very productive. Duncan has been First Team All-NBA every year he's been in the NBA. Bogut is never going to be that. Walton would have never been that. Duncan is an anomaly, the same way Iverson is an anomaly. 

If he's a poor man's Duncan (but still gets 20/10) be happy I'd say.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

MemphisX said:


> This is a misconception. When Duncan came into the league he was much more mobile then he is now. He was playing SF for the Spurs and Pop would routinely use him to play the oppositions PG.
> 
> Bogut is never, ever going to be on that level or close to that level. Bogut needs to set his sights on Big Z , if he reaches that level I will call him a success.


Duncan never played small forward. Where did you get that from? 

And Tim Duncan didn't dominate the International Curcuit at all. He was playing at a small HS in Delaware (his last two years of HS) where only the University of Delaware and Wake Forest were recruiting him. He was the flukest of flukes in the recruiting game. If he wasn't so tall, I doubt he would have even played bball.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

One more thing, I don't think you realize this, but Marty Blake said (a few years back) the best talents to come into the NBA in the last 15 years were Shaquille O'Neal, Chris Webber, Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett and Stephon Marbury. 

Tim Duncan was as can't miss as it gets. NBA scouts wanted him to leave college twice before his senior year, but he wouldn't do it. There were no Question marks about him whatsoever. Golden State wanted him in '95. Philly wanted him in '96, but he didn't want to enter the draft. 

One place he is similiar to Bogut is that he played with a weak supporting cast. In 95, he had Randolph Childress (he's no NBA guy of course, but a damn good college player) and they lost in the Sweet Sixteen to Oklahoma State and Big Country Reeves. In 96, Duncan is basically playing by himself, with a bunch of scrubs and they lose in the Elite Eight to a Kentucky team that had 7 NBA players (Antoine Walker, Ron Mercer, Tony Delk, Nazr Mohammed, Walter McCarty, Derek Anderson, Mark Pope). In 97, Duncan lost in the 2nd round to Brevin Knight and Stanford and that team (which was a 3 seed, 95 a 1 seed and 96 a 2 seed (Kentucky was No. 1)) was the weakest by far. How they won the ACC was a testament to the brilliance of Timmy. 

If Tim played on UNC during those years or maybe even Indiana, he has a National title. On Wake Forest, no dice. I think Bogut will be a better player on the pros, simply because he's playing with more talented players (similiar to Duncan when he came out).

However, he's still no Duncan.


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

HKF said:


> Duncan never played small forward. Where did you get that from?
> 
> And Tim Duncan didn't dominate the International Curcuit at all. He was playing at a small HS in Delaware (his last two years of HS) where only the University of Delaware and Wake Forest were recruiting him. He was the flukest of flukes in the recruiting game. If he wasn't so tall, I doubt he would have even played bball.


Remember the tripple towers? Duncan guarded the other teams small forward, and would run on the wing many times down the court.


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

HKF...can I ask you, who would YOU rather have to build your team with in regards to the Bucks?


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> Remember the tripple towers? Duncan guarded the other teams small forward, and would run on the wing many times down the court.


That played together like 2 minutes a night. Will Perdue played like 5-15 minutes a night. Don't act like Duncan was guarding SF's for 30 minutes a night. Will Perdue has always been a backup scrub. We know this.


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

HKF said:


> That played together like 2 minutes a night. Will Perdue played like 5-15 minutes a night. Don't act like Duncan was guarding SF's for 30 minutes a night. Will Perdue has always been a backup scrub. We know this.


Son, don't pretend like you know about this matter then me. I had Spurs season tickets that season and saw Duncan guard small forwards for 15-20 minutes every night. I know this.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

DHarris34Phan said:


> HKF...can I ask you, who would YOU rather have to build your team with in regards to the Bucks?


