# Williams scares me



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

The guy just sounds too much of a tweener. DraftCity.com has a "worst case scenario" of Tim Thomas (shudder!) - another much heralded high schooler who only stayed one year in college. And in high school, this was said of him:



> Not as tall as Drew Gooden but shares some of the same traits that made Gooden a star.


Yikes! A poor man's Drew Gooden...

Now, if he were two inches taller, or freakishly athletic, then he'd be a no-brainer. But he doesn't seem to stand out at anything, except maybe jump-shooting, and that only for a player his size. Here's hoping Williams and Paul go 1-2...


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

I think Williams has the right attitude to get better, but I wouldn't mind seeing him gone before us. The main thing that scares me about him is that he puts up big numbers in blowouts, but hasn't shown as much against tough competition.

This is from a post comparing Zach and Williams' NCAA performances as freshman:



> I thought it would be interesting to do a comparison of Zbo and M. Williams NCAA playoff performances. I figure performance in the playoffs is the best test of how a player performs in important situations.
> 
> Tournament Averages
> Zbo
> ...



Not terribly impressive numbers. Great players usually find a way to shine in big games. Williams didn't seem to do that at all.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

Reep said:


> Not terribly impressive numbers. Great players usually find a way to shine in big games. Williams didn't seem to do that at all.


Basing player evaluation on 2 games is stupid and I'm pretty sure that's not how NBA scouts evaluate whether he has the potential to be good or not. 

What were Ed O'Bannon's stats in the tourney? Or Mateen Cleaves? Or Jeff Sheppard? Or Miles Simon? Or Anderson Hunt? They were all MVP's of the tourney. None of them did **** in the NBA. Stats over that period of time don't mean anything.


----------



## Goldmember (May 24, 2003)

I was thinking the same thing. I'm not a big fan of 3/4 tweeners. Antawn Jamison, Shareef, Thomas, I don't like that type at all.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

meru said:


> The guy just sounds too much of a tweener. DraftCity.com has a "worst case scenario" of Tim Thomas (shudder!) - another much heralded high schooler who only stayed one year in college. And in high school, this was said of him:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Williams is freakishly athletic, so he should be a no brainer.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

Goldmember said:


> I was thinking the same thing. I'm not a big fan of 3/4 tweeners. Antawn Jamison, Shareef, Thomas, I don't like that type at all.


Now 6'9" 230lbs is a tweener? 

He's got good size and ungodly physical gifts. That doesn't make him a tweener. It makes him versatile. Versatility is a good thing.


----------



## Goldmember (May 24, 2003)

I don't know, I haven't seen him play. Does he have the shooting range, ball handling and quickness to play SF? Or is he a Shareef-type that is better suited playing in the post? If he's more of a post player I would be hesitant. 6'9" is kind of undersized for PF nowadays, unless he has a lot of muscle.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Goldmember said:


> I don't know, I haven't seen him play. Does he have the shooting range, ball handling and quickness to play SF? Or is he a Shareef-type that is better suited playing in the post? If he's more of a post player I would be hesitant. 6'9" is kind of undersized for PF nowadays, unless he has a lot of muscle.


At least being 6'9" and having good hops helps play bigger....


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

Fork said:


> Basing player evaluation on 2 games is stupid and I'm pretty sure that's not how NBA scouts evaluate whether he has the potential to be good or not.
> 
> What were Ed O'Bannon's stats in the tourney? Or Mateen Cleaves? Or Jeff Sheppard? Or Miles Simon? Or Anderson Hunt? They were all MVP's of the tourney. None of them did **** in the NBA. Stats over that period of time don't mean anything.


It was three games (8s, 4s & final), not two, and it is the only picture we have of him in competition. It may not be perfect, but it is what it is. In blowouts he had great numbers, in the final three games, he averaged 5 and 5 in the same number of minutes. If he has great workouts and the Blazers like him, then they should take him, if he is available. However, I think it would be ignorant of them to not consider the fact that his numbers were down significantly in his most important college games. 

I don't think any of the players you mentioned were high lottery picks. Joe Smith would have been a better example to make your point. I'm not saying that having a great finish in the NCAAs makes you a star, but I think a number 1 or 2 pick should stand out more than Williams did.


----------



## furball (Jul 25, 2004)

I see Antwan Jamison written all over this guy. The problem is I don't know if this is a good or bad thing. I do think tweener applies to this guy.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

furball said:


> I see Antwan Jamison written all over this guy. The problem is I don't know if this is a good or bad thing. I do think tweener applies to this guy.


I agree with the Jamison comparison (worry?). I posted something like that a month or two ago, I think.

The thing is that Williams is young (turns 19 in about a month), he's athletic, he's got a good jumper, and he got a year of winning at a high level at UNC.

I think there's a good chance that Williams ends up as a SF, but he's a good enough prospect that it would be worth making room for him wherever he ends up.

Ed O.


----------



## CanJohno (Feb 11, 2005)

:rofl:

Williams IS an athletic freak! He has great range and form on his J'. He has an huge wingspan (I'd guess somewhere around 7' or so, maybe as big as 7'2". He can the handle the ball better than a lot of SG's out there. His back-to-the-basket game (a.k.a. low post) and his defense are still developing but he's DEFINITELY got the ability. A quality NBA coaching staff (mainly the assistants like Grg's) could work wonders with this kid.

I can understand the concerns from those of you who haven't seen Marvin play, but those of you who have watched some of the Tar Heels games this season, knows why he didn't have the opportunity to shine. His team was geared towards the older players (mainly Felton, May, and McCants, amongst others), as is usually the case of freshman players that play on teams such as UNC.

Marvin's got the skills and ability to dominate on the perimeter (a.k.a. SF), and the body to potentially dominate in the post (a.k.a. PF). He's NOT a "tweener," he's "versatile," as Fork already pointed out. Amare was 6'9" and about 245 lbs., when he came into the league. Williams is 6'9" and about 230-235 lbs (keep in mind, these measurements are a year old... we won't know his actual measurments until the the pre-draft camp in Chicago). I guess Amare is a "tweener," too, then.

If we get Williams, I don't think anyone will be upset after this kid starts to get settled in. I really see him becoming more of a power player in the future. And, if this is the case, I have a feeling dude will be a dominating player in the NBA. His quickness, for a player his size, is pretty damn rare. Not to mention his general athleticism.... and his ability to drain the consistent outside jumper. All of these things should allow Marvin to have an awesome career in the NBA.

