Kings still have work to do - ESPN Insider [Archive]

thedofd

09-07-2004, 11:13 AM

Most of it's been said before, though I did find the trade suggestion w/ Phoenix interesting. Of course, if you think the Kings have concerns, take a look at the Charlotte Bobcats' roster.

THE COMPLETE TEXT OF THE ARTICLE IS AVAILABLE AT:

http://proxy.espn.go.com/espn/print?id=1876099&type=story

Heat, Kings and Grizzlies still have work to do

By Chad Ford, ESPN Insider

The free-agent frenzy is over, and a number of high-profile teams have a lot to show for it. With NBA spending at an all-time high and trades going down at a frantic pace, there is a growing parity in the league that gives hope to franchises that have had little to cheer about the past few years.

From Boston to Utah to Orlando and even Cleveland, GMs can stand up credibly after a busy summer and tell fans hope is on the way.

With all the focus the past two months on what teams have done in an effort to improve, it's just as instructive to look at what some teams have left to do.

Training camps start in less than a month, and a handful of potential contenders -- including the Heat, Grizzlies, Kings and Rockets -- are heading into the season with major holes left unfilled.

Today, Insider takes a look 10 teams that still need to make another move or two before training camp begins. Do the Heat have enough depth to make Shaq happy? Can the Kings add enough depth to make a difference in the West? Will the Grizzlies finally get their hands on a big man? Here's our take.

MIAMI HEAT

Holes: Power forward, small forward
Skinny: Shaquille O'Neal is big. But can the Big Aristotle play three positions? He might have to this year to compensate for the Heat's shocking lack of depth. Miami had to give up three starters for one in the Shaq trade. While Shaq is an enormous upgrade over Brian Grant at center, the team has yet to adequately fill holes at the four and three left by the departures of Lamar Odom and Caron Butler.

The team signed sharp-shooting Wesley Person (5.8 ppg, 2 rpg in '03-04) to play the three and goes into opening day with second-year forward Udonis Haslem (7.3 ppg, 6.3 rpg) as the starting power forward. Their bench players at that position, third-year forward Rasual Butler (6.8 ppg, 1.4 rpg), veteran big man Malik Allen (4.2 ppg, 2.6 rpg) and second-round pick Matt Freije don't exactly inspire confidence on a team that has championship aspirations.

Miami's starting backcourt looks good, but there's little depth there, either. Dwyane Wade is a phenomenal talent, but is he really a point guard? He had better be. Damon Jones is coming off the best season of his career, but he's more of a gunner than a point. Keyon Dooling? He couldn't crack the Clippers' rotation. Eddie Jones has been great for the Heat the past four seasons, but he turns 33 in October and shot a career low 41 percent from the field last season. His backup, rookie Dorell Wright looks like he has a ton of potential. But when you consider he just graduated from prep school a few months ago, how much help is he really going to be?

MEMPHIS GRIZZLIES

Holes: Center
Skinny: Brian Cardinal might be the hardest-working guy in the NBA, but he isn't going to be the player who puts the Grizzlies over the top next season. Jerry West has been looking for a legit big man for the past two seasons but still keeps coming up empty. Stromile Swift and Lorenzen Wright were good for the Grizz last season, but West still wants an upgrade. The Grizzlies were the front-runners to land Erick Dampier in a sign-and-trade earlier in the summer, but the Warriors weren't interested in what the Grizzlies were offering.

Last month the Grizzlies turned their attention to landing a younger, but riskier big man -- Eddy Curry. The Grizzlies have a ton of assets to throw at the Bulls, and a trade that would send Bonzi Wells and a re-signed Swift to Chicago for Curry, Eddie Robinson and Chris Jefferies works under the cap. Bulls GM John Paxson has grown weary of Curry's inconsistency and lack of conditioning. He showed up at the Bulls' training facility 35 pounds overweight six weeks ago -- after vowing to get in the best shape of his career as the season ended. Since then, Curry has been working out consistently and has gotten his weight down below 290 -- svelte for Curry.

However, talks have cooled over the past few weeks since Curry began working hard. If the Grizzlies don't land Curry -- who's left? The Grizzlies have a ton of assets to work with. The team has an astounding 10 players on its roster who play guard. No one needs four point guards and six players who can play shooting guard, not even Hubie Brown. The team also has Swift, who's hoping a team works out a sign-and-trade for him.

SACRAMENTO KINGS

Holes: Depth at shooting guard, small forward and power forward
Skinny: Remember a happier time when the Kings sported one of the deepest benches in the league? Those days are now gone. The Maloof brothers had to spend so much money signing free agents like Chris Webber, Mike Bibby, Brad Miller and Doug Christie that they can no longer afford to pay the role players that once made the Kings so successful. While Sacramento continues to have one of the most impressive starting fives in the league, its bench is going to be a big issue this year.

With the exception of Bobby Jackson, who is great backing up Bibby, and big man Greg Ostertag, who the Kings added to help Miller, the Kings are shockingly shallow this year. The team is looking for rookies and one second-year player to help out the rest of the team's starters. That's pretty scary considering the team's injury history. The best of the group is second-year forward Darius Songaila, who was solid in limited minutes backing up Webber and Miller last season. Given that Webber misses, on average, around 20 games per season, will Songaila be enough?

The rest of the group consists of first-round pick Kevin Martin (who lit up the summer league), second-round pick Ricky Minard and international free agent David Bluthenthal. Will he be able to bail them out if Peja Stojakovic goes down with an injury?

While we're at it, let's not forget that Stojakovic is publicly demanding to be traded, and Webber privately supports the idea. GM Geoff Petrie claims the team won't trade Peja, despite strong interest around the league. The Pacers have talked with the Kings about a Ron Artest for Stojakovic swap. Another one that could make some sense? Stojakovic and Christie to the Suns for Shawn Marion and Joe Johnson.

