'16 PF NC Grant Williams (UT commit 11/13/15)

#29
#29
You got the BPG? Curious to see if Williams is solid defensively or not. Curious to see Ado's too.

Shot blocking isn't the only defensive stat to prove whether someone is solid defensively...as an undersized big you'd have to assume Williams isn't gonna be a shot blocker, same as Stokes and Maymon. At nearly 7' playing against other high schoolers you would naturally expect Ado to be an impressive shot blocker, at least IMO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#32
#32
Certain posters are wanting RB to succeed so bad, they're are overlooking the same things we blasted DT and Cuonzo for - weak recruiting .

It's funny, there's certain posters still wanting to build up the previous coach so bad they're defending lesser rated recruits by the previous staff yet bashing the targets of the current staff. It's working both ways.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#34
#34
Or maybe his ranking is deserved. From Charlotte, but No ACC offers is a little concerning. His offer list says pass......IMO

I usually agree with you regarding recruiting and players talent correlating with rank. This time I think it's wrong. He has played well consistently played well against top level competition. I think he is ranked so low because of the tweener body. He can ball and has outplayed a bunch of high major recruits head to head.
 
  • Like
Reactions: orchidvol
#36
#36
Shot blocking isn't the only defensive stat to prove whether someone is solid defensively...as an undersized big you'd have to assume Williams isn't gonna be a shot blocker, same as Stokes and Maymon. At nearly 7' playing against other high schoolers you would naturally expect Ado to be an impressive shot blocker, at least IMO.
Obviously it's not the only indication, but it does usually say a good deal about the player's athleticism and motor defensively, no? Unless you're just a behemoth blocking lesser competition. At 6'7, 230 lbs and playing ball in high school, he's not really undersized is he? Being that big it's more than likely he can overpower guys who weigh less; that won't happen in the SEC. All I'm getting at is, if he's a poor man Stokes and can't really block shots (idk if he can or not, which is why I was wondering his BPG), what will Williams bring to the table? Curious to see what VQ has said on Williams.
 
#37
#37
This kid is closer to 6'5" than 6'7". That is why he does not have many offers. He is more like Moore than Stokes. He does not have Moore's hops or quickness but he is a gamer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#38
#38
This kid is closer to 6'5" than 6'7". That is why he does not have many offers. He is more like Moore than Stokes. He does not have Moore's hops or quickness but he is a gamer.
I agree, I was giving him the benefit of the doubt at 6'7 because his 247 profile stated so.
 
#39
#39
Obviously it's not the only indication, but it does usually say a good deal about the player's athleticism and motor defensively, no? Unless you're just a behemoth blocking lesser competition. At 6'7, 230 lbs and playing ball in high school, he's not really undersized is he? Being that big it's more than likely he can overpower guys who weigh less; that won't happen in the SEC. All I'm getting at is, if he's a poor man Stokes and can't really block shots (idk if he can or not, which is why I was wondering his BPG), what will Williams bring to the table? Curious to see what VQ has said on Williams.

VQ has said they think he's a high major player, as has Eric Bossi the national analyst.
 
#40
#40
This kid is closer to 6'5" than 6'7". That is why he does not have many offers. He is more like Moore than Stokes. He does not have Moore's hops or quickness but he is a gamer.

I would definitely like to know his legit height, I've seen listed from 6'5" to 6'8". Of course many said 6'6" for Maymon was generous, so who knows, but I do agree if he's 6'5" that's a little more of a concern to me than if he's closer to 6'7".
 
#41
#41
I understand it is for some but not all.

What if it cost him 40k per year?

That's a 180k difference

Even though they can't give athletic scholarships, they usually put together "academic stipends" for athletes which are not athletic scholarships in name but might as well be
 
#42
#42
Even though they can't give athletic scholarships, they usually put together "academic stipends" for athletes which are not athletic scholarships in name but might as well be

Yes I am very familiar with that. It's based off of family Income.

If the mom works at NASA then it seems likely to me that he won't qualify for as much as many other lower socioeconomic kids might. It's safe to say he will be paying soemthing to go to school IMO.

How much I don't know but whatever it is it's a dramatic difference in the 20k we will pay him to come
 
#44
#44
I would definitely like to know his legit height, I've seen listed from 6'5" to 6'8". Of course many said 6'6" for Maymon was generous, so who knows, but I do agree if he's 6'5" that's a little more of a concern to me than if he's closer to 6'7".

Rob Lewis says he's 6-5, based on watching him at Tennessee's camp.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#46
#46
Bossi said he could be a high major contributor with time and work.

Is that not what most fall under? To me that sounds like he's saying "he could be a high major contributor" which would mean a very quality player, all-sec or 2-3 year starter, maybe I interpreted it wrong.
 
#47
#47
Rob Lewis says he's 6-5, based on watching him at Tennessee's camp.

I definitely don't recall seeing that from Rob, as I've mentioned he is also a year young, so it's plausible he's still developing. I don't think there's much doubt that he's the guy most now question most, I just find it funny as many questioned Fulkerson and all of a sudden he's now a fringe top 150 guy, those people now look quite foolish for not holding off a bit.
 
#48
#48
Is that not what most fall under? To me that sounds like he's saying "he could be a high major contributor" which would mean a very quality player, all-sec or 2-3 year starter, maybe I interpreted it wrong.

Not even close IMO

Contributor=solid minutes, maybe a starter later in a career
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#49
#49
I definitely don't recall seeing that from Rob, as I've mentioned he is also a year young, so it's plausible he's still developing. I don't think there's much doubt that he's the guy most now question most, I just find it funny as many questioned Fulkerson and all of a sudden he's now a fringe top 150 guy, those people now look quite foolish for not holding off a bit.

I like the fact he is a year younger
 
#50
#50
Not even close IMO

Contributor=solid minutes, maybe a starter later in a career

I interpreted that as high level contributor at high major level, meaning he's at least a high major player, maybe I mistook it as I said. As I've also said, it seems pretty clear that Williams is the one the board most disagree over, and I get that...call me a homer, but he was one of Barnes' first calls, and a guy this staff has now seen a ton of and want bad, to me I'm gonna give them the benefit of the doubt and in 2 years we can look back. How many, myself included, bashed the Washpun commitment, yet many were saying how bad we could've used him last year.
 

VN Store



Back
Top