I think passing up the chance to take an All-Star Center (which he will be) is too great. I'd take Bogut. I love Marvin and if I'm Atlanta I take him, but people seem to think this man will be Lebron James or something. He would not have been better than Josh Smith a year ago as a rookie IMO. Milwaukee hasn't had a Center in decades worth spit. SF's and SG's are a dime a dozen in this league. They'll be a new crop next year and the year after that and the year after that.

If the Bucks are so interested in a SF, make a run at Vladimir Radmanovic. In the system the Bucks run, he'd probably play like a more well-rounded Peja Stojakovic if given the opportunity.

I'd take my 5, because you can get a very good SF in FA.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> Son, don't pretend like you know about this matter then me. I had Spurs season tickets that season and saw Duncan guard small forwards for 15-20 minutes every night. I know this.


Now you're just a damn liar. Duncan guarded SF's 15-20 minutes a night? Yeah, I'm your huckleberry. 

For 82 games, Duncan guard SF's for 15-20 minutes a night... Someone's been smoking that wacky tobaccy. :krazy:


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

HKF said:


> Now you're just a damn liar. Duncan guarded SF's 15-20 minutes a night? Yeah, I'm your huckleberry.
> 
> For 82 games, Duncan guard SF's for 15-20 minutes a night... Someone's been smoking that wacky tobaccy. :krazy:


I never said 82 games [strike]simple minded fool[/strike], but for the 37 that Perdue played in, yes he did guard 3's for 15 minutes a game.

You're the genious who claimed that Dwight Howard would fail in the NBA because he was a Christian and had no intensity. Somebody sure looks kinda stupid now.

Please stop with these insults, thanks cpaw


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> I never said 82 games simple minded fool, but for the 37 that Perdue played in, yes he did guard 3's for 15 minutes a game.


In your words, you did say that. Every night assumes the whole season.



MarvinWilliams#1in05 said:


> Son, don't pretend like you know about this matter then me. I had Spurs season tickets that season and saw Duncan guard small forwards for 15-20 minutes every night. I know this.


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

DHarris34Phan said:


> In your words, you did say that. Every night assumes the whole season.


No, everynight assumes everynight that all 3 guys played. When Perdue didn't play there were no triple towers.


----------



## The Mad Viking (Jun 12, 2003)

Nimreitz:


> Bogut's 11-8 against Tim Duncan is not impressive, no. So when I draft him I'm going to get an 11-8 guy who history has shown won't get THAT much better? Sounds like #1 overall material to me! 11 points? How many were freethrows? 8 rebounds is not impressive either considering this kid is probably playing all 40 minutes, and TD only had 11, so it's not like the boards were being hogged or anything.


This is proof of serious bias. A kid who's 19 putting up solid numbers against the best post in the world, is not impressive? Completlely ridiculous.

MarvinWilliams#1 - well how can you discuss something with a poster so infatuated that he TAKES THE NAME of his fave?

I think Marvin will be a very good player. But I am really tired of the BS being spewed about Andrew Bogut.

I don't expect him to be the ROY. He will have to adjust to constantly playing athletic 7-footers. But-
he will by year 2 or 3 be a BETTER player in the NBA than he was in college. His team in college was WEAK. He made tons of sweet passes that did not become assist because his teammates missed open looks or layups. 
He could NOT be aggressive on defence, because if he ever got in foul trouble, his team would lose. PERIOD. And despite having to play very carefully, he still played very effective D and gots lots of blocks and steals. He will be permitted to play more aggressively in the NBA.

He is a phenomenal rebounder and passer. Period. 

He has tremendous finishing skills inside, and a dizzying array of moves. Including sweet up-and-unders that will work against NBA shotblockers.

He has a tremendous attitude and competitive fire. When they upset Oklahoma to go to the Sweet 16, there was no celebration by Bogut. It was "we haven't won anything yet, time to think about the next game."

It's pretty tough to line up a rookie for the HOF, and that's what the Tim Duncan comp does. But I have seen NOTHING that would rule out Bogut being an MVP in the NBA. He is that good.

