Patrick Williams is having his worst year

[Dan Z]

He has never done anything to make me feel like he hasn’t already peaked his stats. Things that stay the same tend to stay the same. Objects at rest tend to stay at rest. If he had any life in his bones, he would have had a chance. He has shown me who he is, and Maya Angelou does not have to tell me to believe him.

I tend to agree because this is his fifth year in the league.

Every season it seems like people have said "If Patrick improves a little in this area then he'll be quite good" and it never comes to fruition.

However I say that and agree with Doug that PW should be better once he heals up a bit and has an off season to train. But that doesn't mean I like his contract or think he's someone the Bulls should stick with going forward.

[Dan Z]

IMO it's IMPERATIVE that we keep starting him and playing him significant minutes. If we bench him now you can basically kiss goodbye much of any hope that he'll rehabilitate his trade value. That's the critical thing.

I for the life of me do not understand this reasoning....people have been saying this for 3 years with Zach Lavine and where are we now? Reports that not a single team wants him still....you know why? Because once you've shown something for multiple years in a row, there is NO SUCH THING as "rehabbing your trade value".

Zach Lavine is who has always been, and teams no that, doesn't matter that he "looks like an all-star again" as many on here keep saying, teams no that he is not worth that contract, not gonna help on defense and take too many shots to be the 3rd option they want. Its the same damn thing with Patrick Williams, he has 0 offense, his "amazing defensive potential" is really just above average defense, his "he's only 23 and oozing with potential still" is nothing more than what it was 4 seasons ago which was zilch and every team knows that, it won't change. Williams isn't going to "rehab has value" it doesn't happen. If he had played this way for a season, maybe 2 tops then sure i could see saying that, but 4.5 years....no we know who he is, and so do the other 29 teams.

It's really simple reasoning:

1. Teams offers are in part based on (the minimum) they think the team with the player (us in this case) will accept. If you are openly showing you are down on a player by, for example, benching him a few months into a 5 year deal, they KNOW you want to get rid of him. No matter what you say, they KNOW you want to dump him. If you're starting him and playing him 30 mpg, they don't know that, and it suggests you like the player.
2. More minutes gives a player more opportunity to work out his deficiencies.
3. It's more palatable to a fan base to trade for another team's "starter" than a "bench player on a 5 year 90 mil deal". Yes, of course execs try to eliminate this from their minds in analyzing a player, but IMO, they simply cannot. It's just an aspect of human psychology.

I think his defense is still pretty good. Certainly one of our best few defenders.

Zach is playing his best ball ever. I'm sure teams would like him, but those that would mostly can't trade for him due to the newer CBA rules, and/or don't have anything to offer that we'd want.

I know it's not easy to predict the future, but I wish the Bulls were better at planning for it (especially when it comes to contracts).

Zach's a good player, but I never thought he was someone the team should stick with long term. Yet here we are.

[ChiTownHero1992]

IMO it's IMPERATIVE that we keep starting him and playing him significant minutes. If we bench him now you can basically kiss goodbye much of any hope that he'll rehabilitate his trade value. That's the critical thing.

I for the life of me do not understand this reasoning....people have been saying this for 3 years with Zach Lavine and where are we now? Reports that not a single team wants him still....you know why? Because once you've shown something for multiple years in a row, there is NO SUCH THING as "rehabbing your trade value".

Zach Lavine is who has always been, and teams no that, doesn't matter that he "looks like an all-star again" as many on here keep saying, teams no that he is not worth that contract, not gonna help on defense and take too many shots to be the 3rd option they want. Its the same damn thing with Patrick Williams, he has 0 offense, his "amazing defensive potential" is really just above average defense, his "he's only 23 and oozing with potential still" is nothing more than what it was 4 seasons ago which was zilch and every team knows that, it won't change. Williams isn't going to "rehab has value" it doesn't happen. If he had played this way for a season, maybe 2 tops then sure i could see saying that, but 4.5 years....no we know who he is, and so do the other 29 teams.

It's really simple reasoning:

1. Teams offers are in part based on (the minimum) they think the team with the player (us in this case) will accept. If you are openly showing you are down on a player by, for example, benching him a few months into a 5 year deal, they KNOW you want to get rid of him. No matter what you say, they KNOW you want to dump him. If you're starting him and playing him 30 mpg, they don't know that, and it suggests you like the player.
2. More minutes gives a player more opportunity to work out his deficiencies.
3. It's more palatable to a fan base to trade for another team's "starter" than a "bench player on a 5 year 90 mil deal". Yes, of course execs try to eliminate this from their minds in analyzing a player, but IMO, they simply cannot. It's just an aspect of human psychology.

I think his defense is still pretty good. Certainly one of our best few defenders.