I've been on the Green bandwagon for a while now (and I'd still LOVE to have him on our team), but if Williams is available... you take him, no doubt about it.


----------



## Peaceman (Jan 15, 2003)

I find it funny that some on this board find fault with Marvin Williams, but praise Green to death when he hasn't played one time against decent competition. Green might end up being great,good, OK or stink, but Marvin Williams has shown much more of a chance against high level competition to be the best guy in this draft under 7' tall. Marvin reminds me more of Shawn Marion than Tim Thomas. Very good outside shooting and great at getting offensive rebounds.


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

So would a Jamison with more range and athletic ability be a good comparison then?


----------



## Spoolie Gee (Feb 3, 2005)

I think he's a lot like Rashard Lewis but a little stronger and a better attitude.


----------



## GOD (Jun 22, 2003)

I think a good comparison in style and how he plays, (not in how good he will turn out because I am sick of all these T-Mac comparisons) is KG. He is stonger then KG was when entering the league, but he is also a little older. But he does seem to have that all around game KG has. Now I do not the the fierceness that KG has, but he also has a better outside shot then KG. 

In truth, I can not find a good comparison. I think thats a good thing. He has a chance to be his own man in the NBA.


----------



## CanJohno (Feb 11, 2005)

Blazer Freak said:


> So would a Jamison with more range and athletic ability be a good comparison then?


NO!


----------



## CanJohno (Feb 11, 2005)

thylo said:


> In truth, I can not find a good comparison. I think thats a good thing. He has a chance to be his own man in the NBA.


Agreed. :clap: 

This kid's goin' to be a good one! The Jamison comparison stops after mentioning that they both went to UNC. That's it. Williams has better perimeter AND post skills then Jamison, and he still has a ton of room to improve and hone those skills further. Forget it, I'm not going to try to sell anyone on him, his game will do enough talking for itself, once he gets to the league.


----------



## handclap problematic (Nov 6, 2003)

From all of the comparisons I have been reading I would compare him to a young Rasheed Wallace. Think about it. I am surprised nobody has mentioned this yet. He has Athleticism, seems to be a 3/4, of course the UNC connection, ability to score inside and outside, unselfish, and good defensively. For all of those who were upset to see Rasheed leave.....well get ready for the second coming.......hopefully without the negatives (although I love Wallace, attitude and all).

Peace Prunetang


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

*To get Williams @3, you guys should feel blessed. He could have been the #1 overall pick last year, and now that he might fall to 3 this year, you guys should be happy just being able to get him.

I agree though, getting unproven talent is kind of sketchy.*


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

DHarris34Phan said:


> *To get Williams @3, you guys should feel blessed. He could have been the #1 overall pick last year, and now that he might fall to 3 this year, you guys should be happy just being able to get him.
> 
> I agree though, getting unproven talent is kind of sketchy.*


It'd be splentastic if we got Marv.

A good consolation prize would be Green.


----------



## Perfection (May 10, 2004)

I think that the Jamison comparison is pretty legit from what I've seen. However, I really liked the comparison to a healthy Jamal Mashburn. 

How about a cross of the two. Certainly Marvin is athletic and he'll be his own player, but I think that he could be a cross breed of Jamison and Mashburn....any thoughts on this one?

If Williams scares you then so should Green. However, Green is suposed to play a position that we need more help at. Overall...I'm just lucky we moved up rather than down in the draft.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Prunetang said:


> From all of the comparisons I have been reading I would compare him to a young Rasheed Wallace. Think about it. I am surprised nobody has mentioned this yet.


Rasheed played the 5 at UNC, didn't he? 

He was projected as a 4 in the NBA, but he wasn't a guy capable of playing the 3.

Ed O.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

That Rasheed Wallace comparison isn't half bad, though Williams' doesn't have the same size. But if Williams had more take-over mentality, that would be sweet.


----------



## handclap problematic (Nov 6, 2003)

Yes, I do believe that Sheed played the 5 at UNC. And I know Sheed wasn't someone who could ideally man the 3 spot.....but besides an inch or so those seem to be the only differences. Obviously Marvin is his own player, and comparisons can be inane and misleading, but I thought it was at least an interesting thought. When I think of a PF type who can play inside and out packaged with unselfish play and good defense I think Sheed. So, obviously my mind put two and two together on this one....anyways, just another useless comparison....but interesting nonetheless......at least to me....haha
Prunetang


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

DHarris34Phan said:


> To get Williams @3, you guys should feel blessed. He could have been the #1 overall pick last year, and now that he might fall to 3 this year, you guys should be happy just being able to get him.


Really? According to this website, he was rated the third best SF in his high school class. Behind Rudy Gay and Josh Smith, who, if you recall, went in the teens.


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

Prunetang said:


> From all of the comparisons I have been reading I would compare him to a young Rasheed Wallace.


You mean, somebody 2 inches taller and freakishly athletic?


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

While we're coming up with comparisons, how about: a less talented Danny Manning?


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

meru said:


> While we're coming up with comparisons, how about: a less talented Danny Manning?


I don't recall Danny Manning ever being real fluid, or having any leaping ability. or outside shot, really. 

He wasn't a bad player, but I think thats a bad comparison (but that might just be because I disliked Danny Manning)


----------



## Maybeso (Jan 29, 2003)

*Interesting Snippet on Williams from SI Mock*

The No. 1 talent in the draft falls to the fortunate Blazers, who will market Williams and rookie point guard Sebastian Telfair as the leaders of their new era. Williams is the Dwight Howard of the draft, blessed with enormous character to go with his high basketball faculties. (Should the Hawks settle on Marvin Williams at No. 2, the Blazers will happily settle for Deron Williams, instead.)


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

*Re: Interesting Snippet on Williams from SI Mock*

I liked the Shawn Marion comparison, a little bigger, a little better jump shot. 

I would be thrilled if POR selected Marvin Williams, that would be a tremendous draft for POR in and of itself.


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

*Re: Interesting Snippet on Williams from SI Mock*



Kmurph said:


> I liked the Shawn Marion comparison, a little bigger, a little better jump shot. I would be thrilled if POR selected Marvin Williams, that would be a tremendous draft for POR in and of itself.


Shawn Marion is, once again, freakishly athletic, even for the NBA. It's my understanding that Williams is a decent athlete, but nothing hugely special.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

*Re: Interesting Snippet on Williams from SI Mock*

Williams' best comaprrison is Shawn Marion imo with a little bit of Jamison mixed in. He doesn't have the range of a Rashard Lewis yet.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

*Re: Interesting Snippet on Williams from SI Mock*



meru said:


> Shawn Marion is, once again, freakishly athletic, even for the NBA. It's my understanding that Williams is a decent athlete, but nothing hugely special.