Everybody wants a talented 7 footer to build their team around. Milwaukee is stupid if they pass him up.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

HKF said:


> Tim Duncan is a much better (and highly regarded) player than Bill Walton. Walton IMO got to the HOF because of his college exploits, not so much his NBA career. A healthy Walton, still wouldn't be a top 10 player in NBA history, whereas Tim Duncan is (provided he captures that 3rd ring of course, leading his team).
> 
> I think Bogut is a better passer than Timmy, but defensively and rebounding Duncan is such a game changer out there. There are times where you can't get in the lane because of the shots he deflects or alters. Not to mention, he doesn't commit fouls (since they never call over the backs on him).
> 
> ...


Don't you think his playing style resembles Tim Duncan? Even if you don't think he's as talented right now. He has those moments where he turns around in the high post and you can see him probing the defense for weakpoints like Duncan does. And his rebounding style is similiar to Duncan, in that he relies on positioning and good hands to secure rebounds. I don't think I've seen Duncan get more than a few inches off the floor to get most of his rebounds.

As far as how touted Duncan was coming out--wouldn't Bogut be just as touted if he played for four years? He's basically getting the same attention that Duncan got his sophmore year. Except instead of staying in school like Duncan, he's making a run for the NBA. He's already considered the best player in college basketball, imagine if he stayed in school, and continued to develop his body like he has.

I think one of the reasons there is a clash about his athleticism is that Bogut is in a transitional phase with his body. He bulked up awhile back or started to, but that cut down on his quickness, and so it wasn't till later that his body started to adjust to the new dimensions. He's still a growing kid. You look at his frame, and he has the kind of body that looks like it could take on more weight. He's got a good base for development it loooks like physically. He'll never look like Shaq. But he could look like Duncan, who is deceptively strong in the post. What will be interesting to do is compare Duncan and Bogut's wingspans.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

That's the thing. Duncan was touted as a sophomore to be can't miss. It wasn't just when he was a senior. He was going No. 1 in 95 (over Joe Smith and KG), 96 (over Allen Iverson and Camby) or 97.

Bogut would not go No.1 in '03 (over Lebron James), '04 (over Dwight Howard) or '06 (over Greg Oden).

Duncan is not a good comparison.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

HKF said:


> That's the thing. Duncan was touted as a sophomore to be can't miss. It wasn't just when he was a senior. He was going No. 1 in 95 (over Joe Smith and KG), 96 (over Allen Iverson and Camby) or 97.
> 
> Bogut would not go No.1 in '03 (over Lebron James), '04 (over Dwight Howard) or '06 (over Greg Oden).
> 
> Duncan is not a good comparison.



He would go number 1 this year, which is his sophomore year. But I agree, he probably wouldn't go over the other 3. Though those 3 are all kind of once in a lifetime players. I don't know that Duncan would have been drafted ahead of Lebron James or Greg Oden.

In terms of playing style, don't you think Duncan is a good comparison. Not talent, but playing style. That's more what I'm talking about. It's like saying Wade plays like a young jordan. Doesn't mean he is going to be Jordan, but he plays the game the same way.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

I guess so, I just don't see the defensive player Duncan is in Bogut. That's what I think separates Duncan from so many other bigs. He's the reason the Spurs are great defensively. Bogut like Yao, will get dunked on often, because he's not an intimidator in there blocking shots.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

> That's the thing. Duncan was touted as a sophomore to be can't miss. It wasn't just when he was a senior. He was going No. 1 in 95 (over Joe Smith and KG), 96 (over Allen Iverson and Camby) or 97.


I'm not so sure about that....

Players also develop differently...


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

zagsfan20 said:


> I'm not so sure about that....
> 
> Players also develop differently...


Dude, I've been following the NBA draft since '92. I know what the hell I'm talking about. GM's and agents were trying to coerce Duncan to come out after his sophomore year, because they wanted to take him badly. Scouts knew he'd be a star.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Here's the deal with Andrew Bogut. He's a top five pick, but he's not a traditional #1. At #1 you want someone who's going to carry you to the playoffs and maybe a title, a guy who can put you on his back if the going is tough, someone who is just an elite player. The legit ones recently are Bron, Dwight, Yao (everyone hates on him, but he doesn't back down and of course you can NOT teach 7'6''), Duncan, and Iverson. There's pretty much just as many Kwames, Joe Smiths, Kandimans.

