Will Derrick Williams show us what Bias would have been?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Celtics1986. Show Celtics1986's posts

    Will Derrick Williams show us what Bias would have been?

    Both went #2 in the NBA draft. Both had their coming out party vs an ACC powerhouse. Bias at the Dean Dome going for 41  points. Williams dominating Duke for 36 points in the NCAA. Both were late bloomers, neither Mcdonald All Americans. Both wanted to dunk on anyone at anytime, and often did. Both were tweeners between the 4 and 3 spots. Both had soft outside touches and suspect dribbling skills. Both were freak athletes who blossomed at the right time.
     This is the first player that I think will give us at least a glimpse of what Bias might have given us 21 years ago.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Celtics2008Champs. Show Celtics2008Champs's posts

    Re: Will Derrick Williams show us what Bias would have been?

    No. Bias could have been a top 5 player all time. Williams will most likely not even be in the top 50. 
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Celtics1986. Show Celtics1986's posts

    Re: Will Derrick Williams show us what Bias would have been?

    Why would Bias have been a top five player of all time. Brad Daugherty was picked ahead of him and NO ONE at the time debated that move. Bias team was around 20-12 his last year at Maryland, similar to Derrick Williams. Bias was a wonderful talent but similiar to Williams in many ways, and clearly not a lock for greatness. That is why I am intrigued to see how Williams pans out.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Will Derrick Williams show us what Bias would have been?

    Top 5 all-time? No way.

    Bias would have been better than the combo forward we'd just had from 77-85 (Max) and better than the young forward the championship Lakers lucked into at the top of the draft in 82 (Worthy). I'm pretty sure of that.

    Jordan said Bias was the toughest and best player he ever played against in college and Bias was a year younger.

    He likely would have been a 23-26 point 7-9 rebound  per guy who defended 3's and 4's equally, made multiple all-star teams and 2nd or 3rd team all-NBA's... battling Bird, Malone, Barkley, Mullin, Chambers, Wilkins and Cummings each year for all-nba honors 88-91... then Pippen would replace Bird/Mullin/Chambers in the 92-95 years and Bias would be better than all-nba picks like Larry Johnson, Derrick Coleman and battle against Shawn Kemp.

    By 1997-98 he would be 33-34 and in decline with guys like Hill, Webber, Duncan, McDyess and KG taking over.

    He'd seemingly fit somewhere among that list of the 12 best forwards of his 1986-2001 (estimated obviously) career.

    not quite Bird, Barkley, Duncan, KG, Malone... but better than Mullin, Chambers, Kemp, Hill, Cummings, Webber, McDyess....

    We'd have likely end up thinking of him like Pippen maybe?

    The 1987 title would have been ours for sure. Beyond that who knows, it depends on if Bird and McHale's careers were injury free b/c of the mins he represented and rest they'd have gotten. Lewis would still have died. Maybe the 1989 draft wouldn't have been blown on a bust F and used on a C (Vlade).

    Derrick Williams is prob the next Larry Johnson, Derrick Coleman, Glenn Robinson, Kenyon Martin, Michael Beasley, Antawn Jamison type Forward...
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from BostonTrollSpanker. Show BostonTrollSpanker's posts

    Re: Will Derrick Williams show us what Bias would have been?

    No. 
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from 17. Show 17's posts

    Re: Will Derrick Williams show us what Bias would have been?

    Top five would have been uncertain (there are many variables, you see, from injuries to unforeseen circumstances, which Len Bias' tragic death certainly showcased), but no way would Lenny have been like Derrick Williams simply because he's way up there in terms of talent, no matter the similarities they may have.  The similarities would have been just that as Bias' talent and skills were superior to those of Williams.  Williams' athleticism would have been dwarfed by Bias' own athletic gifts, and his shooting was not as great as Bias' own touch.

    I would venture to say that Bias would have been an all-time great and given Boston many more titles, but that's because of the game he had shown in college before death cruelly, almost incomprehensively, took him away from us.  It's the only thing we would have to go by with.

    Bert A. Ramirez a.k.a. 17
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Soxdog67. Show Soxdog67's posts

    Re: Will Derrick Williams show us what Bias would have been?

    My recollection of Bias and the media hype for him was this...he was defined as a cross between Jordan and Worthy, and if he had met those expectations he definitely would have been a top 5 talent in the NBA.

    I can remember Red lighting a cigar immediately after the Bias pick was announced, which usually meant that he had accomplished something...like he always lit up after winning a championship...in this context it meant he got the guy he wanted.

    Regarding Bias going #2 as a reason for saying he would not be a top 5 talent, well to that I say that as is often the case in the NBA draft, the Cavaliers chose Daugherty because he was the top big man in the draft in '86.

    Sadly we never got the chance to see him play with Bird, McHale and Parish...because who knows really how good he could have been!
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Will Derrick Williams show us what Bias would have been?