NBADraft.net's profile of him suggests more than his being a "decent" athlete:



> Strengths:* Elite level athlete, Very quick and agile for a player of his size...* Can play any position on the floor effectively.. Never out-worked or out-hustled... Doesn’t take plays off... Gives you everything he has whether it’s a high school playoff game or an AAU event... Excellent form on jumper... NBA range... Very effective when facing the hoop as *he has a quick first step* and utilizes his jabs and fakes to perfection... Court awareness is that of a vet... Finds teammates from anywhere on the court...An excellent passer from any spot on the floor who possesses great knowledge of the game.... At 6-9 he handles like a guard and has excellent touch out to 17 feet.... Great rebounder because of his size and *ability to get off the ground quickly*... Big game player... Plays his best in the clutch... *A quick leaper who plays well above the rim.* Has tremendous potential.


Everything they say is consistent with Williams being a great athlete and explosive.


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

Okay, well, I'm reassured on the athleticism part. Again, I wouldn't care (is Tim Duncan an "elite athlete"? Only in the swimming pool. Magic and Bird in particular were not close) except for his 'tweener-ness. In fact, I'll take your positive NBADraft.net review and raise it with Draftcity.com's weaknesses:



> (David Mosley, Chris Potts, April 2005 Despite Marvin’s size and athletic ability he is still very raw and unpolished. At times he appears very awkward and tentative, whether it’s dribbling the ball, fighting for position in the post or trying to get a shot off in the paint. He’s almost a little bit too unselfish at times, but this is understandable considering the team he played on. To this point in his career he has been able to rely on his size, strength and quickness to overpower his opponents. In fact, he has a tendency to rely too much on his athleticism offensively. He also seems to be in a bit of a rush at times and it must be noted that Marvin appeared to get slightly rattled during the championship game (again he’s just a freshman).
> 
> Offensively, Marvin has only shown that he can score in one of four ways: open stand still jumpshots, lay-ups / dunks on fast breaks, put-backs and free throws. Marvin hasn’t shown he has the ability to put the ball on the floor and create his own shot consistently, whether it’s driving around a defender to get all the way to the rim or merely shooting off the dribble. If Marvin is going to be a great small forward in the NBA he will need to develop this part of his game. Also, Marvin has shown no post moves outside of trying to overpower his opponents with a drop-step toward the basket. When surrounded by defenders in the paint Marvin often gets his shot blocked because he has yet to show a jump hook, a fadeaway or an up-and-under move. In fact, Marvin’s best offensive move in the paint is trying to get to the free throw line. He will not be able to draw fouls easily against more experienced defenders. If Marvin is going to be a great power forward in the NBA he will need to develop this part of his game.
> 
> ...


See? Scary.


----------



## Scout226 (Sep 17, 2003)

meru said:


> See? Scary.


I'm with you meru. I've been trying to read up on Williams today because the few times I saw Marvin.. well... he sucked. Reading his weeknesses on draftcity had me wondering what is so special about him. A few minutes earlier before I read that, I think it was Chad Ford(ok, I know he shouldn't be taken seriously) on ESPN radio saying Williams might be compared to Lebron and Wade in a few years.

I just don't know. Websites have a lot of weaknesses on him, but the so called experts keep saying there is sooooo much potential. I don't know. I really haven't seen or read anything that puts him that much above Green. 

What I'm hoping is we don't want Williams, but he's available at #3 so the offers come rolling in.


BTW, also in that inteview with Ford I believe he said Portland might have put themselves in a bad situation drafting Telfair because they might be scared to take Paul now. He said Paul was hands down better than Telfair. Both are short, so tlong would have a field day with either in the lineup.. 
I look at it this way. If we drafted Jefferson last year, then Paul this year, we would have an extra PF and a rookie PG, making a problem with our starting PG this year. Taking Telfair this last year and getting him experience to take over, then drafting let's say Green or Williams, we are in a much better situation. Ok, enough rambling..


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Here is the other half of the article that was so conveniently left out when it was posted earlier. After reading this please tell me again why he scares anyone except opposing coaches trying to figure out how to stop him.

Please pay special attention to the 6th paragraph.....Or do we not need any players like that?



(David Mosley, Chris Potts, April 2005 Marvin has the size, length, versatility, athleticism and especially the upside that teams love. These traits give him the ability to play both forward positions. He has a strong upper body and even more impressive is his lower body strength with a very stable, explosive trunk. He can absorb contact and still get shots off. It looks like he could still develop a little more physically. He has room to grow and definitely will continue to mature into his body, which will provide him with even greater control of his athleticism. He is quick in the open floor, explosive and has a good first step. Marvin shows great hops and is a pretty quick leaper, especially going for rebounds. His second and third bounce to get off the floor is almost as good his first. He definitely takes advantage of his athleticism offensively. 

The most developed part of Marvin’s offensive game right now is his almost flawless jumpshot. It’s a very natural shot and he shows great form for his size. His shot looks almost effortless and each shot is nearly identical with his elbow tucked in, arms straight, good follow-through and height. His form looks the same whether it’s a mid-range jumper or a 3 pointer, and he releases it fairly quick. His great leg strength really helps him because he less likely to shoot tired jumpers. Marvin has shown he is a great FT shooter (nearly 85% on almost 5 attempts per game). He is calm and poised at the line and is always confident in the shot.

The few times that Marvin put the ball on the floor toward the basket he showed he has very good handles for a player his size. He displays a low, fast, under control dribble and rarely forces the issue. He provided solid help bringing the ball up the court against full court pressure. Unfortunately for us, Marvin did such a good job playing within the team at Carolina that he didn’t display his ball handling skills often. Marvin does not over dribble and does a good job at keeping the ball moving. He is a very unselfish player and shows great floor instincts in his passing. He was not double-teamed often but he did a pretty good job of passing out of it when help defense arrived. After rebounds he was usually quick in finding Raymond Felton with his outlet passes, helping ignite a tremendous fast break offense.