And what happened to me is that I just know Bogut isn't a star, he's no Duncan, Iverson, Bron, Howard, etc, so I just don't want him at #1. I also think Williams is just so solid fundamentally in almost every aspect of his game and so athletic that he's going to be damn good. And I also know that Bogut won't fit in with the team's style of play because I've never seen him get involved on the break. But I'm willing to admit you can't teach 7 feet and he has some good qualities. I'm just disappointed we got #1 in like the ONE year there isn't a can't miss guy there in 5 years. I think Bogut ends TJ's career, but what I've been swallowing my tounge about because it hurt my blind rage fueled argument against my mortal enemy DHarris34Phan is that TJ's been busted for Crack parephenalia, I heard his back is just in HORRIBLE shape, and that he left Texas after his sophomore year because his back was just terrible at the time and if he stayed in college any longer he might have missed out on the NBA all together because of injuries (apparantly everyone at Texas knew this and the Bucks were the idiots who took him).

So I'll now come around and say we should take Bogut, even though I think he has #4 or #5 pick talent, not #1, but at least we're not building our franchise around Robert Swift, so that's good. And as much as this pains me to say, we might want to consider Redd leave instead of giving him a huge contract and not resign Cowboy after his rookie contract is up (I LOVE him, but 6'4 SF with no range and an UGLY jumpshot isn't great). If we do keep one of the wings, it's Redd and if Redd stays Mason NEEDS to leave. So basically if I'm the GM (of course bear in mind I follow the Kiki philosophy of just BLOWING up a team) I draft Bogut (unless I can maybe trade down to #5 and take someone like Deron or Green, another DHarris fave I'm sure), while getting a solid player in the process on a low salary tied up for awhile. Resign Michael Redd, but move Dez Mason (that contract has GOT to be expiring next year) even though he's a huge fan favorite, for a player with either equal ability but a more favorable contract to the team (less money, more years) or a player with less current ability but is really young. I love Dez, but he's going to demand a big pay raise soon. Admittedly I'm basically already tanking the season for Greg Oden if I draft Gerald Green, but who can argue with Oden? But either way I think if we take Bogut Porter's days are done and we get a coach who can really develop a big man, and if we don't draft Bogut, Porter's days are done because we won't win that much.

But in regards to personnel decisions I don't actually have to trade the fan favorite or fire the hometown hero coach, which probably wouldn't go over well, I can just sit in my recliner and think of long term solutions that would give us a good shot at a future title, but damage the team's standing in the community by quite a bit.

As I've said when not raging at DHarris34Phan, because I truly believe you don't know what you're talking about (Bogut better shooter than Yao, Duncan = international star, Bogut = Duncan, Bogut = unlimited potential, Bogut's dong is 15 inches), I'd be happy with Marv or Bogut, but I'm comming around on the idea of taking Bogut because I suppose we can use a legit 7 footer with offensive skills, and I've been complaining about the Bucks not having a Center for YEARS. But to think he's the cornerstone of the team is rediculous. He'll be a solid piece to have, but he'll never be a star. But with Redd and possibly a point guard next year or a decent FA or something, we have a foundation. And I'm just ejaculating about tanking the season and having the twin towers in 06-07.


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

Duncan had extensive International experience before he was drafted, I never said he was some International Superstar:

•Selected as a member of the gold medal winning 1996 USA Men's COPABA 22 & Under World Championship Qualifying Team and averaged team highs of 13.8 ppg., 9.4 rpg. and 2.4 bpg. Recorded 26 points and 15 rebounds in the 119-83 gold medal game victory over Puerto Rico.