    In Response to Re: Will Derrick Williams show us what Bias would have been?:
    [QUOTE]My recollection of Bias and the media hype for him was this...he was defined as a cross between Jordan and Worthy, and if he had met those expectations he definitely would have been a top 5 talent in the NBA. I can remember Red lighting a cigar immediately after the Bias pick was announced, which usually meant that he had accomplished something...like he always lit up after winning a championship...in this context it meant he got the guy he wanted. Regarding Bias going #2 as a reason for saying he would not be a top 5 talent, well to that I say that as is often the case in the NBA draft, the Cavaliers chose Daugherty because he was the top big man in the draft in '86. Sadly we never got the chance to see him play with Bird, McHale and Parish...because who knows really how good he could have been!
    Posted by Soxdog67[/QUOTE]

    It is like all those drafts where a Joe Smith, Kwame Brown, Michael Olowakandi, etc. went 1st

    Brad actually had some talent... but everyone knew that Bias was going to be a star
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from koberulz. Show koberulz's posts

    Re: Will Derrick Williams show us what Bias would have been?

    Posts: 10296
    First: 11/13/2006
    Last: 7/25/2011
    Top 5 all-time? No way.

    Bias would have been better than the combo forward we'd just had from 77-85 (Max) and better than the young forward the championship Lakers lucked into at the top of the draft in 82 (Worthy). I'm pretty sure of that.

    Jordan said Bias was the toughest and best player he ever played against in college and Bias was a year younger.

    He likely would have been a 23-26 point 7-9 rebound  per guy who defended 3's and 4's equally, made multiple all-star teams and 2nd or 3rd team all-NBA's... battling Bird, Malone, Barkley, Mullin, Chambers, Wilkins and Cummings each year for all-nba honors 88-91... then Pippen would replace Bird/Mullin/Chambers in the 92-95 years and Bias would be better than all-nba picks like Larry Johnson, Derrick Coleman and battle against Shawn Kemp.

    By 1997-98 he would be 33-34 and in decline with guys like Hill, Webber, Duncan, McDyess and KG taking over.

    He'd seemingly fit somewhere among that list of the 12 best forwards of his 1986-2001 (estimated obviously) career.

    not quite Bird, Barkley, Duncan, KG, Malone... but better than Mullin, Chambers, Kemp, Hill, Cummings, Webber, McDyess....

    We'd have likely end up thinking of him like Pippen maybe?

    The 1987 title would have been ours for sure. Beyond that who knows, it depends on if Bird and McHale's careers were injury free b/c of the mins he represented and rest they'd have gotten. Lewis would still have died. Maybe the 1989 draft wouldn't have been blown on a bust F and used on a C (Vlade).

    Derrick Williams is prob the next Larry Johnson, Derrick Coleman, Glenn Robinson, Kenyon Martin, Michael Beasley, Antawn Jamison type Forward...
    --------------------------------

    Hey, can you also tell me what the winning lottery numbers are too?

    Cool
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Red-16Russ-11. Show Red-16Russ-11's posts

    Re: Will Derrick Williams show us what Bias would have been?

    In Response to Re: Will Derrick Williams show us what Bias would have been?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Will Derrick Williams show us what Bias would have been? : It is like all those drafts where a Joe Smith, Kwame Brown, Michael Olowakandi, etc. went 1st Brad actually had some talent... but everyone knew that Bias was going to be a star
    Posted by rameakap[/QUOTE]

    Agreed.  Williams is no where near the player Bias was.  Shows again how watered down everything has become!
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from kaktug. Show kaktug's posts

    Re: Will Derrick Williams show us what Bias would have been?

    i wonder how he would have fit in spelling bird and mchale. i'm not sure he would have gotten a lot of minutes for his first several seasons. and if doc was coaching that team, he would never have gotten off the bench. ;)
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from aciemvp. Show aciemvp's posts

    Re: Will Derrick Williams show us what Bias would have been?

    he would have gotten minutes.  by 88 you would have had a new young core of reggie lewis and bias and the c's would have been positioned to remain relevant thanks to the young guys. 

    bird's minutes should have gone down below 30, mchale's below 30, we had pieces of crap at the 2 in the late 80s if i'm not mistaken, and reggie could have soaked those minutes and bias the 3 and 4 minutes.

    remembah the '72 lakers, the "only old team" (other than the 69 celts) to win it?  i don't think the 72 lakes had anyone young.  69 celts had havlicheck who was in his late 20s and that was it for youth.

    i think the celts could have kept things really interesting.  kareem was a relic by 87.  bias would have smoked worthy with strength and speed, and reggie was faster and better than the older wilkes.

    i can't think of anyone other than thug-troit pistons who could have given us real trouble up until 1990.
     

Share