In the paint, Marvin has decent footwork, but not great footwork. He usually wastes no time while in the lane and is rather decisive with his moves. He can play with his back to the basket or facing it, not seeming to have a preference and sometimes he just takes what the defense gives him. He is very aggressive when establishing position offensively, stays low with strength and has good balance. Marvin doesn’t shy away from contact and actually looks for it often. He has no problem finishing strong at the rim, even after taking contact. When catching passes in traffic he shows good hands and receives the ball fairly well. Unlike many athletic big men these days, Marvin has shown a desire to rebound the ball. He boxes out well and goes hard after every loose rebound and at least gets a hand on almost anything that comes near him. His solid frame and quick leaping will help make him a tremendous rebounder in the NBA. 

Defensively, Marvin has the ability to guard both forward positions. He is quick enough to stay with most small forwards away from the basket and has enough length and strength to guard most power forwards down low. He has a tendency to gamble on defense (part of Roy William’s philosophy) but rarely did he gamble and lose. He has a nice wingspan and shows good timing and anticipation, resulting in several memorable steals and subsequent breakaways. Marvin never gives up on a play and shows tenacity and hustle. He is a student of the game and his knowledge and preparation help him on the defensive end. 

All of the above are impressive enough, 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. 

----------------------------------------

(Prerak Shah, May 2004 Offensive juggernaut who has the most complete arsenal of offensive moves in the 2004 High School Senior class amongst wing players. Williams has a very low dribble and great body control which allows him to penetrate from the perimeter. He has an explosive first step and a quick leap that allows him to get of his jumper in heavy traffic. His shot itself is solid, showing both mid and long rage ability (NBA 3 point line still needs consistency, but the raw potential is there). While he is not a point forward or anything of that sort, he is certainly an above average passer from the SF position who can find the open man when double teamed, and otherwise create for his teammates. He is best when facing the basket, either starting from the perimeter or even in the post. When he does get to the basket he does not disappoint as his athleticism is stunning. While it cannot be compared to those of Josh Smith or Dorell Wright, his 2004 class contemporaries, it is still in the upper tier of the. He has the body strength to absorb contact and still finish strong.

Defensively the effort is there, as are the physical gifts. He is a strong rebounder because of his combination of speed, size, and wingspan. His reflexes are sharp enough to garner a fair share of blocks against smaller (opposing SFs) and slower (opposing PFs) opponents.

While he is most comfortable at the small forward, his size and upper/lower body strength allow him to spend time at the power forward spot as well.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

meru said:


> See? Scary.


Sure. He's definitely not a guaranteed superstar. But then, rawness offensively is to be expected from someone so young. He got so little time on a team that historically sits even super-talented freshmen behind upperclassmen that he may as well be a high schooler.

Kevin Garnett was nothing but raw early on. Same for Bryant and McGrady. Of course, players who turn out poorly also start off raw.  The point is, I don't think being raw is a serious problem at his age and experience level. I do wish he had an extra inch to make him a taller-looking 6'10'', but I think he can potentially be a first-of-his-kind small forward (with the hope, then, of Outlaw being able to handle the shooting guard position).

I'm not 100% sold on Williams (and I'd hate to pick between Williams and Bogut), but I like his combination of athleticism, size and skills. It might add up to a titanic bust, but I think it's more likely he'll be an elite player.


----------



## Scout226 (Sep 17, 2003)

mediocre man said:


> Here is the other half of the article that was so conveniently left out when it was posted earlier. After reading this please tell me again why he scares anyone except opposing coaches trying to figure out how to stop him.
> 
> Please pay special attention to the 6th paragraph.....Or do we not need any players like that?



I read that as well. There are a lot of positives to Wiliams, I get that, but there was also a decent amount of weaknesses. Every player profile has his share of strengths and weaknesses. I just expected less in the weakness side for someone so highly hyped. I guess that's part of it. A lot of hype..


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Scout226 said:


> I read that as well. There are a lot of positives to Wiliams, I get that, but there was also a decent amount of weaknesses. Every player profile has his share of strengths and weaknesses. I just expected less in the weakness side for someone so highly hyped. I guess that's part of it. A lot of hype..


I disagree. I think there should be a lot of weaknesses in the game of even a superior talent who has very little experience. The question is not whether he has weaknesses right now, but whether he will have those weaknesses in a few years. I think the fact that he's considered a tremendous ball-handler and passer for his size, is supposed to be intelligent and hard-working and has the natural athleticism all point to a guy who will have very few weaknesses once he's acquired some experience and polish to his game.


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

Minstrel said:


> Kevin Garnett was nothing but raw early on. Same for Bryant and McGrady. Of course, players who turn out poorly also start off raw.  The point is, I don't think being raw is a serious problem at his age and experience level. I do wish he had an extra inch to make him a taller-looking 6'10'', but I think he can potentially be a first-of-his-kind small forward (with the hope, then, of Outlaw being able to handle the shooting guard position).


But Garnett was the LeBron of his time - everybody was saying he was a once-in-a-decade talent. That's why he was the first person in, what, 25 years to declare out of high school. He had AMAZING athleticism, was almost 7 feet, and (they said) had PG skills.

Bryant and McGrady were big SGs, again, with otherworldly athleticism and solid fundamentals. Both were the #1 rated players in their class, I believe. Williams was about the 7th rated high schooler in his class (lower than Zach) and third SF. And didn't have the chance to show much in college. 



> I'm not 100% sold on Williams (and I'd hate to pick between Williams and Bogut), but I like his combination of athleticism, size and skills. It might add up to a titanic bust, but I think it's more likely he'll be an elite player.


We shall see. I wish I could get excited, but the only player who really interests me is Bogut.


----------



## Goldmember (May 24, 2003)

Scout226 said:


> BTW, also in that inteview with Ford I believe he said Portland might have put themselves in a bad situation drafting Telfair because they might be scared to take Paul now.


But if we don't take Telfair last year, and Nick doesn't shut it down, we win perhaps 3 - 5 more games, and our draft pick is somewhere around 6 - 9. Thus eliminating the option of even selecting Chris Paul. 

Apparently the all-knowing Chad Ford doesn't think about this kind of stuff.


----------



## CanJohno (Feb 11, 2005)

Many people considered Marvin Williams a possible #1 selection in LAST YEAR'S draft, before he decided to go to UNC (if not, many considered him to be THE best in his HS class... yes, ahead of Howard). A lot of people seem to be forgetting about that. Roy Williams damn-near had a heart attack when he found out that Williams was, indeed, going to be coming to UNC, even if it was just for one year. This kid has gotten attention for a reason... he's deserving of it. He has many of the same attributes and abilities as the other players being discussed. Some to a lesser degree, possibly? Sure. But the fact is, dude IS worthy of being a top-3 pick... regardless of when he were to come out (last year, this year, next year... WHENEVER).

