Pat Williams Discussion - Out 4-6 Mo (late Feb to late April)

[drosestruts]

I've said this in other threads over the years about young players and Bulls fans and I'll say it again. Bulls fans talk about wanting youth, high ceiling, high upside guys but damn do they not want to give those players time to develop.

Wait until you get a chance to watch Scottie Barnes on Monday.

There are exceptions to this rule but for the most part, if a player is going to go on to be very good, he shows significant signs of it really early. Not just flashes but true alpha personality stuff. They go on to improve from there but the foundation is there on day 1.

When you look around with all of the young players that the Bulls "failed" to develop, they didn't go on to do much in other situations. Eddy Curry, Tyson Chandler, Crawford, Snell, etc. Recently it looks like Wendell, Lauri, Valentine and others are the same people they were here.

The Jimmy Butlers of the NBA that continuously develop from a low base are very rare. More often, the good players look more like Derrick Rose who hit the ground running and got better from there.

I sure hope that Pat goes the Jimmy Butler route because if Pat just gets to being an average player, the Bulls are contenders this year.

I am fine trading Pat, but I like the point about Barnes. TOR is a rebuilding team and Barnes is a guy they are focused on involving in their offense as a secondary playmaker. We have 4 other starters who are near-elite playmakers, so Pat's role on offense is 5th option scorer (spot-up corner 3 guy)/non-play maker. His role is just to shoot accurately and often enough to keep his defender in the corner. On defense, it's been to guard the opposing team's best F and stick to him. Neither role will make it easy for him to get RB's. I would still like to see him be more aggressive, but his success this season isn't going to likely show up in stats.

I do not view Toronto as a rebuilding team. Siakam is a legit all-star player. FVV, Dragic and Anunoby are all legit starting-level players, Dragic and VanFleet have been big playoff contributors.

I think it's off to say "Barnes puts up better numbers cause he's on a rebuilding team". Barnes in three games has looked better than Williams did all of last year, and the team last year was much worse than this Raptors roster.

The Raptors aren't forcing Barnes' hand, Barnes just is more aggressive and arguably better than Williams.

Sure Williams is our 5th option, but Barnes is usually at best the 4th option behind 3 of VanFleet, Dragic, Anunoby and/or Siakam.

[MrSparkle]

All I'm seeing in this thread is reactionary impatience. This board never gets tired of wanting to trade our own players for other teams trash and it's absolutely maddening.

Also... he's coming off of an injury. But let's not let facts get in the way of a good ol' NBA 2k trade proposal right?

Sent from my SM-F707U using RealGM mobile app

Last year Zach should be traded high for beans and we were ready to build around Pat, Donovan sucked with his drop scheme, AKME were sitting on their asses with nothing to show for it. Then the deadline happened with a 50% roster re-haul, the team stumbled - Vucevic was a big mistake and a declining bum and we were stuck in a treadmill. Then Demar got signed and AKME were huge fools.

Then we win 7 pre-season and reg. season games against bottom barrell and we're ready to trade all remaining assets for a top-40 player (starting PF) to make a 1-2 year finals run in a conference with several superstar teams.

Oh yeah, it's been 10 months since the start of last season.

[stl705]

Drosestruts - I agree on P-Will just not aggressive enough offensively. Seems like he just thinks his role is “game manager”, maybe it is, but that doesnt mean he can’t go above and beyond to make plays. Game manager sounds good on paper but imo P-Will has to be a more aggressive scorer for this team to be successful in the playoffs. I think he’s gotta rely on his slashing and cutting without the ball, and also post up much more and utilizing that size/speed/length.

[MGB8]

So we're judging a guy who turned 20 in late August and missed camp with an injury as not-good-enough after 3 games into his 2nd season....

Ok.... (though this seems kind of inconsistent with how some of the same folks continued to back WCJr and Coby through their 2nd seasons - and those guys were / are much more limited)....

