Let's not compare Keyonte George to Deron Williams

Too many fans are comparing the two guards.
Miami Heat v Utah Jazz
Miami Heat v Utah Jazz / George Frey/GettyImages

it's fair to say that Keyonte George has had an up-and-down season. The rookie point guard has struggled to find a consistent shot from inside or outside of three, and his defense has been awful. He's shown flashes of brilliance as a passer, and his athleticism is among the best in the league, so he clearly has some upside worth pursuing. He's far from a finished project, and if we're being honest, he's far from a starter.

Yet, fans are defending George constantly by comparing him to former Utah Jazz point guard Deron Williams. Frankly, it's not a comparison that makes any sense. Aside from their position, they have nothing in common. Yet, fans will still cite it taking Williams five seasons to make an All-Star team as a reason why we should give George time.

That's the issue though, as that's not entirely true. Yes, it's true that Williams took five years to reach an All-Star game, but his presence on the Jazz helped elevate the team from 26 wins the season prior to his arrival, to 41 wins his rookie season, to 51 wins in his second season with the team. He would take five seasons to reach the All-Star game, but if you look at his stats, production, and team performance there was a case for him to make in year two.

Williams was a better shooter and an overall more skilled player than George, he shot 42% from the floor and 41% from three as a rookie. He had a vastly different skillset, it's why he was a Top 3 pick. Now, some will say that George is younger than Williams, so he'll mature into a similar player with time, but that's not a guarantee. Williams came out a polished prospect because that's what his skillset was. George didn't, he came out with a high ceiling due to his speed, but George wasn't some great shooter in college.

He shot just 38% as a freshman from the floor, and 34% from three. He's far from the same type of player Williams was, who was more fundamental in his approach. The two aren't comparable in that regard. They're in the same position but with different types of players.

Their respective rookie year ages are irrelevant, despite the fact that George is 20, and Williams was 21, the issue remains in their skills coming out of college. Williams was far more polished than George, it's why George went so much later in his draft than Williams did in his. Remember, there were people who thought Williams could have gone No. 1 overall over Andrew Bogut, but no one thought that about George.

George should be allowed to develop and turn into the player he works best as, trying to compare him to the lofty expectations of turning out like Williams is just setting the young man up for failure. George has potential, but he needs far more time than Williams needed.

They're on different trajectories, and there is no reason to compare two vastly different players to one another, as they likely will have vastly different-looking careers.