I find it laughable that anyone could be so mightily discouraged by an amateur "scouting report". The guys that write these scouting reports always ramble on, about both strengths and weaknesses, and the funny thing is... their strengths and weaknesses nearly always contradict eachother.

For instance, go to nbdraft.net and click on a profile of your choice. For almost any given player they'll say in Player X's "strengths" section how great Player X is at (for instance) ball handling, outside shooting, and passing. Then, in his "weaknesses" section they'll say that he needs to work on those same three areas because they're "weak". So, which is it? It can't be both can it? I mean, seriously, just go through any number of these scouting reports and you can see the "consistent inconsistencies" present in most of them. Of course this won't hold true for ALL profiles... but it's pretty dam close.

IMO, draftcity.com's profiles are a little more accurate (than nbadraft.net's), but keep in mind, that these guys, in all reality, are NOT professional scouts (even though they may do this for a living). They're not professional, on the NBA-level... if they were, they'd be on an NBA payroll. And, because of that, I think only so much credence should be lent to their "profiles". Then again, that's just my own opinion.


----------



## Perfection (May 10, 2004)

I still think my Jamal Mashburn (healthy) / Jamison combination is what Williams will be. 

Sorry that I break the flow of the previous few posts.


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

CanJohno said:


> Many people considered Marvin Williams a possible #1 selection in LAST YEAR'S draft, before he decided to go to UNC (if not, many considered him to be THE best in his HS class... yes, ahead of Howard). A lot of people seem to be forgetting about that.


Yes, so you've said. Can you prove it? The only ranking I've seen has him ranked 7th overall (behind Howard, Livingston, Al Jefferson, Rudy Gay, Josh Smith and even Robert Swift), and as the third best SF. I read mock drafts obsessively last year before the deadline for declaring, when they just throw everybody's name out there, and I NEVER remember seeing Williams' name anywhere near #1. Which ones did I miss? 

Now, let's imagine you can produce one. Does that show he should be the top pick this year? Tim Thomas was raved about and ACTUALLY (not just in your mind) ranked #1 in his high school class. After a year in college, he dropped nearly out of the top ten, and rightly so. It's hard to see that Williams's one year coming off the bench settles every doubt about him.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Hey guysKnick fan here..I was just thinking the very same thing a bout Williams and the draft..We have the nimber 8 and 30 pick and if the opportunity to trade up to the number 2 came,I dont know if there is really anyone out there who stands out past Bogut..maybe green??

With that said,if Zeke came calling and said he would trade the 8 and the 30,give you Sweetney,either pennys or TT expiring contract would you trade the 3 and any filler you like??? Miles,Ratliff,Anderson,Patterson..you pick it

Other than Green,I wouldnt really want to take on more cap


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

truth said:


> Hey guysKnick fan here..I was just thinking the very same thing a bout Williams and the draft..We have the nimber 8 and 30 pick and if the opportunity to trade up to the number 2 came,I dont know if there is really anyone out there who stands out past Bogut..maybe green??
> 
> With that said,if Zeke came calling and said he would trade the 8 and the 30,give you Sweetney,either pennys or TT expiring contract would you trade the 3 and any filler you like??? Miles,Ratliff,Anderson,Patterson..you pick it
> 
> Other than Green,I wouldnt really want to take on more cap



According to the Blazers front office people they believe this draft is about 6 players deep of potential studs. I'm guessing those players are Bogut, M. Williams, D.Williams, Paul, Green and maybe Andriuskidjbcrgyurgb(sp?) Pick #8 does nothing for us. I'd rather stay at #3 and hope M.Williams falls to us and if not either pick Green or trade down 1-2 slots and pick him then plus add another pick from Charlotte or something


----------



## Foulzilla (Jan 11, 2005)

If it were up to me, there is no way I would trade the pick for #8 + fillers. I'm of the opinion we should either draft Williams/Bogut(if available) or Green (if neither is). I would hope if it comes down to it we can trade down to get Green + a little incentive from whichever team we trade with. However, if we have to I have no problem using the #3 on Green. Anything else (other then trading the pick for an established superstar) would be a bad draft imo.


----------



## Tince (Jul 11, 2004)

I don't get the Williams bashing. What player in this draft has superstar potential but no question marks about his game? I'd be much more scared to take Bogut than Williams. I'd be more scared of taking Green than Bogut. There isn't a player Portland could draft at #3 that would scare me less than Williams.


----------



## BrooklynBaller (Jun 25, 2003)

Tince said:


> There isn't a player Portland could draft at #3 that would scare me less than Williams.


So true. Almost every player ever drafted (except for guys like Lebron, Duncan, Ewing, etc.) comes with some sort of risk. Williams, Bogut, Paul, Green, and all the rest in this draft definitely fall into that category as well. However, odds are that all four will at least be starter-calibre players in the NBA.

With that said, I'd still take Williams over Green, Paul, Deron Williams or even Bogut. He's the only one, IMO, that has superstar potential (whereas, Green, IMO, has only star potential -- like a Jason Richardson or Corey Magette).

Here's to hoping that M. Williams falls into our laps on draft day ...


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

BrooklynBaller said:


> So true. Almost every player ever drafted (except for guys like Lebron, Duncan, Ewing, etc.) comes with some sort of risk. Williams, Bogut, Paul, Green, and all the rest in this draft definitely fall into that category as well. However, odds are that all four will at least be starter-calibre players in the NBA.


But is that enough? Apparently Damon Stoudamire is "starter-calibre" - I'd be pretty upset if we got that for the 3rd pick.



> With that said, I'd still take Williams over Green, Paul, Deron Williams or even Bogut. He's the only one, IMO, that has superstar potential (whereas, Green, IMO, has only star potential -- like a Jason Richardson or Corey Magette).


Explain please. 
(a) what is this "superstar potential" and in virtue of what does Williams have it? It seems to me you would say that of someone who was a physical freak (a la Shaq) or who had amazing athleticism (a la Stromile Swift, or more charitably, Vince Carter) or had amazing skills (a la Jason Kidd). Williams doesn't have any of these. He's very good at a lot of things, but does he stand out at anything?
(b) why is Williams the only one with "superstar potential"? How can you even know that a player has that? Did anyone even last year (let alone when he was drafted) know Steve Nash had "league MVP potential"?