I mean, if you are talking "is Patrick Williams a future top 10 player"... sure, I think that you can come to the conclusion that he hasn't flashed the type of superior talent that would lead you to think that's very likely. Kobe at 20 (in his 3rd season) scored 20 ppg on pretty good efficiency, while a guy like Giannis who was merely "meh" in his full 2nd season at 20, or Kawhi, who was meh into his age 22 4rd season, are both rare in terms of "late bloomer into top talent." Much more common are the Lukas, Lebrons, Durants, etc. who show right away.

But good player overall? All-star? Long-term piece?

I mean, by this logic, the Bulls should have dumped Zach LaVine --- and Jimmy Butler also, but before they actually did. RJ Barrett is never going to be anything - and why on earth did the Knicks pick up proven bum Julius Randle? Celtics made a big mistake keeping Jaylen Brown, Toronto was nuts in keeping Siakam afer his 7.3 ppg / 4.5 rbp age 23 2nd season, and Pacers kept a loser in Paul George given his 12.1 ppg, 5.6 rpg in 30 mpg age 21 2nd season...

ORRRR.....

People are being utterly ridiculous.

[The 6ft Hurdle]

Pat Williams is a misfit, but I feel that this is temporary.

He's a misfit only because the only starting role available to him is one in which we want him to be a post defender/rebounder. Seems like we drafted him to be primarily an option 1-option 1A, and as everyone knows we've got plenty of those at the moment.

I don't think there's any compelling reason though to trade the guy unless they're offering up KD, AD, or someone who has the chance to vault us into serious playoff contention. No need for proactivity, just patience. Let kid get his sea legs.

[Kurt Heimlich]

It'll be fun to see how he looks compared to another prototype big wing from FSU with "untapped" offensive potential in Scottie Barnes tonight. Early returns seems to me like Barnes has more of "it" (motor/aggressiveness/general engagement in game action) than Pat has shown. But I'm certainly not writing Pat off at 20 years old, 3 games into his sophmore season. But the tendencies he's shown so far are also impossible to ignore.

[Dan Z]

It'll be fun to see how he looks compared to another prototype big wing from FSU with "untapped" offensive potential in Scottie Barnes tonight. Early returns seems to me like Barnes has more of "it" (motor/aggressiveness/general engagement in game action) than Pat has shown. But I'm certainly not writing Pat off at 20 years old, 3 games into his sophmore season. But the tendencies he's shown so far are also impossible to ignore.

Hopefully Pat sees it as a challenge and takes it to Barnes. But are they going to be guarding one another?

[Kurt Heimlich]

It'll be fun to see how he looks compared to another prototype big wing from FSU with "untapped" offensive potential in Scottie Barnes tonight. Early returns seems to me like Barnes has more of "it" (motor/aggressiveness/general engagement in game action) than Pat has shown. But I'm certainly not writing Pat off at 20 years old, 3 games into his sophmore season. But the tendencies he's shown so far are also impossible to ignore.

Hopefully Pat sees it as a challenge and takes it to Barnes. But are they going to be guarding one another?

I'm not particularly intrigued on how they match up 1 on 1 as I don't see either as special, Zach Lavine level offensive talents, but more so how active they are and how noticeably they impact the game. Be it in transition (defense and offense), shot making, rebounding, as well as how they play within the half court offense/defense etc etc.

[Dan Z]

It'll be fun to see how he looks compared to another prototype big wing from FSU with "untapped" offensive potential in Scottie Barnes tonight. Early returns seems to me like Barnes has more of "it" (motor/aggressiveness/general engagement in game action) than Pat has shown. But I'm certainly not writing Pat off at 20 years old, 3 games into his sophmore season. But the tendencies he's shown so far are also impossible to ignore.

Hopefully Pat sees it as a challenge and takes it to Barnes. But are they going to be guarding one another?

I'm not particularly intrigued on how they match up 1 on 1 as I don't see either as special, Zach Lavine level offensive talents, but more so how active they are and how noticeably they impact the game. Be it in transition (defense and offense), shot making, rebounding, as well as how they play within the half court offense/defense etc etc.

I can see that, but is it fair to compare the two? Yes they're close in age, but they're different players and it's not as if the Bulls had a choice between them.