Markezi

09-07-2004, 11:26 AM

While we're at it, let's not forget that Stojakovic is publicly demanding to be traded, and Webber privately supports the idea. GM Geoff Petrie claims the team won't trade Peja, despite strong interest around the league. The Pacers have talked with the Kings about a Ron Artest for Stojakovic swap. Another one that could make some sense? Stojakovic and Christie to the Suns for Shawn Marion and Joe Johnson.First of all, the fact that "Webber privately supports the idea" is news to me - not shocking news (the contrary actually), but maybe I just missed this fact over the past month.

I've said it before and I'll say it again (and again) - as most other Kings fans have too - but I REALLY hope that Petrie is able to move Webber like the rumors have been saying this summer. At this point, I finally concede that I would take ANYONE - Allen Houston...Bryant Reeves...Alonzo Mourning...ANYBODY. I don't care if we lose his "talent" anymore -I'd rather have a complete void at power forward than Webber. I'd rather be able to root for the Kings than countdown the days until the worst contract in history ends.

I do NOT support trading Peja and Christie. Any situation in which Webber stays is bad for the Kings. Period.

monk

09-07-2004, 11:41 AM

If Webber privately supports a Peja trade how would we ever know? Doesn't private mean that he doesn't share that with anybody? Especially Chad Ford.

Evenstar

09-07-2004, 12:00 PM

HndsmCelt

09-07-2004, 12:10 PM

I an not sure that I agree with the statement that "any situation where Webber stays is bad for the Kings", but I do agree that trading both Pedja and Chritie is a bad call. Heck I am not even sure that the much vaunted Pedja for Artest trade makes the Kings any better, but I suspect that a happy and energized Artest would be more of an asset than a disgruntled and lethargic Pedja. As for the Webber coments, beceause of his injuries, short seasons and lack of a ring and givne the size of his contract he is virtualy untradeable. The Kings also have to consider the BEST line up they can put together with out him on the court. This is sort of a no brainer. Much respect and props to Darius, but Shifting Miller to the 4 and bringing Tag in to start at C is obviously the bets move. This of course leaves NO ONE to back up Tag. So the hole in the roster, the #12 slot if you will will most likely be a 3rd string Center. And yes it probaly will be a real unimpressive player unless some one takes a low pay one year contract to get exposuer (Jim Jackson style)... think N'diaye.

Kingsgurl

09-07-2004, 12:35 PM

First of all, the fact that "Webber privately supports the idea" is news to me - not shocking news (the contrary actually), but maybe I just missed this fact over the past month.

I've said it before and I'll say it again (and again) - as most other Kings fans have too - but I REALLY hope that Petrie is able to move Webber like the rumors have been saying this summer. At this point, I finally concede that I would take ANYONE - Allen Houston...Bryant Reeves...Alonzo Mourning...ANYBODY. I don't care if we lose his "talent" anymore -I'd rather have a complete void at power forward than Webber. I'd rather be able to root for the Kings than countdown the days until the worst contract in history ends.

I do NOT support trading Peja and Christie. Any situation in which Webber stays is bad for the Kings. Period.
The only place we've heard that rumored is in AV's opinion pieces. No one else across the whole league has picked up on that, not even the Chad Ford's who run with any little innuendo. Oh, and the street she lives on, can't forget that;)
You'd rather have a complete void at PF? When you get to this point, you have crossed the line from really wanting what is best for the team (which may be, in your opinion, trading Chris) into a whole different area, being so blinded by your desire to see Chris moved that you would do it, even if it destroyed the team.

ReinadelosReys

09-07-2004, 12:59 PM

Where to being?

::shakes head::

Heat, Kings and Grizzlies still have work to do

By Chad Ford

That says it all

Kingsgurl

09-07-2004, 01:06 PM

While Sacramento continues to have one of the most impressive starting fives in the league, its bench is going to be a big issue this year.

Well, at least we aren't trying to plug holes in the starting line-up. Adelman doesn't like to run real deep into the bench anyway. Bobby, Tag and Darius already put us at 8 in the rotation. Add in Kev, who will see playing time, and we are at 9.
As we have learned through traumatic personal experience, all the depth won't do us a bit of good if one of our key players suffers an untimely injury in the Post Season.

Mad D

09-07-2004, 01:10 PM

If Webber privately supports a Peja trade how would we ever know? Doesn't private mean that he doesn't share that with anybody? Especially Chad Ford.the man must be a witch. Burn him at dawn!!

C Diddy

09-07-2004, 01:10 PM

Chad Ford is great at taking nothing, throwing in a bunch of unfounded opinions, and putting it on a website. I feel bad for the easily swayed people that actually believe anything he writes.

VF21

09-07-2004, 01:51 PM

First of all, the fact that "Webber privately supports the idea" is news to me - not shocking news (the contrary actually), but maybe I just missed this fact over the past month.

I've said it before and I'll say it again (and again) - as most other Kings fans have too - but I REALLY hope that Petrie is able to move Webber like the rumors have been saying this summer. At this point, I finally concede that I would take ANYONE - Allen Houston...Bryant Reeves...Alonzo Mourning...ANYBODY. I don't care if we lose his "talent" anymore -I'd rather have a complete void at power forward than Webber. I'd rather be able to root for the Kings than countdown the days until the worst contract in history ends.

I do NOT support trading Peja and Christie. Any situation in which Webber stays is bad for the Kings. Period.
You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but you don't speak for me when you say "most other Kings fans" want Petrie to trade Webber.

Personally, I believe - and I believe MOST KINGS FANS agree - that our best solution would be for Chris and Peja to kiss and make up. And I think that's what the Maloofs and Petrie are working towards.

