@Texas-Hawk-10 I wouldn't land on Williams' side too quickly.
Williams scored better than both -- .404 per minute vs. .268 (Chukwu) and .330 (Coleby).
But Williams was equal to Chukwu rebounding (.247 vs. .242), and not as good as Coleby (.292).
Chukwu had .068 blocks per minute, Coleby .051 vs. Williams at just .025.
Coleby was 79% from the FT line, while Chukwu and Williams were 60% and 61% respectively.
Coleby was excellent 71.1% on shots at the rim, Chukwu 67.8, while Williams was a poor 57.4%
Coleby had a 66% overall shooting percentage, Chukwu 53.2%, while Williams was pretty bad at 41.8%.
I disagree with the premise that Williams would have the biggest immediate impact. That "impact" would be well over one year away. A lot of time for development. And really, Williams just wasn't that good.
The best prospect to develop with the higher upside is Chukwu (as you mentioned). And at a solid 7'0", he would provide a much different dynamic defensively than the other two.
Personally, I'd go Chukwu, then Coleby, then Williams.
I think Self would have gone Chukwu had he been ready to commit and take the scholarship. Chukwu really only looked at east coast schools the first time around, or those in very close proximity. Self could not wait and see. Coleby was the bird in the hand. When we look at Coleby's stats, he's certainly a reasonable add at his current rate of return. A guy that looks better on paper than all three of our non-descript back-up bigs.
But I'm not saying Williams wouldn't ultimately be better. Don't really know. But given that Chukwu only had one season of college ball .. at Providence no less .. I would also bet on that dude having the biggest upside at Kansas, and I actually would expect him to be the better player of the three (if he was at Kansas) in 2016-17.
We will never know.