[GoBlue72391]

When Perdue and Gill talk about PW sitting down with a coach to watch film what I wish they get some old film from the 70's and have him watch what Bob Love used to do. At the same size Love wasn't what you see in a PF today but he could post up and drive to the basket, there was no 3pt line so he worked the mid range game with a high release jumpshot and he always took the best offensive forward on the other team.

I think Rodman would be the one. Show how he anticipated what players were going to do, the angle of the shot, the seams he slipped in. That would be great right now. In the off season he should watch ever Rodman rebound and study.

PS. I too loved Butterbean. If he played in this era with the 3 point line, he'd be a top 10 guy at the least. He shot a ton of 3 pointers in his day that only counted 2. Nobody discouraged those shots either.

I don't think you can teach what Rodman did. He was a different breed.

[GoBlue72391]

The problem with analyzing PW is everyone is affected by sunk cost fallacy. Because he was drafted high, people are having a tough time analyzing him. That decision should not impact the next decision. Just imagine if he was drafted 30th instead -

You probably wouldn’t say he was underperforming. But he also might not be starting.

If he was draft 30 and you were comparing him to Kawhi at all people would be ecstatic - but because he was 4th, people are upset that he isn’t executing at a higher level. But in reality the only thing that’s changed is your perspective.

While it affects his salary, his draft position should really have no impact on how we move forward with him. From a team building standpoint, Pat is the player he is regardless of where we drafted him.

He would have been traded or cut already if he was the 30th pick, or at the very least would be in the G League most of the time.

[MGB8]

The problem with analyzing PW is everyone is affected by sunk cost fallacy. Because he was drafted high, people are having a tough time analyzing him. That decision should not impact the next decision. Just imagine if he was drafted 30th instead -

You probably wouldn’t say he was underperforming. But he also might not be starting.

If he was draft 30 and you were comparing him to Kawhi at all people would be ecstatic - but because he was 4th, people are upset that he isn’t executing at a higher level. But in reality the only thing that’s changed is your perspective.

While it affects his salary, his draft position should really have no impact on how we move forward with him. From a team building standpoint, Pat is the player he is regardless of where we drafted him.

He would have been traded or cut already if he was the 30th pick, or at the very least would be in the G League most of the time.

No, he wouldn’t be / have been.

Billy wants to win, now. Pat isn’t getting entitlement minutes. And Donovan knows more about Pat as a basketball player, and basketball, generally, than you do.

[Kurt Heimlich]

Hopefully Pat sees it as a challenge and takes it to Barnes. But are they going to be guarding one another?

I'm not particularly intrigued on how they match up 1 on 1 as I don't see either as special, Zach Lavine level offensive talents, but more so how active they are and how noticeably they impact the game. Be it in transition (defense and offense), shot making, rebounding, as well as how they play within the half court offense/defense etc etc.

I can see that, but is it fair to compare the two? Yes they're close in age, but they're different players and it's not as if the Bulls had a choice between them.

Agreed there was of course no option for the bulls between the two. I'm not judging the pick. Just curious on how they compare based on some similarities they share. Namely commonalities positionally speaking and some style of play as they both came out as big defensive wings with upside offensive hopes. Both FSU. Both even 4th picks in back to back years randomly enough.

[GoBlue72391]

So we're judging a guy who turned 20 in late August and missed camp with an injury as not-good-enough after 3 games into his 2nd season....

Ok.... (though this seems kind of inconsistent with how some of the same folks continued to back WCJr and Coby through their 2nd seasons - and those guys were / are much more limited)....

I mean, if you are talking "is Patrick Williams a future top 10 player"... sure, I think that you can come to the conclusion that he hasn't flashed the type of superior talent that would lead you to think that's very likely. Kobe at 20 (in his 3rd season) scored 20 ppg on pretty good efficiency, while a guy like Giannis who was merely "meh" in his full 2nd season at 20, or Kawhi, who was meh into his age 22 4rd season, are both rare in terms of "late bloomer into top talent." Much more common are the Lukas, Lebrons, Durants, etc. who show right away.