Chad Ford has continually shown he has no real insight when it comes to the Kings. I cannot imagine why he would gain so much credence, except when he actually says something that supports a particular point of view.

bibbyweb

09-07-2004, 02:03 PM

I've said it before and I'll say it again (and again) - as most other Kings fans have too - but I REALLY hope that Petrie is able to move Webber like the rumors have been saying this summer. At this point, I finally concede that I would take ANYONE - Allen Houston...Bryant Reeves...Alonzo Mourning...ANYBODY. I don't care if we lose his "talent" anymore -I'd rather have a complete void at power forward than Webber. I'd rather be able to root for the Kings than countdown the days until the worst contract in history ends.

Any situation in which Webber stays is bad for the Kings. Period.
This is one of the most illogical posts that I have seen on this board. Period.

Mr. S£im Citrus

09-07-2004, 02:28 PM

Now, let's be fair to Markezi... this board has only been around for a week.

Uhm... period...

Markezi

09-07-2004, 02:59 PM

You'd rather have a complete void at PF? When you get to this point, you have crossed the line from really wanting what is best for the team (which may be, in your opinion, trading Chris) into a whole different area, being so blinded by your desire to see Chris moved that you would do it, even if it destroyed the team.I understand your point, but considering the damage Chris has done to this team to date (morale, drugs, grand jury, quotes, booing debacle, missing over 25% of games), it is very debatable.

Perhaps I am blinded, but also consider the point that I love the Kings so much, it pains me to see them go down a path led by Webber. The team is turning into an unlikable team TO ME when the leader rips the best player and supports (at least according to this article) that player departing (in addition to all the other ridiculous circumstances I listed above).

I'm curious, obviously everyone knows how little respect I have for Chris Webber, the man; is there anything he could do (without being too sensationalistic) that would change your opinion and make you wish he wasn't representing your team and city?

VF21

09-07-2004, 03:07 PM

I for one am not about to fall into that old trap.

Nothing good, IMHO, can be gained by responding to a question that loaded.

uolj

09-07-2004, 03:33 PM

is there anything he could do (without being too sensationalistic) that would change your opinion and make you wish he wasn't representing your team and city?There are many things he could do that would make me wish he was no longer a King.
He could hurt physically hurt somebody - e.g. battery, physical abuse, etc.
He could play without any spirit for at least the first half of the season - making dumb mistakes and not giving effort.
He could play completely ineffectively for the first half of the season to the point of losing games for the team - e.g. forcing horrible shots, shooting a horrible percentage, and not helping with rebounds, assists, or defense. Note that he would have to play substantially worse than he did at times last season, and substantially worse than Stojakovic did in the playoffs (I still want Peja to be a King).
He could call out one or more important teammates in public by calling them names, saying things that were baseless and untrue, and claiming that they should defer to him at all times.
He could do anything that would make Petrie and company actually go through with a trade - since I generally trust Petrie's judgement in these cases.

And by the way, I don't think the idea of trading Webber for nothing is illogical at all. I just don't agree with it. He hasn't done anything above, or really come all that close.

monk

09-07-2004, 04:36 PM

Webber is still the team's best player.

Bballkingsrock

09-07-2004, 04:49 PM

Chad Ford doenst like the Kings. He has a problem.

AriesMar27

09-07-2004, 05:17 PM

Webber still is our best player and outside of Bibby.... was the only other player to show up in the playoffs this year.... Well... doug was there in the Dallas series, then he airballed away a game 7 again...

Webber isnt to blame for last season... Peja is and lets not forget that. webber went toe to toe with KG for 7 games, and still had the ballz to take the last shot. He put that entire series on his shoulders with that shot, if it had gone in and the kings won that series... he'd be a hero to all of you, but he missed and you hate his guts. If peja took that shot, you all would have been happy to see him at least try for once to carry the team and then blame Webber for not doing enough....

For the record, it was Peja's FT shooting that cost us Game 3 not Webbers....

Cozmosis

09-07-2004, 05:32 PM

I think the bench problems are a bit overrated. I think that the Kings should be OK in most cases. Shawn Marion? Ugh.

Markezi

09-07-2004, 05:36 PM

Webber is our best player?

Wow. I am in shock.

This ain't 2001-2002 folks. Even then it was debatable.

monk

09-07-2004, 05:42 PM

Webber is our best player?

Wow. I am in shock.

This ain't 2001-2002 folks. Even then it was debatable. Who is the best player then? Peja?

Regular Season:

Webber
18.7, 8.7, and 4.6 with 1.35 SPG and .87 BPG
Peja:
24.2, 6.3, and 2.1 with 1.33 SPG and .17 BPG

Playoffs:

Webber
18.4, 8.3, and 3.7 with 1.33 SPG and .83 BPG
Peja
17.5, 7.0, and 1.5 with 1.83 SPG and .25 BPG

And Webb was recovering from almost a year without playing.

Bballkingsrock

09-07-2004, 05:42 PM

Webber is the 4th best player behind Bibby, Bobby, Miller, and Peja.

Kingsgurl

09-07-2004, 05:43 PM

Heaven help us:)

Bballkingsrock

09-07-2004, 05:46 PM

You think Webber is the best? Think Again!!!

monk

09-07-2004, 05:48 PM

Webber is the 4th best player behind Bibby, Bobby, Miller, and Peja. HAHAHA!!!

Regular Season:

Webber
18.7, 8.7, and 4.6 with 1.35 SPG and .87 BPG
Peja:
24.2, 6.3, and 2.1 with 1.33 SPG and .17 BPG

Playoffs:

Webber
18.4, 8.3, and 3.7 with 1.33 SPG and .83 BPG
Peja
17.5, 7.0, and 1.5 with 1.83 SPG and .25 BPG

And Webb was recovering from almost a year without playing.

