Patrick Williams next deal discussion with poll

[madvillian]

Watching the playoffs it's even more critical we sign him. All these good teams have 3 and D guys everywhere that are constantly winning loose balls and hitting shots off the stars.

We aren't even close to having real superstars but maybe at least we can fill in the roster in hopes of a miracle occurring sometime in the next few years.

[ChettheJet]

things seem to have changed dramatically that someone besides me wants to see Patrick stay and play the 3. He has looked out of position at the 4 but if you actually watched the games did you see how often he was out there with Lavine and DeRozan and ended up matching up with someone like SGA or Haliburton? The reason for that was because he was the best on ball defender out there and Zach and Demar were no deterrent. So just like when he was stationed in the corner to spread the floor for the mid 3,no way to rebound from 22 feet away from the basket.

That's why I'm still stuck on let Demar go, move Zach if possible and even end up with a not perfect but a genuine tall PF like John Collins. Some other team, good or not, will be willing to put Williams out there at the SF and see what he can do and the Bulls can see another case of what people are talking about giving up for Lauri and heck as mentioned DJJ getting offers.

[2weekswithpay]

For those that think Pat is better at the 3, what exactly changes by moving him there? He gets to guard smaller players on defense but I don't consider that a significant role change. On offense maybe he gets more on-ball reps but I don't expect any major deviation from his 3&D role. Pat has never used his size against smaller opponents. If he feels confident enough to start doing that there are plenty of opportunities in a regular game he shouldn't need a position change to encourage attacking mismatches.

[Chi town]

things seem to have changed dramatically that someone besides me wants to see Patrick stay and play the 3. He has looked out of position at the 4 but if you actually watched the games did you see how often he was out there with Lavine and DeRozan and ended up matching up with someone like SGA or Haliburton? The reason for that was because he was the best on ball defender out there and Zach and Demar were no deterrent. So just like when he was stationed in the corner to spread the floor for the mid 3,no way to rebound from 22 feet away from the basket.

That's why I'm still stuck on let Demar go, move Zach if possible and even end up with a not perfect but a genuine tall PF like John Collins. Some other team, good or not, will be willing to put Williams out there at the SF and see what he can do and the Bulls can see another case of what people are talking about giving up for Lauri and heck as mentioned DJJ getting offers.

Preach.

But not John Collins.

I’d take a flier on Isaac though.

[DuckIII]

things seem to have changed dramatically that someone besides me wants to see Patrick stay and play the 3.

I’ve been advocating that since he was in summer league. And there are quite a few more posters as well. I’d go so far as to say among people who care enough about Pat to discuss him it might even be a majority.

I agree with the rest of your post though (except the John Collins part).

[DuckIII]

For those that think Pat is better at the 3, what exactly changes by moving him there? He gets to guard smaller players on defense but I don't consider that a significant role change. On offense maybe he gets more on-ball reps but I don't expect any major deviation from his 3&D role. Pat has never used his size against smaller opponents. If he feels confident enough to start doing that there are plenty of opportunities in a regular game he shouldn't need a position change to encourage attacking mismatches.

There’s really no way for you to know what he would or would not do with his advantages at the 3 because he has never done it for any sustained period of time.

Pat is a walking mismatch at the 3 if used correctly, and if he responds and takes initiative himself. At the 4 he’s more likely to be a victim of a mismatch than to create one.

It’s been a terrible strategy since day one for Pat as an individual prospect and for the team. Because by forcing Pat to play out of position, and being content with it, AK completely ignored getting the type of 4 we actually need to cover for Vuc. Layers of badness.

[2weekswithpay]

For those that think Pat is better at the 3, what exactly changes by moving him there? He gets to guard smaller players on defense but I don't consider that a significant role change. On offense maybe he gets more on-ball reps but I don't expect any major deviation from his 3&D role. Pat has never used his size against smaller opponents. If he feels confident enough to start doing that there are plenty of opportunities in a regular game he shouldn't need a position change to encourage attacking mismatches.

There’s really no way for you to know what he would or would not do with his advantages at the 3 because he has never done it for any sustained period of time.

