A Closer Look at Derrick Williams

Czvosec said:

The point is, anyone can throw out random examples to back up their "opinion." I didn't realize this was a formal debate where everything had to be spelled out clear as day. The poster I quoted used Brandon and LJ to support his opinion that Williams will be a better player. From my point of view, this was not a fair analogy, so I threw out two random names.

I thought points A and B were easily connectable. Didn't realize I needed to build a bridge and provide directions.

Click to expand...

and the poster you replied to was replying to other posters citing pro player comparisons as basis for a variety of opinions.

you really cant fault jake for his comparisons than the comparisons to Michael Beasley the pot smoker. Im tired of seeing Williams being associated with poor character guys who make bad decisions while kyrie gets associated with strong character guys.

Initially Willaims was associated with Beasley and West. West isnt really a bad character guy so the focus has been on Beasley. Whose character can be attacked and the natural insinuation that Williams is the same guy, has a negative connotation that Williams doesnt deserve.

I know some people say it's thinking too far down the road but the 2012 draft class will be STACKED with PFs (Sullinger, McAdoo, Davis, Jones, etc.)... If the Cavs miss out on Williams, who I don't think will be a perennial all-star, it's not like the Cavs missed the boat on getting their PF for the future...

While Williams is a good player and I'd be glad to have him and even trade up for him, it's not worth giving up a ton of assets for... The Cavs can still get a piece at #4 without giving up a ton of assets or even move back, gain assets and still get a building block..

Williams is good but the fact that the draft is a bit weak at the top is inflating Williams value some, IMO...

Smooth said:

I know some people say it's thinking too far down the road but the 2012 draft class will be STACKED with PFs (Sullinger, McAdoo, Davis, Jones, etc.)... If the Cavs miss out on Williams, who I don't think will be a perennial all-star, it's not like the Cavs missed the boat on getting their PF for the future...

While Williams is a good player and I'd be glad to have him and even trade up for him, it's not worth giving up a ton of assets for... The Cavs can still get a piece at #4 without giving up a ton of assets or even move back, gain assets and still get a building block..

Williams is good but the fact that the draft is a bit weak at the top is inflating Williams value some, IMO...

Click to expand...

Agree that why Kyrie and jonas makes the most sense, 2012 is full of 2 guards, swingmen and athletic PFs, a top 15 pick in 2012 should get you a good young player who feel a need

Why not trade Hickson for #2 straight up? He could play C on the wolves. only reason I'm throwing it out there is bc Kahn might do it.

Forgetting the 2012 class which is a valid argument when talking about taking Williams 1. I personally feel that the Cavs can get away with taking Williams 1 and either Irving or Knight 4. If Rubio is coming over to play for Minny there is NO WAY Kahn takes Irving. He just can't do it. His job is on the line and his fan base would eat him alive if he takes yet ANOTHER PG. They have to take Kanter or Jonas. That leaves Knight and Irving for Utah to choose from. The Cavs have the leftovers at 4 to get their PG. I'm a big fan of Knight so I'd be happy with Williams and Knight. Maybe Utah has fallen head over heels for Knight and they're comfortable with him and not knowing much about Irving (he didn't work out for them) take Knight over Irving at 3.
The only thing that worries me about taking Williams 1 and "knowing" one of the PGs will be at 4 is a trade down from Minny. Sacramento or another PG desperate team (LA) may make a move to get to the 2 spot. If that happens we're looking at Williams and Jonas. Not a bad draft when you're extremely high on Williams (like I am) and there are plenty of reports saying Jonas is a franchise Center down the line.

I can't wait for the draft to get here so we stop debating who will be one our team, and instead start talking about rotations, trades, and how good we will or wont be for 2012.

Smooth said:

I know some people say it's thinking too far down the road but the 2012 draft class will be STACKED with PFs (Sullinger, McAdoo, Davis, Jones, etc.)... If the Cavs miss out on Williams, who I don't think will be a perennial all-star, it's not like the Cavs missed the boat on getting their PF for the future...

Click to expand...

bu-bu-bu-but we've got JJ freaking Hickson!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At least for the 'time being'

I am officially on "draft Williams at #1" bandwagon. If CLE can secure the #2, I would still take Irving. The key factor is that Williams is the safer pick; if Irving comes up lame, then the franchise is not decimated. The scenario where Irving falls to #4 is interesting; but I would be OK with either Knight or Walker here.

It seems that most discount Williams ability to play SF in the calculation on whether to select him at #1. Allow yourself to consider "what if he actually can?" You can then retain Hickson and/or Varejao and, with the other players already in place, have a solid front line with depth going forward. The Cavs have evaluated him and have certainly made a determination as to his position options.