Bballkingsrock

09-07-2004, 05:49 PM

He was the one that missed the 3 pointer vs. the T-wolves!!! Why did we sink when Webber came back in the season? BECAUSE OF WEBBER!!!!

monk

09-07-2004, 05:50 PM

He was the one that missed the 3 pointer vs. the T-wolves!!! Why did we sink when Webber came back in the season? BECAUSE OF WEBBER!!!!
Give me a break. If you make 1 in 3 3-pointers you are doing OK. At least he took the shot, unlike another player you think is better than Chris.

VF21

09-07-2004, 05:51 PM

bballkingsrock -

Oh good.

The 3-pointer at the buzzer that went two/thirds of the way in and back out? Yeah, you're right. It's all Webber's fault. Every game should come down to whether or not the Kings can make a last second three to tie...

If you want to fault Webber, you might consider picking something other than his performance in the playoffs if you expect your arguments to be given any credence whatsoever.

monk

09-07-2004, 05:51 PM

nevermind. I'm getting dumber just reading Bballkingsrock's stuff.

Kingsgurl

09-07-2004, 05:52 PM

He was the one with the guts to take that shot. I didn't see Peja jumping up and down calling for the ball. Just as well, he probably would have bricked it off the side of the backboard.

Bballkingsrock

09-07-2004, 05:52 PM

Ok forget about the 3 pointer shot. That was Christies fault for giving him the ball. But what about the team sinking when Webber came back. We were 8-8 the first 16 games!!1 THAT STINKS!!!

Widowmaker2k

09-07-2004, 05:53 PM

I have to say that, if he can stay healthy, Webber will mean far more to us next year than Peja will. Sure Peja can shoot, but Webber can score, pass, block shots, and rebound. Even a hurt Webber was better than the Peja that showed up for the playoffs this year.

monk

09-07-2004, 05:56 PM

Ok forget about the 3 pointer shot. That was Christies fault for giving him the ball. But what about the team sinking when Webber came back. We were 8-8 the first 16 games!!1 THAT STINKS!!!
I guess that the team not being used to Webber on the floor didn't matter. I guess that Miller's injured elbow didn't matter. I guess Vlade's disappearing act didn't matter. I guess the signifigantly tougher schedule didn't matter either.

I wore a blue shirt the day I got a flat tire, so I obviously shouldn't wear blue shirts any more, right?

Widowmaker2k

09-07-2004, 05:56 PM

Ok forget about the 3 pointer shot. That was Christies fault for giving him the ball. But what about the team sinking when Webber came back. We were 8-8 the first 16 games!!1 THAT STINKS!!! Never mind that the schedule got tougher, we lost Bobby Jackson, Miller got hurt, and we stopped playing like a team. I guess you might be able to blame Webber for that last part, but it's not really his fault if the rest of the Kings just stand around and watch whenever he gets the ball.

Bballkingsrock

09-07-2004, 05:56 PM

monk

09-07-2004, 05:58 PM

Look All im saying is he did bad last year mostly in the season and some in the playoffs. Hopefully he can gain his strength and comeback with a healthy leg. Also LOOK WHO'S FAULT MADE PEJA WANT TO LEAVE!!!! WEBBER!!!! He didn't do "bad" when he came back. Did you even look at the stats I posted? Webber played better than Peja in both the regualr season and the playoffs.

Kingsgurl

09-07-2004, 05:59 PM

I could give a crap about the regular season. Yea, it was a shame that the team struggled, lost games they shouldn't have. Certainly some of it was do to integrating Chris, who was just coming of a potentially career ending injury. How convenient to dismiss, totally, the other factors at work. Tougher schedule, Bobby out, Brad injured, missing games, and far less effective than when he was healthy. Let's also totally dismiss the fact that the Kings of the early season ranked dead last in almost every statistical defensive catagory.

In the Play-Offs, when it mattered, which players stepped up for us? Chris, on one good leg, was one of the ones that did.

Bballkingsrock

09-07-2004, 05:59 PM

So, Webber took too many shots, made 30% of them

monk

09-07-2004, 06:00 PM

VF21

09-07-2004, 06:00 PM

Bball ... Webber didn't do badly in the playoffs. And we do not know that it was, in fact, Webber's fault for Peja's current little snit. Just as many people are saying it's the Maloof's fault because they didn't give the okay to pay Vlade enough to stay.

There's no need to yell. We can all read what you're saying...

Widowmaker2k

09-07-2004, 06:00 PM

Look All im saying is he did bad last year mostly in the season and some in the playoffs. Hopefully he can gain his strength and comeback with a healthy leg. Also LOOK WHO'S FAULT MADE PEJA WANT TO LEAVE!!!! WEBBER!!!!
Webber was the one who said he wasn't talking about Peja when he made his comments after we lost to the Twolves. He said something to the effect that it wasn't Peja's fault if his shots weren't falling, sometimes you go through shooting slumps. It seems more likely that Peja's request for a trade is just him being a drama-queen. I would bet that it was caused as much by Vlade's departure as by anything that Webber said.

monk

09-07-2004, 06:01 PM

So, Webber took too many shots, made 30% of them
Uh, no. He made 41% reg season and 45.5% playoffs. While Peja made 48% season, 38% playoff.

Kingsgurl

09-07-2004, 06:02 PM

Also LOOK WHO'S FAULT MADE PEJA WANT TO LEAVE!!!! WEBBER!!!!
The main impetous seems to be the fact he thought the Kings organization treated Vlade unfairly in not offering him more money. Should we blame Chris for that?
You don't honestly believe Peja is THAT weak minded he would demand a trade because Webb said the team needed to get tougher, do you? Do we really want him if he is?

Bballkingsrock

09-07-2004, 06:03 PM

Kingsgurl

09-07-2004, 06:06 PM

Look All im saying is he did badly last year mostly in the season and did 8/10 in the playoffs. Hopefully he can gain his strength and comeback with a healthy leg. No need for a fight. Some of the comments ticked Peja , but I know not all of it made him want to leave. OK?
He played 25? games last year, after they used a DeWalt Chuckless on his knee. How about we see what he looks like with a little more time to heal. Some of you may not remember what a force Webb can be. I do. I hope we will see that again.

