Sean Williams

legacyinthemakin89c · Post #1 » by **legacyinthemakin89c** » Tue Jan 20, 2009 5:45 pm

Hey I was just really curious about this guy. After seeing him play last year, I thought he had incredible defensive potential and thought he was going to be the steal of the draft and now I'm hearing teams would rather have Ager instead of him in a trade? He hasn't played much this year so I was hoping you guys could tell me why? I know he was considered a guy with a lot of baggage, but I thought he was going to be an awesome compliment to Lopez.

Revolutionistt · Post #2 » by **Revolutionistt** » Tue Jan 20, 2009 5:49 pm

I was doing back flips when we drafted this kid and he showed enormous potential last season, i think he had 8 blocks in one game last season. but the frank factor soon settled in and it was all over......

ecuhus1981 · Post #3 » by **ecuhus1981** » Tue Jan 20, 2009 6:13 pm

The whole "Ager > Sean" thing is from one team who already have 3 similar players (Chicago), and is based solely on money, namely Sean's guaranteed contract next year (Ager is an expiring).

This news has dented his trade value, but he still is a valuable commodity.

Rockice_8 · Post #4 » by **Rockice_8** » Tue Jan 20, 2009 6:24 pm

He had a real nice game in the d-league last week 27pts. 16 rbs. 2 blocks. If we do this trade wit Chi and we continue to fade in the next couple of weeks I want him back up in the NBA to back up Yi. Give him another shot if continues to work hard in the D-league.

sonic-ben · Post #5 » by **sonic-ben** » Tue Jan 20, 2009 6:34 pm

The Nets and Bulls have discussed a deal that would send Larry Hughes to New Jersey for Bobby Simmons and Maurice Ager, league sources said. Sean Williams was offered instead of Ager, but Chicago wasn't interested.

Both sides are considering it, although the Bulls are talking to many teams about Hughes, who is signed through next season.

Nets need to bring down demands for Williams ....
Depending how the draft works out the THUNDER may be interested

S.I.C. GM · Post #6 » by **S.I.C. GM** » Tue Jan 20, 2009 6:45 pm

ecuhus1981 wrote:The whole "Ager > Sean" thing is from one team who already have 3 similar players (Chicago), and is based solely on money, namely Sean's guaranteed contract next year (Ager is an expiring).

This news has dented his trade value, but he still is a valuable commodity.

I totally agree with you. Why would chi want a thomas-lite and Noah-lite? This has nothing to do with his potential or skill.

Preludepunk27 · Post #7 » by **Preludepunk27** » Tue Jan 20, 2009 7:10 pm

Yeah besides the money, I can't see Chicago wanting Sean. What they need is a high character vet big man to help with the development of their young big men, not to add another high risk, high reward player like Sean. They need front court help, but a deal with Sean isn't in the best interest for them. I think they personally should pull the trigger on Ager/Simmons for Hughes, gives them small relief this year and Bobby still comes off the books next year. Then try to move Hinrich or Nocioni for a vet big man to sure up their front court and help with the development of Noah and Thomas. Just my personal opinion. I'm not a bulls fan so I could possibly be way off base and I apologize if that's the case.

legacyinthemakin89c · Post #8 » by **legacyinthemakin89c** » Tue Jan 20, 2009 8:09 pm

Alright thanks for the input guys. I really like Williams and think he would be a much better compliment to Lopez then Yi would be, so hopefully it works out for you guys. If not maybe my Pistons can pick him up.

Revolutionistt · Post #9 » by **Revolutionistt** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 1:47 am

legacyinthemakin89c wrote:Alright thanks for the input guys. I really like Williams and think he would be a much better compliment to Lopez then Yi would be, so hopefully it works out for you guys. If not maybe my Pistons can pick him up.

you can have him for sheed straight up.

legacyinthemakin89c · Post #10 » by **legacyinthemakin89c** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 1:54 am

Throw in Harris just to make the contracts match and I'll throw in Stuckey, call it a night.

buddy23 · Post #11 » by **buddy23** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 10:36 am

we should trade him for robin lopez, let brook play his natural 4 spot or have robin come off the bench and let yi play pf. it would also make both the brothers more comfortable in the environment as such.

jeff1624 · Post #12 » by **jeff1624** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 12:31 pm

^^I wouldn't be opposed to that deal...