But good player overall? All-star? Long-term piece?

I mean, by this logic, the Bulls should have dumped Zach LaVine --- and Jimmy Butler also, but before they actually did. RJ Barrett is never going to be anything - and why on earth did the Knicks pick up proven bum Julius Randle? Celtics made a big mistake keeping Jaylen Brown, Toronto was nuts in keeping Siakam afer his 7.3 ppg / 4.5 rbp age 23 2nd season, and Pacers kept a loser in Paul George given his 12.1 ppg, 5.6 rpg in 30 mpg age 21 2nd season...

ORRRR.....

People are being utterly ridiculous.

It's less about his lack of production and more about his lack of an edge. Zach and Jimmy may have taken a while to develop as well, but they flashed what made them great from day one. Both of those guys are dogs. They're not scared and they don't back down, and that was true from the moment they stepped in the league.

Here we are in year two just hoping Pat will take the open shots he's presented and hustle and put in an effort instead of coasting. Two totally different scenarios.

[sco]

The problem with analyzing PW is everyone is affected by sunk cost fallacy. Because he was drafted high, people are having a tough time analyzing him. That decision should not impact the next decision. Just imagine if he was drafted 30th instead -

You probably wouldn’t say he was underperforming. But he also might not be starting.

If he was draft 30 and you were comparing him to Kawhi at all people would be ecstatic - but because he was 4th, people are upset that he isn’t executing at a higher level. But in reality the only thing that’s changed is your perspective.

While it affects his salary, his draft position should really have no impact on how we move forward with him. From a team building standpoint, Pat is the player he is regardless of where we drafted him.

He would have been traded or cut already if he was the 30th pick, or at the very least would be in the G League most of the time.

No, he wouldn’t be / have been.

Billy wants to win, now. Pat isn’t getting entitlement minutes. And Donovan knows more about Pat as a basketball player, and basketball, generally, than you do.

I sorta disagree. While Pat is the best available PF, but we don't have a better PF because the FO is invested in Pat succeeding.

[GoBlue72391]

The problem with analyzing PW is everyone is affected by sunk cost fallacy. Because he was drafted high, people are having a tough time analyzing him. That decision should not impact the next decision. Just imagine if he was drafted 30th instead -

You probably wouldn’t say he was underperforming. But he also might not be starting.

If he was draft 30 and you were comparing him to Kawhi at all people would be ecstatic - but because he was 4th, people are upset that he isn’t executing at a higher level. But in reality the only thing that’s changed is your perspective.

While it affects his salary, his draft position should really have no impact on how we move forward with him. From a team building standpoint, Pat is the player he is regardless of where we drafted him.

He would have been traded or cut already if he was the 30th pick, or at the very least would be in the G League most of the time.

No, he wouldn’t be / have been.

Billy wants to win, now. Pat isn’t getting entitlement minutes. And Donovan knows more about Pat as a basketball player, and basketball, generally, than you do.

We traded Gafford midway through his second year and he was far more productive then PWill has been. If PWill had been drafted 30th overall he wouldn't have started all of last season and may have not even been in the rotation. Given that, we would have no reason to be high on PWill anymore than we were with guys like Snell or Teague; young guys with obvious tools but questions about where they'll ever be able to put it all together to make use of them.

As for that Billy Donovan remark...yeah, I would certainly hope he knows more about basketball than I do. But what's your point? He doesn't exactly have a ton of options besides PWill.

[Hold That]

Pat has no dog in him. Look at scottie Barnes. Same schools similar size and gets after it..

Look at Pats rebounding numbers with his frame, that lets you know how mentally lazy he is on the court. It’s one thing to be timid offensively but he doesn’t even crash the boards. He’s mentally lazy just like Lauri, you can’t teach a player to have dog or some grit consistently. You either have it or you don’t. Even the ones who develop slowly show grit and DONT get complacent for minutes on end. They always make their presence felt in some way..

This is why I called him Tim Thomas. You guys will come around to seeing that. He could be super talented but he just doesn’t have the get up and go you’d like to see.