VF21

09-07-2004, 06:07 PM

Bball - Look, all we're saying is there are a bunch of really sharp basketball fans on this forum. If you're going to make statements without substance in fact they're going to call you on them...

Webber did badly last year, mostly in the season? He didn't play in most of the season. When he did, no one with a scintilla of basketball knowledge expected him to be 100% right off the bat. As Adelman has said since in interviews, he knew it was gonna be tough for Webber but he (Adelman) also knew we were dead in the playoffs if Webb didn't come back.

No one knows, for sure, why Peja is ticked off. Remember, as Kingsgurl pointed out in another thread, Peja also wanted to quit the NBA after his first year and Vlade had to talk him into staying. This isn't new with Peja...

Now, can we all just get along?

Bballkingsrock

09-07-2004, 06:07 PM

Hopefully

Widowmaker2k

09-07-2004, 06:07 PM

Look All im saying is he did badly last year mostly in the season and did 8/10 in the playoffs. Hopefully he can gain his strength and comeback with a healthy leg. No need for a fight. Some of the comments ticked Peja , but I know not all of it made him want to leave. OK?

Agreed. It was sad watching Chris hobble around the court last season on one leg. A best-case scenario for all would be both Webber and Peja stepping up big next year. We can only hope.

Bballkingsrock

09-07-2004, 06:08 PM

OK we can get along. sorry Kingsgurl

monk

09-07-2004, 06:12 PM

scintilla
I love that word.

Bballkingsrock

09-07-2004, 06:13 PM

Oooookkkkkaaaaayyyy

Superman

09-07-2004, 06:17 PM

I understand your point, but considering the damage Chris has done to this team to date (morale, drugs, grand jury, quotes, booing debacle, missing over 25% of games), it is very debatable.
Some people view things very differently.

Perhaps I am blinded, but also consider the point that I love the Kings so much, it pains me to see them go down a path led by Webber. The team is turning into an unlikable team TO ME when the leader rips the best player and supports (at least according to this article) that player departing (in addition to all the other ridiculous circumstances I listed above).
When did he rip Peja (I assume that's who you're referring to when you speak of the best player; I don't agree, but that's a prevalent and respectable opinion) and support his departure?

I remember him saying: "I want to play with people who work hard.... Peja is a hard worker."

I don't see how that can be misconstrued to give you the belief that he ripped Peja (maybe something else is the interview makes you think that), and I certainly don't see how you can think that he wants Peja gone, not in light of that comment.

I'm curious, obviously everyone knows how little respect I have for Chris Webber, the man; is there anything he could do (without being too sensationalistic) that would change your opinion and make you wish he wasn't representing your team and city?
The things that were listed above were a good start. But there are more.

I'm not saying that Chris Webber is the consummate professional and that he can do no wrong. I'm saying that, at this point in time, I'd rather have Chris Webber than have no power forward at all. I'd rather have him than Bryant Reeves or Allan Houston, too. And I think that most "Kings fans" would agree with me.

Is he overpaid? Yes. Has he contributed to - perhaps even caused - chemistry issues? Yes. Has he been injury prone since he's been here? Yes. Has he missed 25% of the games? Yes. Has the team played okay without him? Yes. Does the team need him, healthy, (or a player with similar talent and ability) to win a championship? Yes, this season that is the case. Would I rather have him here than there? Yes.

Bballkingsrock

09-07-2004, 06:19 PM

He is no question overpaid!!!

ReinadelosReys

09-07-2004, 06:24 PM

:mad: No fair, Monk, KG and VF21 get to have all the fun. Now everyone is going to play nice/fair before I get a say in it!

Oh well, for future reference I guess:

-For someone who played "bad," Webb did relatively good. If bad is scoring 16-plus points 19 times, grabbing seven-plus rebounds 18 times and handing out four-plus assists in 16 games (I had more #'s on the assists, but they got lost in the meltdown), then I'd love to see what "horrible" looks like.

-Webb had hold drilled in his knees, had almost all the muscle in his leg deteriorate and then had to rehab for 10 months, not playing basketball, something he's done almost his whole life, 300 days to only come back and put on an amazing performance at Arco vs. the Clippers. Who else could have done that? Who? Peja, and no offense to him but I don't think so. Any one else? I highly doubt it. For that simple fact, and you could even add in there that his skills havn't diminished and his less than normal play was due more to lack of mobility and physical problems rather than diminished skills, makes him IMHO still the best player on the team. THAT BEING SAID it doesn't matter. The Kings just don't need him in top form, they need Peja, Mike, Doug, Brad, Bobby and who ever else wants to step up.

Bballkingsrock

09-07-2004, 06:26 PM

Whatever, that was so 10 minutes ago

Superman

09-07-2004, 06:26 PM

Ok forget about the 3 pointer shot. That was Christies fault for giving him the ball. But what about the team sinking when Webber came back. We were 8-8 the first 16 games!!1 THAT STINKS!!!
:rolleyes:

We were also 8-4 in the first 12. No one remembers that it took 12 more games for us to start losing after Webber came back. Wouldn't the negative effects of his presence have hurt us immediately? Why would it take 12 games for his cancerous presence to start dropping games for us?

The reasons we went 12-12 in our final 24 were Webber's prolonged integration, Vlade's hibernation, Brad's injury, Bobby's injury, and the much tougher schedule in late March and April. To blame it solely on Webb is out of this world to me. People preach about how much Bobby means to this team, and then ignore his absence when talking about our slide last season. People are so shocked that Vlade left because "he meant so much to the Kings", but ignore the fact that he decided - and commented on his decision - to take it easy down the stretch.