But heck, i'd trade him for a towel boy at this point..

Preludepunk27 · Post #13 » by **Preludepunk27** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 12:47 pm

haha as much as I'd love the twin towers playing on the same team together, We'd have to give up more than just Sean haha.

Revolutionistt · Post #14 » by **Revolutionistt** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 1:44 pm

the only time id want to see robin lopez on the floor the same time as the nets is when hes playing for the other team. otherwise keep him as far away form this organization as possible. i wouldnt trade coach frank for robin lopez. come on guys you disappoint me. i know golden state would never do this unless they were smokin some sour d, but id do a swill for anthony randolph or something along those lines. but robin lopez??? no.

Preludepunk27 · Post #15 » by **Preludepunk27** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:13 pm

I admit he's kind of redundant since we have boone, but come on don't even mention a guy we that we literally have 0% shot of landing for Sean to try to make an argument stronger. The kid is 20 years old and shows some promise defensively and isn't as worthless offensively as people originally thought. I have more faith in Robin learning a 12 foot jumper and evolving into a Varejao-type hustle player coming off the bench than Boone. You can make a solid argument for saying all the reasons why Robin should never be in a Nets uniform, however, you did nothing to show that, then you just drop a pipe dream name or something along those lines we could never land for Sean.

jeff1624 · Post #16 » by **jeff1624** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:14 pm

^^You do realize a team just prefered Maurice Ager over Sean Williams right??

S.I.C. GM · Post #17 » by **S.I.C. GM** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:50 pm

jeff1624 wrote:^^You do realize a team just prefered Maurice Ager over Sean Williams right??

Stop!!!

They didnt need him. Ager might get waived if this trade goes down. SWill would have ride the bench and wouldnt get PT.

Granted SWill has had issues, THEY didnt want him because it didnt make sense to get him. They wouldnt be able to trade him again before the trade deadline. Why would they want him?

jeff1624 · Post #18 » by **jeff1624** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 3:12 pm

^^You're basically contradicting yourself. If he had any value at all he shouldn't be a problem to move. It's not like he makes 5+ mil a year, if he had any value at all we wouldn't be adding him as filler nor would the other team prefer an expiring over commiting to pay a guy with potential a measley 1.5. Even if a team doesn't need a certain player, if the player has value and is given to you in a trade for practically nothing you jump on it.

Let's face it, Sean has no trade value at all right now..

S.I.C. GM · Post #19 » by **S.I.C. GM** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 4:25 pm

jeff1624 wrote:^^You're basically contradicting yourself. If he had any value at all he shouldn't be a problem to move. It's not like he makes 5+ mil a year, if he had any value at all we wouldn't be adding him as filler nor would the other team prefer an expiring over commiting to pay a guy with potential a measley 1.5. Even if a team doesn't need a certain player, if the player has value and is given to you in a trade for practically nothing you jump on it.

Let's face it, Sean has no trade value at all right now..

I am not disagreeing with SWill's trade value, but in this instance IMO it doesnt make sense for Chicago to trade for someone they already have in three other players on their team.

As for contradicting myself, isnt there a timeframe for trading someone after they have been traded to your team? That is what I was referring to when I meant they wouldnt be able to trade him.

Preludepunk27 · Post #20 » by **Preludepunk27** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 4:33 pm

jeff1624 wrote:^^You're basically contradicting yourself. If he had any value at all he shouldn't be a problem to move. It's not like he makes 5+ mil a year, if he had any value at all we wouldn't be adding him as filler nor would the other team prefer an expiring over commiting to pay a guy with potential a measley 1.5. Even if a team doesn't need a certain player, if the player has value and is given to you in a trade for practically nothing you jump on it.

Let's face it, Sean has no trade value at all right now..

You ride the short bus, Ager's contract isn't guaranteed next year, Sean's is plus they have a Tyrus Thomas who essentially is a similar player but with a better offensive game. The would be counterproductive to both of them to include Williams in this deal. It doesn't save Chicago a ton of money, but it's strictly financial reasonings and team oriented reasoning for why they didn't want Sean. Get your facts straight. Yes, Sean has low value, but that's that the reason they don't want him.