•Named to the 1995 gold medal winning USA World University Games Team that finished 7-0 and won the gold medal. Averaged 8.7 ppg., and team bests of 6.3 rpg., 2.9 bpg., and shot a team leading 69.2 percent (27-39 FGs).

•Named to the 1994 bronze medal winning USA Goodwill Games Team, averaged 3.8 ppg., 5.0 rpg.

•Following the '94 Goodwill Games, he recorded eight points, five rebounds in 23 minutes in a 113-75 loss to the 1994 USA World Championship Team that included Shaquille O'Neal and Alonzo Mourning in Oakland, California.

I never said Bogut=Duncan, I just said that Bogut's style of play reminds me of Duncan.

I never said Bogut's dong is 15 inches. You may know something I don't, but I never said anything remotley close to that.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Dude, come on, those are such garbage tournaments. Playing for Team USA in the mid 90s against young foreigners? I mean, that's a joke! I don't know what COPABA is, but I'll assume it's the basketball version of CONCACAF, which is just north america. WOW, U-22 North American tournament, now THAT'S competition. And that's really the only tournament he got any PT in, except of course for the "World University Games" which I had NEVER heard of and will either forget about tonight or remember it for my Jeopardy appearance in 10 years. Dude, give me a break. I was crapping on Bogut's pre-olympic international experience, and this is 100 times weaker. He would have been better off working with his coaches in Winston-Salem than playing in any of those games.


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

Nimreitz said:


> Dude, come on, those are such garbage tournaments. Playing for Team USA in the mid 90s against young foreigners? I mean, that's a joke! I don't know what COPABA is, but I'll assume it's the basketball version of CONCACAF, which is just north america. WOW, U-22 North American tournament, now THAT'S competition. And that's really the only tournament he got any PT in, except of course for the "World University Games" which I had NEVER heard of and will either forget about tonight or remember it for my Jeopardy appearance in 10 years. Dude, give me a break. I was crapping on Bogut's pre-olympic international experience, and this is 100 times weaker. He would have been better off working with his coaches in Winston-Salem than playing in any of those games.


So...considering Duncan's International experience is, in your words, 100 times weaker, then that makes Bogut's experience that much more valuable.


----------



## Greg Ostertag! (May 1, 2003)

I guess where you and I would differ, Nimreitz... is that I don't think there is a "#1 talent" as you say in the entire draft. I mean, over the course of a decade, how many guys lead their teams to a title? 3 or 4, right? Will Marvin Williams amongst the top 3 or 4 players drafted over the course of a decade? Highly, highly unlikely. For mine, he's going to be on the Shawn Marion at best, Antwan Jamison/Rashard Lewis at worst level.

Bogut is probably guaranteed at least Brad Miller, and probably without the injuries.

It all depends on what is the better building block, because no one in this draft will lead you to a championship single-handedly.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Yeah I know, which makes me SO mad because it happens to be the one year the Bucks incredibly got the #1 pick. I mean, WHY couldn't that have been Howard/Bron/Oden!?!?

Quick question and then I think me and DHarris34Phan are back to being friendly Brewers, Bucks, and UW fans... What were your feelings last year? Because to me Okafor and his guaranteed production out of the gate sounds like your type of guy, but in the same vein I can't imagine that you'd have such a short memory to believe Dwight was a Kwame Brown clone (because it's an all too common scenario), be proven wrong, and then stick with the same immediate production guarantee philosophy this year. Not that Marvin Williams is on Howard's level, or even that Bogut is on Emeka's level, but the arguments are very similar to what people were saying last year.


----------



## Cammo (May 24, 2005)

Lets hope that Marvin doesnt turn out to be like Marion, who wants a player who's going to get completely shut down in the western conference finals?  (note: i am actually a fan of Marions game, its just a shame that he is getting completely mauled in the conference finals).


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

DHarris34Phan said:


> So...considering Duncan's International experience is, in your words, 100 times weaker, then that makes Bogut's experience that much more valuable.


Yeah, but 100 times 0 is still 0, and 100 times .01 is 1.