Pat is a walking mismatch at the 3 if used correctly, and if he responds and takes initiative himself. At the 4 he’s more likely to be a victim of a mismatch than to create one.

It’s been a terrible strategy since day one for Pat as an individual prospect and for the team. Because by forcing Pat to play out of position, and being content with it, AK completely ignored getting the type of 4 we actually need to cover for Vuc. Layers of badness.

What advantages does he have at the 3 make him a walking mismatch? Size + strength sure but if that's all he has I don't see what will make him so effective at the 3.

[nomorezorro]

Watching the playoffs it's even more critical we sign him. All these good teams have 3 and D guys everywhere that are constantly winning loose balls and hitting shots off the stars.

We aren't even close to having real superstars but maybe at least we can fill in the roster in hopes of a miracle occurring sometime in the next few years.

pat williams has never averaged more than 4 made shots per game in his career. he was eighth on our team in loose balls recovered per 36 minutes.

i agree we should keep him because if you squint really hard you can see the vague outline of a useful rotation player, and if we don't keep him it's probably not going to open up any resources that could be used toward something better, but it's very important to keep in mind that patrick williams currently does not play winning basketball

[ChiCitySPORTS#1]

Who cares, he sucks.

He's been living off of having a big frame since he got drafted. Woo hoo.

[madvillian]

Watching the playoffs it's even more critical we sign him. All these good teams have 3 and D guys everywhere that are constantly winning loose balls and hitting shots off the stars.

We aren't even close to having real superstars but maybe at least we can fill in the roster in hopes of a miracle occurring sometime in the next few years.

pat williams has never averaged more than 4 made shots per game in his career. he was eighth on our team in loose balls recovered per 36 minutes.

i agree we should keep him because if you squint really hard you can see the vague outline of a useful rotation player, and if we don't keep him it's probably not going to open up any resources that could be used toward something better, but it's very important to keep in mind that patrick williams currently does not play winning basketball

he's entering his age 23 season. We're going forward, not back. We can continue to lose guys that need more breathing room and time like pat and DJJ or we can do what good teams do and sign and develop assets.

[Stratmaster]

At this point you have to separate the past, his draft status, mediocre play and project forward. Chicago cannot afford to lose a decent 3 and D guy regardless of how he's panned out relative to expectations.

Spot on. I say this frequently due to the frequency with which people make this emotional mistake: draft position is irrelevant the second the commish calls the name.

From that point on fans should only be evaluating a player based on what he is doing and what reasonable contractual value for those collective pros and cons should be. Never let a useful guy walk because he’s not what you hoped he’d be, never overpay a guy simply because he pleasantly surprised you. To fans, they should all just be players once drafted.

Devaluing what a guy actually does because it’s less than what you hoped for when you drafted him is really poor asset management.

It isn't irrelevant if the player insists on getting paid based on it after his rookie contract.

If Williams will come back for the dollars you pay a journeyman role player, I am absolutely for keeping him with the assumption he will be a solid 8th or 9th guy in your rotation. Otherwise it is more of a gamble to pay him then to part ways.

Sent from my SM-S911U using RealGM mobile app

[DuckIII]

At this point you have to separate the past, his draft status, mediocre play and project forward. Chicago cannot afford to lose a decent 3 and D guy regardless of how he's panned out relative to expectations.

Spot on. I say this frequently due to the frequency with which people make this emotional mistake: draft position is irrelevant the second the commish calls the name.

From that point on fans should only be evaluating a player based on what he is doing and what reasonable contractual value for those collective pros and cons should be. Never let a useful guy walk because he’s not what you hoped he’d be, never overpay a guy simply because he pleasantly surprised you. To fans, they should all just be players once drafted.

Devaluing what a guy actually does because it’s less than what you hoped for when you drafted him is really poor asset management.

It isn't irrelevant if the player insists on getting paid based on it after his rookie contract.

That’s kind of my whole point. Though observed potential, rather than draft position, is part of valuing any player’s first non-rookie deal. But to an objective GM potential and draft position should not be confused for one another.