[Dan Z]

So we're judging a guy who turned 20 in late August and missed camp with an injury as not-good-enough after 3 games into his 2nd season....

Ok.... (though this seems kind of inconsistent with how some of the same folks continued to back WCJr and Coby through their 2nd seasons - and those guys were / are much more limited)....

I mean, if you are talking "is Patrick Williams a future top 10 player"... sure, I think that you can come to the conclusion that he hasn't flashed the type of superior talent that would lead you to think that's very likely. Kobe at 20 (in his 3rd season) scored 20 ppg on pretty good efficiency, while a guy like Giannis who was merely "meh" in his full 2nd season at 20, or Kawhi, who was meh into his age 22 4rd season, are both rare in terms of "late bloomer into top talent." Much more common are the Lukas, Lebrons, Durants, etc. who show right away.

But good player overall? All-star? Long-term piece?

I mean, by this logic, the Bulls should have dumped Zach LaVine --- and Jimmy Butler also, but before they actually did. RJ Barrett is never going to be anything - and why on earth did the Knicks pick up proven bum Julius Randle? Celtics made a big mistake keeping Jaylen Brown, Toronto was nuts in keeping Siakam afer his 7.3 ppg / 4.5 rbp age 23 2nd season, and Pacers kept a loser in Paul George given his 12.1 ppg, 5.6 rpg in 30 mpg age 21 2nd season...

ORRRR.....

People are being utterly ridiculous.

It's less about his lack of production and more about his lack of an edge. Zach and Jimmy may have taken a while to develop as well, but they flashed what made them great from day one. Both of those guys are dogs. They're not scared and they don't back down, and that was true from the moment they stepped in the league.

Here we are in year two just hoping Pat will take the open shots he's presented and hustle and put in an effort instead of coasting. Two totally different scenarios.

I agree that Patrick Williams is too passive and I'd love to see him play with an edge. But with Butler nobody thought he'd take the leap that he did in his 4th season. At best most thought he'd just be a defensive specialist.

People had questions about Zach too, but his offensive game was generally pretty good early on.

[MGB8]

He would have been traded or cut already if he was the 30th pick, or at the very least would be in the G League most of the time.

No, he wouldn’t be / have been.

Billy wants to win, now. Pat isn’t getting entitlement minutes. And Donovan knows more about Pat as a basketball player, and basketball, generally, than you do.

We traded Gafford midway through his second year and he was far more productive then PWill has been. If PWill had been drafted 30th overall he wouldn't have started all of last season and may have not even been in the rotation. Given that, we would have no reason to be high on PWill anymore than we were with guys like Snell or Teague; young guys with obvious tools but questions about where they'll ever be able to put it all together to make use of them.

As for that Billy Donovan remark...yeah, I would certainly hope he knows more about basketball than I do. But what's your point? He doesn't exactly have a ton of options besides PWill.

Gafford was tried and failed at center. Maybe some of that is Donovan’s scheme, but it remains the case - they tried Gafford at center, as a starter, and the results were awful.

Pat hasn’t actually failed at either SF or PF (really, combo-forward). He hasn’t been super productive, but he is efficient, net positive, and does what Donovan is asking him to do in that role.

[MGB8]

Pat has no dog in him. Look at scottie Barnes. Same schools similar size and gets after it..

Look at Pats rebounding numbers with his frame, that lets you know how mentally lazy he is on the court. It’s one thing to be timid offensively but he doesn’t even crash the boards. He’s mentally lazy just like Lauri, you can’t teach a player to have dog or some grit consistently. You either have it or you don’t. Even the ones who develop slowly show grit and DONT get complacent for minutes on end. They always make their presence felt in some way..

This is why I called him Tim Thomas. You guys will come around to seeing that. He could be super talented but he just doesn’t have the get up and go you’d like to see.

Tim Thomas didn’t lack aggression; he was just a Jack. That is why he was sent home.

This risk with Pat is that his personality is too similar to Markannen’s… but he is already significantly better on defense (both man and team).