----------



## Tince (Jul 11, 2004)

Meru-

Do you want to trade the pick for a player because everyone in this draft has question marks about their game? If so, that makes perfect sense.

If not, who would you rather we drafted? It will be very difficult to find a guy with less question marks and equally high star-potential as Williams.


----------



## BrettNYK (Jul 15, 2004)

Minstrel said:


> That Rasheed Wallace comparison isn't half bad, though Williams' doesn't have the same size. But if Williams had more take-over mentality, that would be sweet.


Williams has a much better attitude than Wallace did, which will make him an even better payer than 'Sheed. They do have some similarities to their games, but Williams is still a differnet player. As someone said before, Williams will be his own man in the NBA. He will be a very good player, and you guys should be thrilled if you he land to you with the third pick. If Williams is not available, you guys should trade down with the Bobcats, who would love to pick Chris Paul or Deron Williams, both who you have no need for, since you already have Telfair. 

Since I see the Bobcats picking Paul, the Hornets will pick Williams, which will leave Green available at #5. 

Back to Williams, if he there at #3, you guys should pick him. And you should play him at the 3, not at the 4 like many have said. He has the quickness to guard the 3, and once he develops some post moves, he will have an excellent inside/outside game. He would be able to blow past a bigger defender, but would be able to score down low against a smaller defender. I really think that putting him a the 4 will prevent him from reaching his full potential, which is why I think that he is a small forward in the NBA.


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

Tince said:


> Meru-
> 
> Do you want to trade the pick for a player because everyone in this draft has question marks about their game? If so, that makes perfect sense.


I'm not sure I ever make perfect sense. 
I would be in favour of a good trade, against a bad one. Big surprise there.



> If not, who would you rather we drafted?


Bogut! But since he won't be there...
I guess I like the sound of Deron Williams, Gerald Green and Chris Paul, arguably in that order. But if Antoine Wright shoots up the draft boards, that sounds fine, too. 
I'm not sold on Telfair, and I would be mad if we passed on a great PG just because our GM fell in love with his own special pick.



> It will be very difficult to find a guy with less question marks and equally high star-potential as Williams.


There you go with the "star potential" again. That and about five bucks will get you a decent coffee. But see my earlier post about why Williams lacks it. 

I guess I want us to be picking third in a different draft. Like the 2003 one, maybe (I'd take Wade and shock the world).


----------



## Tince (Jul 11, 2004)

Bogut has any many, if not more question marks as Williams. 

I've read your post on why you think Williams is a sketchy pick, and while I'd never promise he'll be a star in this league, I believe he's got as good of a chance as anyone in this draft.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

What can Williams have as a prospect that would excite you, meru?

His positives seem pretty clear:

-- Athleticism
-- Basketball IQ
-- Coming from a successful college program (even if only for a year)
-- Skill (especially his jumper, and important one)
-- Youth (he's over a year younger than Telfair, for example, in spite of being in the same prep class)

His negatives seem to me to be:

-- No clear position in the NBA
-- No big stats at UNC
-- Doesn't play a position of scarcity (PG or C)

The positives are more legitimate to me than the negatives, since all of the negatives can be legitimately argued away, while nobody can really counter most of the positives.

I don't think that Williams is a sure-fire star, but if Portland were picking first I'd have a tough time picking between him and Bogut, and if Portland reels Marvin in on draft day I'll be confident we'll be happy with the results.

Ed O.


----------



## Perfection (May 10, 2004)

Ed O said:


> His negatives seem to me to be:
> 
> -- No clear position in the NBA
> -- No big stats at UNC
> ...



As far as the doesn't play a position of scarcity...we saw what happened when we took Sam Bowie out of need for a player at a position of scarcity.

I personally think that between Telfair and Pryz...our PG and C are set...at least for this up and coming year. 

No clear position in the league....I'd rather say that he is versitle and can play multiple positions. Obviously this happens most with PG/SG, SG/SF or PF/C. I think that he has the size and explosiveness that he could/should play SF in the league. Although, in a running game like Pheonix, he'd be the PF, where he could log some spot minutes (but he'd be undersized...I wouldn't want him there). 

As for no big stats...he was a freshman playing behind a slew of established starters for the national champion team. I think we can all see how that is discounted. 

I really think it might come down to whether or not Outlaw can play SG...from what I've seen, my only knock on him is high ball handling. I think his shooting, passing and decision making have all improved vastly over the last year. And I think he'll be fast enough to guard the SG spot...which in reality is the most important thing. 

So, I think that we need to come out of this draft with either Green or Williams. At this point I would still definately prefer Williams and would be estatic if he dropped to us. 

However, if we could do that trade with Charlotte for the #5 + a future 1st rounder then that could be appealing too, depending if we could get Green....I think that Charlotte will be a high lottery pick again next year. 

Anyways, I'm still inclined to keep the pick and take Williams if we can. He is pretty much all positives. I've discounted the biggest negatives....I think.....


----------



## BrettNYK (Jul 15, 2004)

Ed O said:


> What can Williams have as a prospect that would excite you, meru?
> 
> His positives seem pretty clear:
> 
> ...


I don't understand why people say that Williams has no clear position in the NBA. He is a small forward, and people just said that he could play the 4 without any real proof. Just because he is tall doesn't mean he is a 4. He is a small forward, who, if need be, can play the 4. But he would be playing out of position. His skills make him a 3, but his height makes people want him to be a 4, which he is not.


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

Ed O said:


> What can Williams have as a prospect that would excite you, meru?
> 
> His positives seem pretty clear:
> 
> ...


BUT: you could say the same for just about every player in the draft. College basketball players likely to be drafted in the first round BY DEFINITION have to be athletic (unless they're over 7 feet) and should have SOME basketball IQ (unless they're overwhelming enough in other areas that their coach had to play them). Is he really OUTSTANDING in any area? The only "star" player I can think of who's not outstanding in any clear area is Paul Pierce (who had the same college coach) who sank like a stone on draft day because of it. But he at least had a very good college career to point to.
(Okay, maybe Rip Hamilton as well. But he was the BEST player on a championship team, not a guy who did practically diddly in the title game.)

Here are the comparisons that worry me:
Drew Gooden
Tim Thomas
Rashard Lewis
Joe Smith

Of them, obviously Rashard Lewis would be best case scenario, and I can't say I'm that big a fan of his game.

If we're going to gamble, let's gamble on Green. But I'd love to get a player I knew could immediately contribute, like Bogut.

