Shelden Steps up.

[Diesel]

Shelden Williams steps up

All Hawks rookie Shelden Williams needed was a little more playing time to resume the productive ways he showed during the first two months of the season; when he started 27 games and ranked as the league's rookie leader in rebounds.

In five games this month, Williams is averaging 9.4 rebounds per game. He grabbed a season-high 16 rebounds in last week's win over Milwaukee and scored 14 points in Tuesday's win over Boston.

"Shelden [has been] one of several guys that we've had step up down the stretch," Woodson said of Williams, whose 23.3 minutes per game this month is his highest average of the season for any month. "That said, I think he can be even more active and more effective out there."

[Guest Walter]

The first half was another Woodson excuse machine. SW stepping up against NBDL-level talent is wonderful for Woodson and BK's job security, not so much for the Hawks.

In the last 5 games Roy is averaging 22 PPG/4.4 APG/4.2 RPG in 36 MPG...and he's been doing that all season AND we don't need to bench anyone, much less Josh Smith to give him enough minutes.

W

[vext]

Quote:

---

In the last 5 games Roy is averaging 22 PPG/4.4 APG/4.2 RPG in 36 MPG.

---

What does this have to do with the post about Shelden Williams putting up some numbers the past few games?

[AHF]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

In the last 5 games Roy is averaging 22 PPG/4.4 APG/4.2 RPG in 36 MPG.

---

What does this have to do with the post about Shelden Williams putting up some numbers the past few games?

---

Because Walter only sees Shelden in terms of what we have lost by passing up Roy.

[Sothron]

Not true. Walt also sees Shellhead for his complete inability to play defense, alter shots, block shots or do anything on offense except lumber into a position to set a screen.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

Not true. Walt also sees Shellhead for his complete inability to play defense, alter shots, block shots or do anything on offense except lumber into a position to set a screen.

---

Fair enough. However, I think it is all through the "what we could have had" lense which is why Walter sees Roy as relevant to this thread.

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

In the last 5 games Roy is averaging 22 PPG/4.4 APG/4.2 RPG in 36 MPG.

---

What does this have to do with the post about Shelden Williams putting up some numbers the past few games?

---

Because Walter only sees Shelden in terms of what we have lost by passing up Roy.

---

I definitely see SW in comparison to Roy, but not "only". Who here doesn't see MW in comparison to Paul or Deron?

W

[Johnnybravo4]

I don't because the only way we don't draft Marvin Williams is if Andrew Bogut was still on the board.

[vext]

My only point is that this, how well Roy does has nothing to do with how well Shelden does. The two are completely separate events. It's a different story if the subject is how our GM did making the 2nd and 5th draft picks in the last two years. I agree with you that in hindsight Paul was a better pick than MW (my choice was Deron) and that Roy was a better pick than Shelden. This may change in the upcoming years depending on how each player grows and such, but I doubt it will.

In the end, it is pointless to bring up who we didn't pick in a post that is just commenting on how well our pick played in the past few games. Your comment may be accurate, but it doesn't belong in the context of the original post. You are basically trying to throw this thread off topic and use it as yet another post to get your point across (like the million before it).

And to try to avoid this turning into a "we shouldn't have drafted marvin or shelden" thread...I agree with you. I think at this point in time Marvin and Shelden were the wrong picks. I will look at them again in the future and may change my opinion.

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

I don't because the only way we don't draft Marvin Williams is if Andrew Bogut was still on the board.

---

Huh?

Or if half the board were GM. There may not have been a consensus on Paul O-R Deron over MW, but there were quite a few wanting franchise Pg over MW. They were obviously right.

W

[Diesel]

Let's give you and I our way Walter...

2005.. Hawks choose Chris Paul (Although I seem to remember you talking about Paul having Flippers and not being big enough to play in the league and bringing out statistics against big PG).. Still, Hawks pick Paul. Paul = ROY..

By some fluke, Hawks get the 5th pick of the draft in 2006...

Who do you select?

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

Let's give you and I our way Walter...

2005.. Hawks choose Chris Paul (Although I seem to remember you talking about Paul having Flippers and not being big enough to play in the league and bringing out statistics against big PG).. Still, Hawks pick Paul. Paul = ROY..

By some fluke, Hawks get the 5th pick of the draft in 2006...

Who do you select?

---

Assuming I couldn't have either of my 1st two options: trading up for Bargnani or trading down to get Sene and a Pg prospect like Williams, Sergio, Rondo in that order, 100% I pick Roy.

Doesn't mean I don't trade him, others, or look to at least, but I 100% pick Roy as he was by far IMO the most talented player available and a 3-guard rotation of Paul, Roy, and JJ would be interchangable and unstoppable.

However, since we didn't pick Paul aren't you just making your tired case for SW worse?

[Diesel]

the wrong person to make the pick.

If we had Paul, we would have Paul/JJ... Probably the finest Backcourt in the land. One of the finest in the history of basketball...

We would also have a big hole in the front court.

Your pick Roy play don't play...