And let's not talk about the playoffs. Peja's the best player on the team? Okay, then why is it Webber's fault that we got bounced, when Peja mailed it in 4 out of 5 nights?

:: sighs prayerfully ::

Boy, I'll tell ya... this offseason can't end soon enough...

Bballkingsrock

09-07-2004, 06:29 PM

Dude its old no need to talk about it anymore. OK?

VF21

09-07-2004, 06:33 PM

Dude its old no need to talk about it anymore. OK?
Dude. This is a message board. As you've seen (and done yourself), people reply to posts when they see them.

You started this whole mess yourself. If you quit posting, people will - eventually - quit proving you wrong.

Bballkingsrock

09-07-2004, 06:33 PM

Again sorry

monk

09-07-2004, 06:36 PM

My momma always used to tell me "wrong is as wrong does."

Bballkingsrock

09-07-2004, 06:36 PM

cool

monk

09-07-2004, 06:44 PM

cool
Don't feel compelled to reply to every post, especially when you have nothing to add.

Kingsgurl

09-07-2004, 07:48 PM

OK we can get along. sorry Kingsgurl
No need to apologize to me. I was bored and enjoyed the debate, tired as it is. Besides, now we have a thread we can send the newbies too with "this has been discussed to death":)

Markezi

09-08-2004, 08:25 AM

Anytime stats are used to "prove" that one player is better or more valuable than another - the argument has already been lost.

So Webber averaged 20ppg last year? How does that make a difference when the Kings play UNDER .500 ball with him in the lineup? All it shows is that Webber is not a team player, disrupts chemistry in order to pad his stats, and does more bad than good when he is on the floor.

And by the way:
Webber is the 4th best player behind Bibby, Bobby, Miller, and Peja.I could not agree more.

Kingsgurl

09-08-2004, 08:37 AM

Anytime stats are used to "prove" that one player is better or more valuable than another - the argument has already been lost.

Rrriiigghhhttt. Everyone knows subjective opinion is much more substansive than stupid stats:rolleyes:
Webber has always been a true team player, one of the best passing bigs in the game. Last season was a bit of an aberration in that the team force fed him too much to get him reps, but given the amount of time the team had left to prepare for the PlayOffs, not all that surprising.
Why do you only look at his PPG stats then dismiss the rest? Look at boards, look at assists. Oh, that's right, stats don't mean anything unless they can be used to prove your point;)

Markezi

09-08-2004, 08:55 AM

Rrriiigghhhttt. Everyone knows subjective opinion is much more substansive than stupid stats:rolleyes:
Webber has always been a true team player, one of the best passing bigs in the game. Last season was a bit of an aberration in that the team force fed him too much to get him reps, but given the amount of time the team had left to prepare for the PlayOffs, not all that surprising.
Why do you only look at his PPG stats then dismiss the rest? Look at boards, look at assists. Oh, that's right, stats don't mean anything unless they can be used to prove your point;)Again, what is more important than a 12-13 record and slipping from first place to fourth place in a span of mere weeks?

The problem with your argument is the same problem with the NBA today: individuals over team.

AriesMar27

09-08-2004, 09:03 AM

Kingsgurl

09-08-2004, 09:16 AM

Again, what is more important than a 12-13 record and slipping from first place to fourth place in a span of mere weeks?

The problem with your argument is the same problem with the NBA today: individuals over team.
Really? I think you need to take a look. I'm saying the TEAM lost those games, not just Chris. Others here seem to be arguing that Chris, the individual, is solely responsible for the TEAMS poor play. Integrating a gimpy Chris into the line-up was certainly part of it, but not the only contributing factor.
You were the one that began this argument by stating you would rather have a void at PF than Chris Webber, a position that can't be construed as anything but detrimental to the team. Trading him would be a position you could support as better for the team, in your opinion. Getting nothing back just to be rid of him shows where your real motives lie.

mcsluggo

09-08-2004, 09:17 AM

Again, what is more important than a 12-13 record and slipping from first place to fourth place in a span of mere weeks?

The problem with your argument is the same problem with the NBA today: individuals over team.
Jeez, your own arguments are the single biggest argument against your arguments... :)

1. "Individuals over team." You mean like searching for all of the blame in one solitary individual player , and ignoring the overall monsoon of factors that affected the entire team at the same time....?

2. What is 12-13, but a stat. OF COURSE STATS MATTER. Its all in the interpretation of the whole, and not allowing yourself to be blinded by one particular narrow angle.

Markezi

09-08-2004, 09:25 AM

if the kings hadnt lost to the warriors in that last game or the suns we wouldnt be having this discussion. if they had won and peja hadnt showed up against the spurs you would still be whinning about webber. what does his regular season play have to do with the fact that peja didnt show up in the playoffs? in the end its different team same results, peja shutdown by someone shorter than him, the kings lose then we blame webber for it...1. In order to properly prepare for the playoffs, a contending team cannot finish the season playing sub .500 ball. Period. You don't prepare for a foot race by sitting on the couch and eating potato chips.
2. Your tiresome whining comment indicates that you are more interested in pointing blame at specific moments of missed opportunity rather than the big picture. You would do well in a government position. Peja was a leading candidate for the league MVP prior to Webber's return. After his return, Peja's shots per game dropped, he was not receiving the ball as much because ball movement in their offense nearly disappeared (due to Vlade sitting on the bench and Miller's injury) so it was more difficult for him to get in the flow of the game. We didn't lose in the playoffs. We lost long before the playoffs.
3. Webber is only partially responsible for the Kings losing. I blame poor coaching decisions upon Webber's return (he shouldn't have returned when he did, he should have started at 15-20 minutes when he finally did return, Adelman should have ensured that the offense continued to run through Vlade, Vlade should have stepped up, and on and on), as well as Webber's ego demanding that he take over the team and make it his regardless of what they'd accomplished to date. Oh yeah, and the drug policy failure. Nothing inspires a first place team in the home stretch of perhaps their single best season ever than having their self-appointed team leader fail the league drug test and get suspended. On top of a 5 game league suspension for lying to the federal grand jury of course - can't forget that.