But that wasn't my point, my point was your comment showed an assumption with no actually knowledge to back it up. Reading some of your earlier posts I just see a tendency for the dramatic. "Bogut came to Utah as an unknown 6'1'' german girl and in just 2 years he won the Wooden Award" Not true, he was well known internationally, using your argument to refute your argument, he singlehandedly won that 2003 World Junior Championship before playing a second for Utah. Another one I like was "Devin Harris came from no where and dropped 47 points in one game midseason and from then on he went to become Mr. Basketball, UW, and finally the #5 pick in the draft" Bull. I don't know if it was because you were in middle school for most of his high school career and I was just a year younger, so saw it for more years, but he wasn't unknown at all. I mean first of all Mike Wilkenson was Mr. Basketball the year before, so it's not like it was gonna take THAT much for him to be the State's best player, I mean, who was in that class? Travis Diener? And he didn't come from no where, my friends and i knew about this guy from the start of his junior year. He WAS honorable mention all-state his junior year along with the likes of Novak, Joah Tucker, and J.R. Morris before he went to prep school out east. The only non-seniors from the 1st and 2nd team were Diener, Marquette's Grunst (and we all know Marquette is all hype and no substance), and some kid from Washington. Harris played Volleyball, and his senior year one of my friends was SOOO hyped he got to be on the same court (even a non-basketball one) as Harris, and this was before basketball season.

Not that it means much, but you have major homer biases ("why isn't Devin Harris considered a possibility to be ROY?") and a flare for the dramatic story. It seeps into your "facts" and it really weakens your stance when you try to sell your side if you take a few liberties to make a better story. Sorry for giving you so much ****, and you're pretty good to just take the piss and not respond in kind.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Nimreitz point about Okafor and Howard does scare me a bit. This (2004) HS class was so talented, that it wouldn't be a surprise to see Marvin be the better player, but remember here. Basketball is a team game. If Bogut can be an above average center getting 18/10 with the ability to pass from the high and low post, with the way the Bucks draft, they'll be able to find a superstar wing.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Well the thing about the Bucks is that they've come away from the last 10 drafts with something like 5 first round players. The picks always get traded away somehow, and for a draftnick like me who looks forward to the Draft every year and calls it my New Year it's hard to see the Bucks routinely throw in first round picks in trades and then just watch deep draft classes go bye. I mean, who could we have had in 04? Josh Smith, Tony Allen, David Harrison, or used 17 and something else to leapfrog Boston at 15 and possibly take Jefferson. What would that have taken? An expiring contract? A second rounder? And we traded it away to get Big Dog off the books, but not use his capspace, and let the Pistons complete the Sheed trade. Pistons get Sheed, Blazers get SAR, we get capspace, Kukoc, Leon Smith, and TJ. So I guess we got nothing when we could have gotten a good player last year, or someone without the back of a 57 year old in 03. The Bucks GMs have not done well recently, cleared up a ton of capspace, but never made a big FA spash.

And not to be a skeptic, but I had never heard of Harris before he got the GM job and he hasn't done a thing yet, so while I won't assume he's in over his head I haven't been convinced he knows exactly what he's doing. First of all he should try to get ANYTHING for TJ because that career is over. TJ Ford for a mid or late first rounder? Any takers? I'm sure someone might consider it. And average point guards in the NBA are so easy to find too, the Bucks have had just about every journeyman point guard you can think of in the last few years and they're just as good as the last. Mo Williams, Damon Jones, Erick Strickland, Mike James, Rafer Alston. I guarantee there are about 100 of these guys in the ABA or Europe or just in the second round. But again, it's easy for me to play GM from my living room.


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

Not to go off topic, but just because you and your friends knew about Devin going into his senior year doesn't mean he was well known. A lot of people around Wisconsin knew his name. I am talking about national recriuting, and national prominence. He didn't even participate in any camps, AAU, or anything the summer going into his senior year because he got his spleen removed. Only one Division 1 school recruited him going into his senior year. That school was Central Florida. What he did during his senior year made him a Wisconsin Badger.