Zach is playing his best ball ever. I'm sure teams would like him, but those that would mostly can't trade for him due to the newer CBA rules, and/or don't have anything to offer that we'd want.

INSANITY: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results - Albert Einstein

Been there done that, team hasn't gotten any better in 4 years...in fact continuosly getting worse by the year! So sure lets just keep paying, playing and startin Lavine and Williams because in Chicago we love our 38-44 Play-In bound rosters! But its ok because if we keep playing them yearly, and winning between 35-40 games, eventually someone is going to want our crap, right! Sure let's just keep going down this road yearly, bound to work sometime right.

[League Circles]

I for the life of me do not understand this reasoning....people have been saying this for 3 years with Zach Lavine and where are we now? Reports that not a single team wants him still....you know why? Because once you've shown something for multiple years in a row, there is NO SUCH THING as "rehabbing your trade value".

Zach Lavine is who has always been, and teams no that, doesn't matter that he "looks like an all-star again" as many on here keep saying, teams no that he is not worth that contract, not gonna help on defense and take too many shots to be the 3rd option they want. Its the same damn thing with Patrick Williams, he has 0 offense, his "amazing defensive potential" is really just above average defense, his "he's only 23 and oozing with potential still" is nothing more than what it was 4 seasons ago which was zilch and every team knows that, it won't change. Williams isn't going to "rehab has value" it doesn't happen. If he had played this way for a season, maybe 2 tops then sure i could see saying that, but 4.5 years....no we know who he is, and so do the other 29 teams.

It's really simple reasoning:

1. Teams offers are in part based on (the minimum) they think the team with the player (us in this case) will accept. If you are openly showing you are down on a player by, for example, benching him a few months into a 5 year deal, they KNOW you want to get rid of him. No matter what you say, they KNOW you want to dump him. If you're starting him and playing him 30 mpg, they don't know that, and it suggests you like the player.
2. More minutes gives a player more opportunity to work out his deficiencies.
3. It's more palatable to a fan base to trade for another team's "starter" than a "bench player on a 5 year 90 mil deal". Yes, of course execs try to eliminate this from their minds in analyzing a player, but IMO, they simply cannot. It's just an aspect of human psychology.

I think his defense is still pretty good. Certainly one of our best few defenders.

Zach is playing his best ball ever. I'm sure teams would like him, but those that would mostly can't trade for him due to the newer CBA rules, and/or don't have anything to offer that we'd want.

INSANITY: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results - Albert Einstein

Been there done that, team hasn't gotten any better in 4 years...in fact continuosly getting worse by the year! So sure lets just keep paying, playing and startin Lavine and Williams because in Chicago we love our 38-44 Play-In bound rosters! But its ok because if we keep playing them yearly, and winning between 35-40 games, eventually someone is going to want our crap, right! Sure let's just keep going down this road yearly, bound to work sometime right.

I don't care about being good this year and I'd trade Patrick for a salary dump if it were possible, which I kinda doubt it is. I wouldn't trade Zach for garbage but I'd trade him. I don't want Patrick to keep starting because I think it's best for us on the court right now or cause I want to continue down this road.

Benching Patrick just adds to our problems IMO. It's actually a very sane thought.

[Guru]

Patrick will be fine. He has flashed this year. Is he a disappointment? Absolutely, but he doesn't need to be much to be impactful. He will be a easy rotational 3 and D guy once he bounces back. DDR was impactful with these guys and their development and Pat misses him. Things will settle and Patrick will bounce back.

[ImSlower]

Patrick will be fine. He has flashed this year. Is he a disappointment? Absolutely, but he doesn't need to be much to be impactful. He will be a easy rotational 3 and D guy once he bounces back. DDR was impactful with these guys and their development and Pat misses him. Things will settle and Patrick will bounce back.

Can you demonstrate something he's doing different this year to impress you compared to his first four seasons? Just saying "he has flashed" doesn't seem to mean anything. He's had three good games, which is about what he's averaged since he was a rookie.

[Guru]

Patrick will be fine. He has flashed this year. Is he a disappointment? Absolutely, but he doesn't need to be much to be impactful. He will be a easy rotational 3 and D guy once he bounces back. DDR was impactful with these guys and their development and Pat misses him. Things will settle and Patrick will bounce back.

Can you demonstrate something he's doing different this year to impress you compared to his first four seasons? Just saying "he has flashed" doesn't seem to mean anything. He's had three good games, which is about what he's averaged since he was a rookie.

I didn't say it was different.