[League Circles]

One thing I find difficult to evaluate is how the years vs dollars will/should shake out with Patrick. I think the Bulls should offer him a deal that is about 12-13 mil for next year, then a team option for the following year. But a significant part of me thinks the smart move is to try to ink him for 5 years. I just think he'll actually prefer a shorter, smaller deal because he and his agent will think that he can get paid big as a UFA. Like I can actually see him taking a 2-3 year deal for 13 mil/year before I see him taking a 5 year deal for like 16 mil/year, cause he probably thinks he'll get 30 mil+/year as a UFA.

Usually the shorter a deal, the larger it needs to be to get a guy to ink cause he wants security.

Also worth noting Patrick has made a good chunk of money so far.

He'll probably also be willing to sign for a little less if he thinks he can play more mpg at the 3. Better for his career long term.

[MrSparkle]

FWIW, he would be one of the worst (statistically speaking, and "eye-test") rookies the Bulls ever extended. GarPax traditionally let them go (Tyrus, JJ, Marquis, Snell, Doug, Hutchison, Denzel, Gafford), not to mention the guys whose numbers were pretty solid and promising by their 4th year, but not enticing enough to hold for the next deal (or whatever other reason): Chandler, Curry, Crawford, Gordon, Bobby, Niko, Lauri. Let's be honest: Pat was outperformed by each of those 7 guys in a 4y sample size.

So again... Interestingly enough... Patrick may be the worst Bulls draftee to ever get an extension. Coby and Ayo were pretty low on the pole in their extension years, but their deals were definitively under (expected) market value. So I think if Pat exceeds that MLE range, FO's not going to keep him. If his main strength is defense, and all he could do is a garner a measly 10 PPG with starting dibs on a short-handed team, then you have to pay him like an OK defense specialist and not like the offensive star he talked about becoming.

[2weekswithpay]

One thing I find difficult to evaluate is how the years vs dollars will/should shake out with Patrick. I think the Bulls should offer him a deal that is about 12-13 mil for next year, then a team option for the following year. But a significant part of me thinks the smart move is to try to ink him for 5 years. I just think he'll actually prefer a shorter, smaller deal because he and his agent will think that he can get paid big as a UFA. Like I can actually see him taking a 2-3 year deal for 13 mil/year before I see him taking a 5 year deal for like 16 mil/year, cause he probably thinks he'll get 30 mil+/year as a UFA.

Usually the shorter a deal, the larger it needs to be to get a guy to ink cause he wants security.

Also worth noting Patrick has made a good chunk of money so far.

He'll probably also be willing to sign for a little less if he thinks he can play more mpg at the 3. Better for his career long term.

The issue with offering Pat a 1 year 12-13M deal plus a team option is that the qualifying offer is 13M. There's no benefit for Pat to take a deal with a similar salary as the qualifying offer plus a team option. If Pat wants to be a UFA he should take the qualifying offer.

There's no reason for him to take a pay cut this early in his career. It makes less sense when you consider he's missed over 100 games already.

[MrSparkle]

The downside with these bargain deals is that the reason they're bargains is because they sucked. And a 3y bargain with a player option hardly helps the long-term cap structure, as you'll run into issues with working out a max extension if they play well enough to deserve it, so they'll opt to hit unrestricted FA early.

MIP improvement brings these kids from fringe rotation players to acceptable starters. It would take an unrealistic climb to join the ranks of even the B/C class of all-stars (in the case of this year's game: Trae, Barnes, Bam, Paolo, Maxey, Brunson etc.) All fine players BTW, but not pillars (they could be but they need loaded teams built around their strengths, ala Jalen and Trae).

I've bounced a lot on this AK team build, but as we near the end of this road (Lonzo, Zach, Demar, Vuc, ETC.)... I think you have to look at shopping Coby and also Pat (S&T). The blow-it-up scenario just kinda makes the most sense to me right now. All you have to do is sell very high on Caruso and Coby, get SOMETHING for Demar and Pat, and then take Vuc, Zach, Ayo a minute at a time and see how the season unfolds. Getting two lotto picks next year would be a refreshing change.

If Pat can resign a 4y bargain deal (40M) with a non-guaranteed 4th team option, that'd be the best. Seeing as he wanted a 9-figure contract, it's laughable to think we do better than a QO for a role-player.