And, when he got to Wisconsin, who would have thought he would be the #5 overall pick three years later?

*LINK *


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Hey, Tigert! I didn't know he was all-state? Man, if Butch doesn't pan out our state will only have Devin. At least Mil-town looks good, and your boy Smith better make us look good too, he's been hyped like CRAZY since his sophomore year, maybe earlier. This probably isn't the place, but do you know if he picked Madison? We already lost Matthews out of our own backyard to Crean, I hope we at least got Smith. Smith + Twin Towers in 07? WOW!


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

Nimreitz said:


> Hey, Tigert! I didn't know he was all-state? Man, if Butch doesn't pan out our state will only have Devin. At least Mil-town looks good, and your boy Smith better make us look good too, he's been hyped like CRAZY since his sophomore year, maybe earlier. This probably isn't the place, but do you know if he picked Madison? We already lost Matthews out of our own backyard to Crean, I hope we at least got Smith. Smith + Twin Towers in 07? WOW!


Jerry Smith is awesome. He is no doubt going to win Mr. Basketball next season. You can quote me on that one. He has been hyped since 8th grade, when he was the #5 overall prospect in the nation. Now he is a modest 27. Jerry has cut his choices down to Wisconsin, Wake Forest, Kansas, UConn, and Tennesee (Bruce Pearl), with the top 3 being the front runners. I really think that he is going to go to Wisconsin. He will be an impact player from the moment he steps into the Kohl Center.

Kammron/Jerry/Alando/Landry/Butch could be an amazing bunch when Jerry is a frosh.

IDK what Matthews is thinking. Marquette is very appealing now that they are in the Big East, but for the forseeable future, they will be the doormat. Stay in your own city man, go to UW!!!


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

This thread has officially been hijacked 

Yeah, Wes going to Marquette just sucked and to be honest I just don't understand it at all. Like you said that is just a doormat of a team. With Diener gone they'll have Novak and Mason, but Novak sucks and Mason just never lived up to the hype (next Wade my ***, not anywhere near sophomore Wade). I grew up a Marquette fan, but to choose them just doesn't make sense to me.

I forgot about Landry! And that kid from South Dakota too, don't forget him. I love Butch, but I don't think he's a center, he's just too soft. On the other hand I LOVE Stiemsma. That kid BANGS! And if he got regular PT I could see him averaging 3 blocks per game in the Big Ten easy. Not to mention all the shot's he'll alter. Whenever he played he made an impact defensively, hell I even think he got some PT against UNC in the Tournament which must have been a tough decision for Bo to make, but I think the right one. That kid just DOMINATES the post. And a legit 7 footer is going to get some EASY putbacks especially in the Big Ten, there just aren't any bigs at all. If he started I could see 10-8-3 in 25 minutes.

Oh god, I just read Chris Paul showed Smith around Wake. How can you say no to that? I love my school, but it's CHRIS FREAKIN PAUL! That would be tough to say no to even if you'll never play with him. Plus at Wake if you're any good you're going to be talked about nationally and your name will get out there.


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

I don't even think Dameon Mason is returing to Marquette! They are going to suck next year. Teams like Syracuse, UConn, BC and Lousiville are all going to go into the Bradley Center are destroy them. Westen Michigan beat MU at home in the NIT. LOL! **** MARQUETTE!

Butch is still learning how to be a post player. He was never really a post in HS. I think he will at least be a serviceable big off the bench. Steimesta still has the potential to be a good one, especially in the Big 10. Like you said, the amount of good bigs in the Big 10 is very low. I don't Greg think he played in the NCAAs...you might be thinking of Jason Chappell....I might be wrong though.

Yeah...Paul did show Jerry around. That must have been crazy. It creates a decision for Jerry, go into the ACC that is loading up on McD's All American's, with a chance not to get good minutes right away, or go to UW and be the man from the get-go.

Let's get back on topic though....Bogut Rules! :biggrin: LOL.


----------

