Why NY Knicks Should Gamble on Bringing Shawne Williams Back
According to the NY Post, the Knicks will bring Williams in for a workout next week, after he impressed at IMG Academy in Las Vegas.
Williams was a great role player for New York in 2010-11, when he averaged 7.1 points and 3.7 rebounds, while shooting 40 percent from downtown. Coupled with his physical defense, Williams started to emerge as a reliable utility player, but his career has since gone downhill.
After contract negotiations broke down that offseason, Williams joined the rival New Jersey Nets, and thoroughly disappointed in the 25 games he played before a foot injury ended his season.
Since then, Williams faced drug charges before falling out of the league completely last season.
Even so, bringing back Williams would be a worthwhile risk for the Knicks, as if he's in shape, his skill set can be very helpful.
Though it's unlikely that we'll see Williams shoot such a high percentage from beyond the arc again, he can spread the floor and bring some extra scoring at small forward.
On top of that, Williams is capable of guarding bigs inside, which makes him a perfect fit for the Knicks. It would give them more versatility on the defensive end, and will really help out Carmelo Anthony if he continues to line up at power forward.
If the Knicks bring back Chris Copeland and Kenyon Martin, Williams won't be a major part of the rotation, but having such a versatile player on the end of the bench would be perfect.
The Knicks are in need of more players who can contribute on both ends of the floor, and a motivated Williams can do just that.
Playing in New York seemed to light a fire under him last time, and they may be able to get the best out of him with the opportunity to play with former teammates Raymond Felton and Amar'e Stoudemire.
Adding Williams isn't the type of move that is going to make or break the Knicks' season, but it's clear that they need help on the inside, so it'd be worth the risk to bring him back for the veteran's minimum.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?