[kulaz3000]

For those that think Pat is better at the 3, what exactly changes by moving him there? He gets to guard smaller players on defense but I don't consider that a significant role change. On offense maybe he gets more on-ball reps but I don't expect any major deviation from his 3&D role. Pat has never used his size against smaller opponents. If he feels confident enough to start doing that there are plenty of opportunities in a regular game he shouldn't need a position change to encourage attacking mismatches.

There’s really no way for you to know what he would or would not do with his advantages at the 3 because he has never done it for any sustained period of time.

Pat is a walking mismatch at the 3 if used correctly, and if he responds and takes initiative himself. At the 4 he’s more likely to be a victim of a mismatch than to create one.

It’s been a terrible strategy since day one for Pat as an individual prospect and for the team. Because by forcing Pat to play out of position, and being content with it, AK completely ignored getting the type of 4 we actually need to cover for Vuc. Layers of badness.

Speaking of mismatches, though he doesn't do it enough, but when he is mismatched against smaller players, he can play bully-ball and throws his body in there. He would get those mismatches a lot more often at small forward, because he will more often than not have a strength difference to his advantage. At the power forward spot, he is the one mismatched against the majority of the time.

As for Billy playing him out of position, it was due to DeMar being relied upon with heavy minutes, and the power forward spot was really the only position to give him the minutes to develop. And it was clear as day that they didn't provide a lot of competition at that spot either so he would have the long leash to play minutes, and the sad truth is, even then, he really didn't show the assertion to take advantage of the minutes by drifting way too much.

He has a long ways to go mentally, way more than physically, because he has the skills and talents, but he just doesn't have the go-get it attitude that he needs, on both ends.

[Dan Z]

One thing I find difficult to evaluate is how the years vs dollars will/should shake out with Patrick. I think the Bulls should offer him a deal that is about 12-13 mil for next year, then a team option for the following year. But a significant part of me thinks the smart move is to try to ink him for 5 years. I just think he'll actually prefer a shorter, smaller deal because he and his agent will think that he can get paid big as a UFA. Like I can actually see him taking a 2-3 year deal for 13 mil/year before I see him taking a 5 year deal for like 16 mil/year, cause he probably thinks he'll get 30 mil+/year as a UFA.

Usually the shorter a deal, the larger it needs to be to get a guy to ink cause he wants security.

Also worth noting Patrick has made a good chunk of money so far.

He'll probably also be willing to sign for a little less if he thinks he can play more mpg at the 3. Better for his career long term.

A 5 year deal...I guess you believe in his potential going forward?

I have mixed thoughts about it, but if his next contract isn't that bad then they should re-sign him. I think it's better to take a chance on his potential then letting him walk.

[kulaz3000]

One thing I find difficult to evaluate is how the years vs dollars will/should shake out with Patrick. I think the Bulls should offer him a deal that is about 12-13 mil for next year, then a team option for the following year. But a significant part of me thinks the smart move is to try to ink him for 5 years. I just think he'll actually prefer a shorter, smaller deal because he and his agent will think that he can get paid big as a UFA. Like I can actually see him taking a 2-3 year deal for 13 mil/year before I see him taking a 5 year deal for like 16 mil/year, cause he probably thinks he'll get 30 mil+/year as a UFA.

Usually the shorter a deal, the larger it needs to be to get a guy to ink cause he wants security.

Also worth noting Patrick has made a good chunk of money so far.

He'll probably also be willing to sign for a little less if he thinks he can play more mpg at the 3. Better for his career long term.

A 5 year deal...I guess you believe in his potential going forward?

I have mixed thoughts about it, but if his next contract isn't that bad then they should re-sign him. I think it's better to take a chance on his potential then letting him walk.

The problem with the Bulls situation is that we are in a position where we HAVE to still rely on his potential, until we improve this roster. It's just a matter of how much of a gamble does the team take as far as his contract goes to bank on whether he improves or not. Because losing out and getting nothing in return for a no.4 pick on what was a pretty solid draft would be another nail in the Bulls coffin.

[Hangtime84]

I have source that told me Pat is done as a Chicago Bull, but I told them nah.

So far they been right about all other nba moves team or business so I’m worried.