Is Billy Walker In The Celtic's Future Plans?

[jr_3421]

I was thinking the other day about trade ideas going around and started to think about who is going to be here next season. Bill Walker has been a tough read in his time hear in Boston. In the beginning it seemed like Danny had found another gem in the second round. Walker was doing the right things and making the right plays. Then he got injured and came back out of shape and less aggressive than I remember. My question is how do you think Danny views Walker? Is he another piece of a trade or is he Danny's new project. Remember when he drafted Perk, Perk did not see the floor consistently until his third season. And he was on mediocre team! Bill Walker has all the physical tools and seems to have a good work ethic to go with it, similar to Perk's situation. Do you think Danny plans on developing Walker like we did with Perk?

[2short]

Well Walker is cheap and to me has a good enough upside to keep around.  I feel his posistion is sf which we can use.  I do think if a good trade comes and he needs to be part of it no one in c's org will hesitate.  But to me he is worth it to keep around, giddens no

[Bankshot]

I doubt it.

[PLamb]

No

[rondohondo]

Well his contract for the next few years is less than a million non guaranteed. I have a feeling he will be here for at least next year because he still has some pretty good potential if he can pick up the team defense.

[More Banners]

Hmm.  To quote anthropologist Clifford Geertz, a number of things, I think, are true.

He'd be gone in a second if he was needed to make a trade work.

He'd be gone in a second if he presented any off-court issues or expressed any problems with his status/position/playing time, etc.

So I doubt he's that highly valued as a prospect/project.

He does have one of the lowest salaries possible, and there is a minimum roster size, so he's valuable as a cheap player on the end of the bench, i.e. cheapest 13th man possible.  He might stay for that.

He does have some skills and upside, so it might be worth the cheap price to keep him around next year (and after). 

I think he'll stick around, mostly due to being a low risk player/contract in a high risk business.

[Chris]

I don't think they know yet.  While I think they like him a bit, he has not been healthy enough to fully develop (both before and after joining the C's).  So I don't think they would hesitate to cut him or trade him if they needed, but I also don't think they have decided his future either (unlike Giddens, who I think is as good as gone).

[P2]

Well Walker is cheap and to me has a good enough upside to keep around.  I feel his posistion is sf which we can use.  I do think if a good trade comes and he needs to be part of it no one in c's org will hesitate.  But to me he is worth it to keep around, giddens no

I agree with 100% of this post.

[Tough Juice]

no

[hwangjini_1]

even if he is, i dont see it as a particularly bright one.

for example, how many posters think that walker will ever be as good a player as tony allen? i dont think he will be that good.

what is tony's role with the celtics? backup to the backup for pierce.

on a good team, walker is the 10th to 13th player.

on a really bad team, he might be a rotation player, someday.

i just dont see what he does that gives such hope to fans. i would be more than happy to listen and learn.

[Surferdad]

This is kind of an impossible question because we don't see what Walker does in practices or how hard he works.  Since he basically doesn't play in games, then most information about him is second hand.

Another reason it is hard to say is that even if Walker does have talent and upside, that doesn't mean they will keep him.  Ainge has to give something to get something back.  Kind of obvious, but it's amazing how often we forget that.

Now I like Walker and agree with most of the comments above, but I have to say I was extremely disappointed in his 3 minutes or whatever he played in the 1st or 2nd quarter of the Clippers game.  He doesn't seem to understanding the defense and fouling a guy shooting a 3-pointer is just a bad play.  (I know, I shouldn't judge him based on 3 minutes.)

So the answer is really, who knows.

[clover]

I think with all these young guys the differentiation is in who gets better after they sign with the team.  It's that ability to keep improving once they hit this level that decides whether most guys make it.  Learning the plays and improving their skills are the two elements that they must show.  So far, I'm not sure we've seen that from any of the three young guys the C's have had this year--which is too bad.  We got spoiled by Danny having drafted so many guys who outperformed their drafting level.

[Surferdad]

I think with all these young guys the differentiation is in who gets better after they sign with the team.  It's that ability to keep improving once they hit this level that decides whether most guys make it.  Learning the plays and improving their skills are the two elements that they must show.  So far, I'm not sure we've seen that from any of the three young guys the C's have had this year--which is too bad.  We got spoiled by Danny having drafted so many guys who outperformed their drafting level.

Great point.  I think, in part, that depends upon how their game translates to the pro level.  Shelden Williams was a very high 1st round pick, but basically is a journeyman.  He's made a living by basically being a well-schooled athlete who works hard but lacks a lot of talent and hasn't improved much in the NBA.  I really don't know how much talent Billy Walker has or how much he can learn and improve.

[More Banners]

I think with all these young guys the differentiation is in who gets better after they sign with the team.  It's that ability to keep improving once they hit this level that decides whether most guys make it.  Learning the plays and improving their skills are the two elements that they must show.  So far, I'm not sure we've seen that from any of the three young guys the C's have had this year--which is too bad.  We got spoiled by Danny having drafted so many guys who outperformed their drafting level.

Great point.  I think, in part, that depends upon how their game translates to the pro level.  Shelden Williams was a very high 1st round pick, but basically is a journeyman.  He's made a living by basically being a well-schooled athlete who works hard but lacks a lot of talent and hasn't improved much in the NBA.  I really don't know how much talent Billy Walker has or how much he can learn and improve.

Good point about Williams.  I can see him having a 10 year career as a journeyman rebounder/competent defender, though.  I wonder how many teams he will have played for by the time he hangs it up.

[jr_3421]

I think with all these young guys the differentiation is in who gets better after they sign with the team.  It's that ability to keep improving once they hit this level that decides whether most guys make it.  Learning the plays and improving their skills are the two elements that they must show.  So far, I'm not sure we've seen that from any of the three young guys the C's have had this year--which is too bad.  We got spoiled by Danny having drafted so many guys who outperformed their drafting level.

Great point.  I think, in part, that depends upon how their game translates to the pro level.  Shelden Williams was a very high 1st round pick, but basically is a journeyman.  He's made a living by basically being a well-schooled athlete who works hard but lacks a lot of talent and hasn't improved much in the NBA.  I really don't know how much talent Billy Walker has or how much he can learn and improve.

I think there is a considerably difference between Williams and Walker. Williams was drafted a high in the first round but he is athletically challenged, undersized and lacks offensive skill.
Walker on the other hand is a good size for small forward and and a superior athlete with an aggressive mindset. My point was do you think we might take our time in helping him reach his maximum potential ala Perk?