bibbyweb

09-08-2004, 09:25 AM

Webber is the 4th best player behind Bibby, Bobby, Miller, and Peja.Yeah sure why dont u put in Kevin Martin and Ostertag in before Webber as well. Seriously do u know what you are even talking abt?
and by the way u need to take some math classes as well to get ur counting right

Markezi

09-08-2004, 09:33 AM

Jeez, your own arguments are the single biggest argument against your arguments... :)

1. "Individuals over team." You mean like searching for all of the blame in one solitary individual player , and ignoring the overall monsoon of factors that affected the entire team at the same time....?

2. What is 12-13, but a stat. OF COURSE STATS MATTER. Its all in the interpretation of the whole, and not allowing yourself to be blinded by one particular narrow angle.1. "Monsoon of factors?" Wow. Quite a statement. Were there not a "monsoon of factors" in place for the first 3/4 of the season when the Kings still managed a pace of about 40-15? I said early on this year (january) that the Kings won't win it all without a healthy Bobby. Therefore, my position has always been that his absense was the single biggest factor to their demise. However, the fact remains that the Kings managed to win without Bobby prior to Webber's return. Is it just coincidence that the team began losing to last place teams - repeatedly - once Webber returned? Do I blame him for that? For the umpteenth time - he is only the catalyst, not the scapegoat. Vlade voluntarily took a back seat. Miller was hurt for a short while and when he returned, Adelman limited his role. Adelman deferred the team chemistry to Webber. Each of these problems, other than Bobby, tie back to the negative impact Chris's return had on the team.
2. How is my explaining that going from first place to fourth place in a matter of games by losing to last place teams relying on individual player stats?

bibbyweb

09-08-2004, 09:37 AM

Look All im saying is he did bad last year mostly in the season and some in the playoffs. Hopefully he can gain his strength and comeback with a healthy leg. Also LOOK WHO'S FAULT MADE PEJA WANT TO LEAVE!!!! WEBBER!!!!
Could u give some credit to the sniveling baby's so called elder brother Vlade bailing out of Sacramento? I say bailing becasue he could have stayed here if he really wanted. Not to say that he should have.
And the other important thing is his own attitude of shying away from challenges? If at all Webber was calling him out then he should have the guts to stand up against it and show his mattle.
The way I see it is that he is afraid that he will fail again when the time to deliver comes and thats why he is talking abt places like Chicago where he will never have to worry abt things like playoffs. because they are never going to reach there.

Kingsgurl

09-08-2004, 10:12 AM

1. "Monsoon of factors?" Wow. Quite a statement. Were there not a "monsoon of factors" in place for the first 3/4 of the season when the Kings still managed a pace of about 40-15? I said early on this year (january) that the Kings won't win it all without a healthy Bobby. Therefore, my position has always been that his absense was the single biggest factor to their demise. However, the fact remains that the Kings managed to win without Bobby prior to Webber's return. Is it just coincidence that the team began losing to last place teams - repeatedly - once Webber returned? Do I blame him for that? For the umpteenth time - he is only the catalyst, not the scapegoat. Vlade voluntarily took a back seat. Miller was hurt for a short while and when he returned, Adelman limited his role. Adelman deferred the team chemistry to Webber. Each of these problems, other than Bobby, tie back to the negative impact Chris's return had on the team.
2. How is my explaining that going from first place to fourth place in a matter of games by losing to last place teams relying on individual player stats?
Your arguments are specious, at best. You admit the Kings needed a healthy Bobby, then dismiss his abscence two sentences later. You want to point to the 12-12 record to end the season, yet dismiss the fact that the Kings were 4-1 immediately following Chris' return, which might lead one to believe there were probably other mitigating factors at work, in addition to a gimpy Chris.
Vlade voluntarily took a back seat? Was he even still on the bus? I'm fairly certain no one went to him and said "Vlade, big fella, we know you are tired, why don't you just coast through the rest of the season? We have to make you suit up and all, but make sure you aren't expending too much effort out there, OK?" Chris' return did not mean Vlade had to become a non-factor.
Just a thought, but Brad's injury might have hampered his effectiveness.
Once again, the regular season doesn't matter. In the PlayOffs we needed a bit more production from a couple of key players. Chris did not make Vlade turn the ball over, he did not make Peja and Vlade miss 6 inch lay-ups. He didn't make Peja hit the side of the backboard or throw up shots that didn't even graze the rim.

Widowmaker2k

09-08-2004, 11:38 AM

Webber is the 4th best player behind Bibby, Bobby, Miller, and Peja.
Webber had more triple doubles in the playoffs then all of those players combined.

allrightythen

09-08-2004, 11:45 AM

This is a rather interesting discussion.
It seems to me that there is truth to both sides of the argument. The Kings game changed when Webber came back, and apperently not for the better. It's easy to put it on Webber and I'm sure at least a small percentage of the decline could be attributed to him, but there is no hard solid proof to back up the idea. Its also equally silly to try put the losses in the playoffs on Peja. He obviously did not play as good as we all believe he could. I don't think anyone can put a real reason to it either. I've heard a lot of theories, but seen little or no evidence. As Rasheed Wallace once put it "both teams played hard." The end of the regular season was tough and I was surprised they played as gutty as they did in the playoffs.

Daved

09-08-2004, 12:06 PM

It is possible for Webber to have done nothing wrong, and yet still be detrimental to the team. It is possible for him to try his best, but for the team to be better off without him.