Nobody will give you a talented big for Roy as a Rookie. YOu've just put the Hawks in the bad spot of having negotiations with Al screw us.

Here's why you're inconsistent

If you agree with me that picking Marvin was wrong because he was a duplication. Then Picking Roy when we have JJ and Paul is also wrong for the same reason. Before you backtrack on why you believe we shouldn't have pick Marvin, let me remind you that I can find quote after quote of you saying Marvin, Wrong, and Duplication in the same sentence probably over 80 times.

It would have been more respectable if you said "trade the pick"... however, your hindsight won't let you do it.

:eye-popping:

[TheNorthCydeRises]

LOL. The cat is schizophrenic, I tell ya. Either that, or he's using NBA Live logic to assemble the Hawks.

[thesheedera]

Quote:

---

One of the finest in the history of basketball...

---

EAAAAAAAAAASY now Diesel! Wow!

I personally think a Paul (PG), Roy (PG/SG), JJ (SG/SF) lineup would work just fine even when they're on the court together. You'd still need the inside force but I would have no problem at all trotting those three out there together as starters, and then let them rotate in and out for each other the rest of the game.

I'd much rather have:

Paul, Roy, JJ, Smith, Zaza

than:

Speedy, JJ, Marvin, Smith, Zaza

[Diesel]

Quote:

---

I personally think a Paul (PG), Roy (PG/SG), JJ (SG/SF) lineup would work just fine even when they're on the court together.

---

I don't think so. That forces us to play smoove at PF and Zaza at C.

That team loses again.

Also, I don't think JJ wants to play SF. He didn't like playing Sf when the Suns had QRich playing SG...

Sometimes, the best move is the needed move. Get a big.

[bfwolf]

I think in any evaluation of who you draft, you have to look at both talent and need.

If the talent gap between the two players is very large (e.g. Oden and Durant vs. everybody else, or Roy vs. Shelden) then you've got to take the more talented player regardless of need or you trade the pick to somebody who needs the more talented player.

If the talent gap is small, then you take the position you need.

I was for taking Marvin Williams. I believed he had a large talent gap over Chris Paul and Deron Williams, and I was obviously very wrong. If, however, I had believed they were similar talents or that Marvin Williams was just slightly more talented than one of the PGs, I would have said take the PG because of our need at that position.

I was also for taking Roy because I believed the talent gap was very large over Shelden (especially) and Foye. In this case, I was right. However, in this case, I feel like it was much more obvious because Shelden Williams only partially filled a need we had. Yes, we needed interior defense, but we all knew that what we really needed was a center. And in addition, we all knew that while we really needed a PG, Brandon Roy could probably fill in at that position if necessary. So the need for Shelden Williams was only marginally stronger than the need for Roy, which makes that pick all the more dubious unless you really believed Shelden was close to as talented as Roy, and I don't know anybody who believed that. MOST people thought that Marvin was more talented than Paul and Deron.

[bfwolf]

Paul, Roy, JJ, Josh Smith, Zaza with Childress and Lue coming off the bench loses??? Are you kidding me??? Plus, with that lineup we never would've signed Speedy Claxton, freeing up money to add another solid big man.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

No they didn't. Most people thought Marvin COULD BE more talented than Deron or Chris. There is a difference.

It's like saying that most people Olowokandi was more talented than Bibby or a Vince Carter ( who was taken #5 that year ). I don't think anybody believed that.

But the Clippers that year desperately needed a big, and they believed that Olowokandi had the best POTENTIAL of any big in that draft that year. They didn't think a guy like Bibby or a Vince Carter would help them in the long run, more than Kandi would . . IF . . he developed into a nice big man.

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

I think in any evaluation of who you draft, you have to look at both talent and need.

If the talent gap between the two players is very large (e.g. Oden and Durant vs. everybody else, or Roy vs. Shelden) then you've got to take the more talented player regardless of need or you trade the pick to somebody who needs the more talented player.

If the talent gap is small, then you take the position you need.

---

This is my nuanced, maybe sophisticated, but still IMO common sense opinion. You weigh EVERYTHING. Fact is that SW didn't and doesn't fill a need remotely as much as people want him to. His college defense didn't translate to the NBA. Easy to see that IMO. We had JS and with MW inteded to play him at Pf. Easy to see that. Interior defense is best found in a center. Easy to see that. There was absolutely no comparison in terms of talent/skill Roy vs SW. Just none. Easy to see that. You weigh everything.

Quote:

---

I was also for taking Roy because I believed the talent gap was very large over Shelden (especially) and Foye. In this case, I was right. However, in this case, I feel like it was much more obvious because Shelden Williams only partially filled a need we had.

---

It was clear that Roy was FAR more an NBA Pg than SW was an NBA center. There was a positional need that trumped our role (interior defender) need. We needed a star, starter caliber player at a position of need. While Roy isn't a "pure" Pg, by his college coach on up to Portland's management he was and is an NBA Pg. NOBODY would say that about SW being an NBA C.

Again, the talent gap was enormous.

W