ESPN does a good job of laying out stats by month. He was playing well up until January. Maybe somethings going bad off the court, I don't know.
https://www.espn.com/nba/player/gamelog/_/id/4431687/patrick-williams

[ImSlower]

I don't understand what you're getting at, then. Are you expecting him to improve his play this year? Next year? Or are you content with his play. I'm not sure, either, what you mean by "bounce back". What do you expect him to return to?

[GoBlue72391]

Patrick will be fine. He has flashed this year. Is he a disappointment? Absolutely, but he doesn't need to be much to be impactful. He will be a easy rotational 3 and D guy once he bounces back. DDR was impactful with these guys and their development and Pat misses him. Things will settle and Patrick will bounce back.

What would need to happen in order for him to not be considered fine by your standards? You must have an incredibly low bar.

This is about as bad of a season he could conceivably have. This is just about worst case scenario, other than like a catastrophic knee injury or something.

I'm honestly not sure what he could do worse.

[vxmike]

So you have a guy who not only underperformed his draft place, showed near-zero improvement over 4 years, and demonstrated no motor.

Was giving this guy a 5 year guaranteed deal the proper decision?

[panthermark]

He will be fine. It will be a steal of a contract.

Man, I thought this was sarcasm.

[GoBlue72391]

So you have a guy who not only underperformed his draft place, showed near-zero improvement over 4 years, and demonstrated no motor.

Was giving this guy a 5 year guaranteed deal the proper decision?

Nope. It was a bad decision then and it's a bad decision now and it'll be a bad decision in 4 years. So many more sensible options to choose from and we chose the worst one.

We should have let him test the market and matched whatever he was offered if we were deadset on keeping him, because no team would have offered him 5/$90M, that's for sure. We bid against ourselves like we always do. Better yet, we should have traded him when he still had value.

[GoBlue72391]

He will be fine. It will be a steal of a contract.

Man, I thought this was sarcasm.

He's a toxic optimist.

[Mk0]

I just watched a reel of his rookie year and he was just so much faster. Not sure if he bulked up too much or what. I have been saying he is playing this season with oven mitts and cement shoes on but jfc I didn't realize just how bad it really was.

Wouldn't be such an issue if he wasn't so slow to process things. Now he hesitates on everything and isn't fast enough to do anything about it. Which is why he just parks his butt on the 3pt line.

[Guru]

Patrick will be fine. He has flashed this year. Is he a disappointment? Absolutely, but he doesn't need to be much to be impactful. He will be a easy rotational 3 and D guy once he bounces back. DDR was impactful with these guys and their development and Pat misses him. Things will settle and Patrick will bounce back.

What would need to happen in order for him to not be considered fine by your standards? You must have an incredibly low bar.

I would have to have had one of those men in black neuralyzers that made me forget that December and November existed and then someone would have to go through the entirety of the internet and delete all history of those two months.

[Dez]

Patrick will be fine. He has flashed this year. Is he a disappointment? Absolutely, but he doesn't need to be much to be impactful. He will be a easy rotational 3 and D guy once he bounces back. DDR was impactful with these guys and their development and Pat misses him. Things will settle and Patrick will bounce back.

What would need to happen in order for him to not be considered fine by your standards? You must have an incredibly low bar.

I would have to have had one of those men in black neuralyzers that made me forget that December and November existed and then someone would have to go through the entirety of the internet and delete all history of those two months.

So yes you do have an incredibly low bar.

[Guru]

What would need to happen in order for him to not be considered fine by your standards? You must have an incredibly low bar.

I would have to have had one of those men in black neuralyzers that made me forget that December and November existed and then someone would have to go through the entirety of the internet and delete all history of those two months.

So yes you do have an incredibly low bar.

11ppg and 37%3P in December
11ppg, 4.6rpg, 1s, 40%3P in November

Tha't's not a low bar. That's a fine rotational forward.

[Dez]

I would have to have had one of those men in black neuralyzers that made me forget that December and November existed and then someone would have to go through the entirety of the internet and delete all history of those two months.

So yes you do have an incredibly low bar.

11ppg and 37%3P in December
11ppg, 4.6rpg, 1s, 40%3P in November

Tha't's not a low bar. That's a fine rotational forward.

It's not a low bar you're right, it's an incredibly low bar.

20 million a season for that production is deplorable, not to mention the Bulls are better with him off the floor.

[MalagaBulls]

Can we honestly now label him a BUST? He just isn't ever going to get any better than he is now.

[HearshotKDS]

I've never liked the player as a prospect - I dont think you can reliably teach aggression or fix motor issues past puberty, but I thought he was like 1 rebound and 3 ppg per 36 away from being a good value 3 & D guy on his contract. I did not see coming this plummet of his efficiency. His low volume low efficiency scoring is tough to offset and we are a ton of minutes into the season for him to be 6-7% TS off his previous career average. Its worrying to me.