Hell, if we get Marvin Williams, I hope he's the second coming. I just don't see why some people seem confident he already is. I would be prepared to bet large sums of money he won't be seen as the best player from this draft class in three or four years. (But I guess he just has to be the third best if we get him.) Overall, this draft looks depressingly like the Kenyon Martin draft, not like the LeBron James draft. But hey, here's hoping I'm wrong. I'm waiting for someone to dredge up convincing evidence to reassure me, but so far in vain.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

meru said:


> BUT: you could say the same for just about every player in the draft. College basketball players likely to be drafted in the first round BY DEFINITION have to be athletic (unless they're over 7 feet) and should have SOME basketball IQ (unless they're overwhelming enough in other areas that their coach had to play them). Is he really OUTSTANDING in any area?


Yes. I would say that he's outstanding in athleticism and basketball IQ. Just as I didn't list that he was "tall" as a positive (although at the 3 spot he definitely WOULD have a height advantage most nights), similarly I wouldn't have listed those attributes unless he had a significant advantage in them.

Ed O.


----------



## Tince (Jul 11, 2004)

meru said:


> Here are the comparisons that worry me:
> Drew Gooden
> Tim Thomas
> Rashard Lewis
> ...


I don't understand how those comparisons bother you when Bogut is compared to Chris Kaman on the same site that Williams is compared to Tim Thomas.

I thought a telling sign on draftcity.com is that they said Bogut's best case scenerio is something between Vlade Divac and Brad Miller, but they couldn't even find a good comparison to make with Williams. To me that means they've never seen a player with all the attributes that Williams has, and that has to be a good thing.


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

Tince said:


> I don't understand how those comparisons bother you when Bogut is compared to Chris Kaman on the same site that Williams is compared to Tim Thomas.


But the Chris Kaman comparison is very unlikely. Was Chris Kaman that good of a passer? Had he played against the same level of competition - like Team USA and Tim Duncan? Or taken his team into the NCAAs?

Whereas, if anything, Tim Thomas achieved more than Williams in his one year in college.



> I thought a telling sign on draftcity.com is that they said Bogut's best case scenerio is something between Vlade Divac and Brad Miller, but they couldn't even find a good comparison to make with Williams. To me that means they've never seen a player with all the attributes that Williams has, and that has to be a good thing.


It just says to me that they haven't much imagination. Either that, or all of the examples they could think of didn't sound very complimentary.


----------



## Tince (Jul 11, 2004)

meru said:


> But the Chris Kaman comparison is very unlikely. Was Chris Kaman that good of a passer? Had he played against the same level of competition - like Team USA and Tim Duncan? Or taken his team into the NCAAs?
> 
> Whereas, if anything, Tim Thomas achieved more than Williams in his one year in college.


That makes no sense. Kaman comparison is very unlikely, but Tim Thomas is because he played better at Villanova than Williams did on the best team in the country? 




> It just says to me that they haven't much imagination. Either that, or all of the examples they could think of didn't sound very complimentary.


Right...they have a best case scenerio for every 1st round prospect, but it just so happens they have no imagination with Williams? I seriously doubt draftcity.com is worried about sounding complimentary when making comparisons. I know if they feel like the comparison won't do a player justice they'll say "A rich mans (vs poor man) 'F L'".


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

Tince said:


> Right...they have a best case scenerio for every 1st round prospect, but it just so happens they have no imagination with Williams? I seriously doubt draftcity.com is worried about sounding complimentary when making comparisons.


Well, it doesn't look very good if the player you've got ranked first or second is being compared with Drew Gooden, does it?



> I know if they feel like the comparison won't do a player justice they'll say "A rich mans (vs poor man) 'F L'".


"A Rich Man's Drew Gooden." Yeah, everyone would SNAP that up.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

meru said:


> "A Rich Man's Drew Gooden." Yeah, everyone would SNAP that up.


What's wrong with Drew Gooden? It seems like you're throwing the Gooden comparison out there like it's a big negative.

After Memphis tried to force him to play the 3 because of Gasol's presence, he went to Orlando and put up better numbers. Then he went to Cleveland and took another step up. 

And he's still only 23 years old.

The ONLY thing that's wrong with him is between his ears. Well, that and a bit of weakness on defense.

If Marvin Williams turns out to be a "rich man's Gooden" and as part of that affluence he's got a better attitude, he's going to be a VERY good player. At least an all-star and maybe a HoFer.

Ed O.


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

Ed O said:


> What's wrong with Drew Gooden? It seems like you're throwing the Gooden comparison out there like it's a big negative.


No, a big negative would be Kwame Brown. Well, except to you, because of course he's still young, and youth trumps all in the Ed O. household. I throw it out there because he's Mr. Boring Average. Mr. There-are-a-million-players-like-me-in-the-NBA. Mr. Jerry-West-will-never-EVER-forgive-himself-for-taking-me-over-Amare-Stoudemire, so much so that he had to trade me to get me out of his sight.



> After Memphis tried to force him to play the 3 because of Gasol's presence, he went to Orlando and put up better numbers. Then he went to Cleveland and took another step up.


One more step up and he might be Shareef Abdur-Rahim! No, let's not shoot too high.



> And he's still only 23 years old.


Oh well then. That settles it.



> The ONLY thing that's wrong with him is between his ears. Well, that and a bit of weakness on defense.


AND the fact that he's Mr. Boring average. Unless you replace his brain with Jason Kidd's or a young Magic Johnson's, I don't see that it'd make much difference.



> If Marvin Williams turns out to be a "rich man's Gooden" and as part of that affluence he's got a better attitude, he's going to be a VERY good player. At least an all-star and maybe a HoFer.


Oh come on, Ed. Nobody takes "a rich man's..." to be a compliment, unless the player is already very good. You think an agent pitches their player as "he's a rich man's Anthony Johnson"? That's like saying he's mediocre - only in a GOOD way.

I once was a teaching assistant with a guy who gave out the grade F+. You failed but you did it in _style_. That's a "rich man's Drew Gooden."


----------



## Tince (Jul 11, 2004)

meru said:


> Well, it doesn't look very good if the player you've got ranked first or second is being compared with Drew Gooden, does it?


But when Bogut is being compared to Chris Kaman, that's not so bad? I'd take Tim Thomas or Drew Gooden over Kaman anyday. You're really stuck on these "worst case" scenarios instead of Williamstalent and work ethic.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

meru said:


> No, a big negative would be Kwame Brown. Well, except to you, because of course he's still young, and youth trumps all in the Ed O. household.