If he can't and must be moved to PF, you can move Hickson at the trade deadline or after the season. If Hickson somehow turns into a star next year, work it out!

CommD said:

I am officially on "draft Williams at #1" bandwagon. If CLE can secure the #2, I would still take Irving. The key factor is that Williams is the safer pick; if Irving comes up lame, then the franchise is not decimated. The scenario where Irving falls to #4 is interesting; but I would be OK with either Knight or Walker here.

It seems that most discount Williams ability to play SF in the calculation on whether to select him at #1. Allow yourself to consider "what if he actually can?" You can then retain Hickson and/or Varejao and, with the other players already in place, have a solid front line with depth going forward. The Cavs have evaluated him and have certainly made a determination as to his position options.

If he can't and must be moved to PF, you can move Hickson at the trade deadline or after the season. If Hickson somehow turns into a star next year, work it out!

Click to expand...

Irving is not falling to #4. His trade value alone on draft day would guarantee that he goes #2. Williams is good, but we just don't need a tweener PF as much as we need a PG.

It blows my mind that there are so many people who don't get that basic truth.

WhoWeAre said:

Irving is not falling to #4. His trade value alone on draft day would guarantee that he goes #2. Williams is good, but we just don't need a tweener PF as much as we need a PG.

It blows my mind that there are so many people who don't get that basic truth.

Click to expand...

Actually, SF is a greater team need than PG as the team is currently constructed. Again, you discount the possibility that Williams can play this position. If selected #1, he would certainly be given the opportunity, and would likely be in the Cavs' starting lineup at SF at season start. If he ultimately has to be moved to PF, the team would proceed with the appropriate personnel moves.

I agree that Irving falling to #4 is unlikely. Cavs should be in the mix to acquire the 2nd pick at which point they could select Irving; or if not, go on to the BPA at #4 (Knight, Walker, available center).

CommD said:

Actually, SF is a greater team need than PG as the team is currently constructed. Again, you discount the possibility that Williams can play this position. If selected #1, he would certainly be given the opportunity, and would likely be in the Cavs' starting lineup at SF at season start. If he ultimately has to be moved to PF, the team would proceed with the appropriate personnel moves.

I agree that Irving falling to #4 is unlikely. Cavs should be in the mix to acquire the 2nd pick at which point they could select Irving; or if not, go on to the BPA at #4 (Knight, Walker, available center).

Click to expand...

NBA draft is not based on positions of need, unless you are a contender. Cavs HAVE to select the best player available, at any given spot, not just at #4.

Jezzar said:

NBA draft is not based on positions of need, unless you are a contender. Cavs HAVE to select the best player available, at any given spot, not just at #4.

Click to expand...

and he was replying to a post about pg being a need.

Either way your agreeing with him. irving should not be drafted on the basis of someones projected need for point guard but ultimately if he is a better player than williams and that is questionable.

Talent wise you also have 2 other point guards with high potential with a few centers ranked highly just because they are indeed centers.

Everyone else up for lottery picks are interchangeable talent wise and a matter of looking for the diamonds in the rough.

Another thing is not all teams draft bpa. quite a few teams draft on need so that is certainly a factor when projecting a players availability but Grant has stated several times he is drafting BPA

Jezzar said:

NBA draft is not based on positions of need, unless you are a contender. Cavs HAVE to select the best player available, at any given spot, not just at #4.

Click to expand...

I agree that absent the potential for chronic injury, Irving would be the BPA at #1. The injury potential makes that debatable; looking at the Cavs' particular situation, I just feel the BPA at #1 for them is Williams.

CommD said:

I agree that absent the potential for chronic injury, Irving would be the BPA at #1. The injury potential makes that debatable; looking at the Cavs' particular situation, I just feel the BPA at #1 for them is Williams.

Click to expand...

Kyrie's injury was a freak accident, and like another poster in another thread said, name one player that has had toe problems that has hindered their career.

By using your example, I could say Williams is much more of a risk of being a "potential for chronic injury" because of his style of play.

If Williams could play the 3 in this league, which he can't in the eyes of all GMs, I would have no problem with this argument. Since he can't, can we please put this to rest!

LeJohn23 said:

Kyrie's injury was a freak accident, and like another poster in another thread said, name one player that has had toe problems that has hindered their career.

By using your example, I could say Williams is much more of a risk of being a "potential for chronic injury" because of his style of play.

If Williams could play the 3 in this league, which he can't in the eyes of all GMs, I would have no problem with this argument. Since he can't, can we please put this to rest!

Click to expand...

It will be put to rest by Grant and Gilbert on draft day. Their evaluations are the ones which matter. Cavs' fans will then be content to root for the team at hand.