Let's see what kind of offers Brown gets this summer and what kind of career he has. He might never live up to the #1 billing, but he's still a pretty good prospect at age 23.

Not sure what this has to do with anything, though, other than you making a weak attempt at ignoring the points I made about Gooden.



> I throw it out there because he's Mr. Boring Average. Mr. There-are-a-million-players-like-me-in-the-NBA. Mr. Jerry-West-will-never-EVER-forgive-himself-for-taking-me-over-Amare-Stoudemire, so much so that he had to trade me to get me out of his sight.


Gooden is average?

Come on, man. You're not that ignorant.

Gooden put up 14 points and 9 rebounds a game last year. Since when is THAT average?

Whether West passed up Amare for Gooden or not has no impact on what kind of player he is now.



> AND the fact that he's Mr. Boring average. Unless you replace his brain with Jason Kidd's or a young Magic Johnson's, I don't see that it'd make much difference.


Boring? You must not watch him much. He's extremely talented offensively and he's explosive emotionally at times (to his detriment).

Average? I'd love to see how that's anything less than pure nonsense.



> Oh come on, Ed. Nobody takes "a rich man's..." to be a compliment, unless the player is already very good. You think an agent pitches their player as "he's a rich man's Anthony Johnson"? That's like saying he's mediocre - only in a GOOD way.


#1: Gooden isn't mediocre.

#2: What are you talking about that no one takes "a rich man's" to be a compliment? The whole poor man's/rich man's thing is to give people an impression of a similar player and if the player is a "new and improved" version then he's a rich man's X.

Again, though, I can't believe you are so off base on Gooden. He's a solid starter in the NBA at age 23, and you're acting like everyone in the NBA could do that.



> I once was a teaching assistant with a guy who gave out the grade F+. You failed but you did it in _style_. That's a "rich man's Drew Gooden."


As much as I love it when you regale us with tales of academia (which, as we all know, is in lockstep with reality ) that has little to do with Drew Gooden as a player or with comparisons to Drew.

Ed O.


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

Ed O said:


> Let's see what kind of offers Brown gets this summer and what kind of career he has. He might never live up to the #1 billing, but he's still a pretty good prospect at age 23.


No he isn't. He's got small hands and no clue.



> Not sure what this has to do with anything, though, other than you making a weak attempt at ignoring the points I made about Gooden.


I'm sorry - you made points? I must not have been paying attention.



> Gooden is average?
> 
> Come on, man. You're not that ignorant.


Hey! It's "dude" to you.

And I AM that ignorant.



> Gooden put up 14 points and 9 rebounds a game last year. Since when is THAT average?


You forgot to point out that he did it in only 30 mpg.

It's average because it isn't exceptional and it isn't poor. It clearly isn't mean, median or mode average, but I don't care.



> Whether West passed up Amare for Gooden or not has no impact on what kind of player he is now.


Well no duh, Mr. Literal.



> Boring? You must not watch him much.


I tried, but he sent me to sleep.



> Average? I'd love to see how that's anything less than pure nonsense.


Well at least it's PURE nonsense. I'd hate my nonsense to be adulterated.



> As much as I love it when you regale us with tales of academia (which, as we all know, is in lockstep with reality ) that has little to do with Drew Gooden as a player or with comparisons to Drew.


You're comparing the NBA to "reality"?

Feel free to slice me to ribbons one more time, Ed., but I think only you are reading this thread any more (we've even lost Tince), and if you don't respond, not even you.


----------



## Tince (Jul 11, 2004)

meru said:


> "?
> 
> Feel free to slice me to ribbons one more time, Ed., but I think only you are reading this thread any more (we've even lost Tince), and if you don't respond, not even you.


I'm still reading, I've just given up and agreed to disagree. 

I'll let the NBA GM's decide who's the better prospect. If Green gets taken before Williams, then I'll admit I was wrong.


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

Tince said:


> Bogut has any many, if not more question marks as Williams.
> 
> I've read your post on why you think Williams is a sketchy pick, and while I'd never promise he'll be a star in this league, I believe he's got as good of a chance as anyone in this draft.


That is just untrue. Bogut has nothing left to prove on any level of basketball besides the NBA. Go to the Milwaukee Bucks Forum, and read the threads I have made about him. 

Williams didn't impact his teams in the biggest games of the season (ex. the last 3 games of the tourney). That tells me that he still needs a year or two of development to make an impact on the NBA Level. Carmelo Anthony proved he was ready to make the jump and contribute right way, Marvin hasn't.

The question comes down to, who will be the better player? Well, Marvin may become the better player down the road, but give me a 7 footer with skills that we haven't seen since Tim Duncan, and can contribute right away, over the potential of Marvin Williams any day.


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

Tince said:


> But when Bogut is being compared to Chris Kaman, that's not so bad? I'd take Tim Thomas or Drew Gooden over Kaman anyday. You're really stuck on these "worst case" scenarios instead of Williamstalent and work ethic.


The only reason that Bogut is being compared to Chris Kamen is because they are both white. Andrew Bogut has proved, beyond a reasonable doubt, that he will be lightyears better than Chris Kamen. Kamen was drafted when he was 22 years old. Bogut is 20 and has already shown more than Kamen, even if you include Kamen's NBA experience.


----------



## DHarris34Phan (Oct 28, 2004)

Tince said:


> But when Bogut is being compared to Chris Kaman, that's not so bad? I'd take Tim Thomas or Drew Gooden over Kaman anyday. You're really stuck on these "worst case" scenarios instead of Williamstalent and work ethic.


The only reason that Bogut is being compared to Chris Kamen is because they are both white. Andrew Bogut has proved, beyond a reasonable doubt, that he will be lightyears better than Chris Kamen. Kamen was drafted when he was 22 years old. Bogut is only 20 and has already shown more than Kamen, even if you include Kamen's NBA experience!


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

OK, I am convinced - the draft is just too terrifying to be involved in. We should trade our pick for some vet on the downhill side of his career. The outcome will be bad, but we can predict it with certainty! :whatever:


----------



## Tince (Jul 11, 2004)

DHarris34Phan said:


> The only reason that Bogut is being compared to Chris Kamen is because they are both white.


Then the only reason Williams is being compared to Tim Thomas is because they're both black.

Bogut has something to prove because most all draft "experts" question if he's quck enough for the NBA game. I like Bogut's game, but if you watched him play in college, you would have noticed that quick athletic big men gave him trouble. Well in the NBA, that's about every big man.


----------