Trading good or great players without getting fair value in return happens all the time, and except for maybe the Clippers, the point is to improve the team either now or in the future, or both. It is not foolish to think that trading Webber, even for less than his value, would be a good thing for the Kings.

Sure it would create a gaping hole at power forward, but that hole can be filled, especially by Petrie. It doesn't have to be filled by someone of Webber's caliber for the team to be improved, either. Moving Webber would completely change the dynamic of the team, potentially for the better.

Mr. S£im Citrus

09-08-2004, 12:31 PM

There's a fairly significant difference between getting back less value and trading him just or the sake of trading him. Getting lesser value (say Magliore/West for Webber) could be reasonably argued as addition by subtraction. Gettting rid of him just to be rid of him is bad business to be polite about it.

Daved

09-08-2004, 12:53 PM

To be honest, trading him just for the sake of trading him could really help the team. Doing it because you've got a personal vendetta, or because you just don't like him is bad business, but there would still be benefits.

With Webber, the Kings are a slow team. They were better on defense, but thats because they slowed the pace of the game down. I think with a younger, more athletic player at the PF spot, the rest of the team could hold down the scoring load as they did last year when he was out. At the same time, they should emphasize defense more than they did last year. Part of the reason their defense was so good in the playoffs was that they focused on it more. I think they would do that even without Webber in town, at the very least starting playoff time. With Miller at center, and hopefully somebody better than Songaila starting at PF, they could just show up and be better than last years pre-Webber defensive team.

IMO, if the team could approach last years pre-Webber success on offense, and improve on defense, they'd have a better chance at winning a championship than they do now with Webber in the lineup and in the locker room.

Markezi

09-08-2004, 01:11 PM

Daved - you are a breath of reality and fresh air.

Please continue posting!

Ryle

09-08-2004, 01:16 PM

To be honest, trading him just for the sake of trading him could really help the team. Doing it because you've got a personal vendetta, or because you just don't like him is bad business, but there would still be benefits.

With Webber, the Kings are a slow team. They were better on defense, but thats because they slowed the pace of the game down. I think with a younger, more athletic player at the PF spot, the rest of the team could hold down the scoring load as they did last year when he was out. At the same time, they should emphasize defense more than they did last year. Part of the reason their defense was so good in the playoffs was that they focused on it more. I think they would do that even without Webber in town, at the very least starting playoff time. With Miller at center, and hopefully somebody better than Songaila starting at PF, they could just show up and be better than last years pre-Webber defensive team.

IMO, if the team could approach last years pre-Webber success on offense, and improve on defense, they'd have a better chance at winning a championship than they do now with Webber in the lineup and in the locker room.
Quite frankly, if Peja would have showed up in the playoffs last year they would have had a better chance at winning a championship.

Widowmaker2k

09-08-2004, 01:17 PM

To be honest, trading him just for the sake of trading him could really help the team. Doing it because you've got a personal vendetta, or because you just don't like him is bad business, but there would still be benefits.

With Webber, the Kings are a slow team. They were better on defense, but thats because they slowed the pace of the game down. I think with a younger, more athletic player at the PF spot, the rest of the team could hold down the scoring load as they did last year when he was out. At the same time, they should emphasize defense more than they did last year. Part of the reason their defense was so good in the playoffs was that they focused on it more. I think they would do that even without Webber in town, at the very least starting playoff time. With Miller at center, and hopefully somebody better than Songaila starting at PF, they could just show up and be better than last years pre-Webber defensive team.

IMO, if the team could approach last years pre-Webber success on offense, and improve on defense, they'd have a better chance at winning a championship than they do now with Webber in the lineup and in the locker room.
I disagree, with Webber AND Vlade gone, we would either have to put the passing burden entirely on Miller, or switch to a traditional point-guard run offense. (Which wouldn't be entirely bad, but we wouldn't be the same team that had the early season success of last year.)

JB_kings

09-08-2004, 01:33 PM

I think people focus way too much on the last few months of the regular season. It was unusual circumstances and not a good indicator of the way next season's team will perform. Between the injuries to Brad and Bobby and the Miller/Divac starting role, the roster was in trouble no matter what. When Adelman decided to sacrifice games in exchange for getting Webber back into the mix, it was nearly automatic that the team would struggle. Well that scenario has changed and the situations and roles are very clear. We saw a glimpse of the future in the playoffs when Brad and Chris were very effective in the frontcourt. It's now up to Adelman and Peja to work out how Peja is going to get better shots. They have a whole training camp to get that done.
If you want something to worry about, keep an eye on Bobby and his ab injury. It could be serious enough to end his career if he has problems with it in training camp.

Mad D

09-08-2004, 01:40 PM

If you want something to worry about, keep an eye on Bobby and his ab injury. It could be serious enough to end his career if he has problems with it in training camp.ive heard he's been working out everyday since he was allowed him to, hope thats a good sign

Superman

09-08-2004, 01:43 PM

To be honest, trading him just for the sake of trading him could really help the team. Doing it because you've got a personal vendetta, or because you just don't like him is bad business, but there would still be benefits.No one in the Kings front office has a personal vendetta against Chris Webber. At least, not that I know of.

With Webber, the Kings are a slow team. They were better on defense, but thats because they slowed the pace of the game down. I think with a younger, more athletic player at the PF spot, the rest of the team could hold down the scoring load as they did last year when he was out. At the same time, they should emphasize defense more than they did last year. Part of the reason their defense was so good in the playoffs was that they focused on it more. I think they would do that even without Webber in town, at the very least starting playoff time. With Miller at center, and hopefully somebody better than Songaila starting at PF, they could just show up and be better than last years pre-Webber defensive team.Three considerations:

1) If you think the Kings were slow with Webber on the court, imagine how slow they'd be with Greg Ostertag and Brad Miller being the two best big men on the floor.

2) Who would that younger, more athletic player be that we could get by getting rid of Webber [for peanuts]? We're still over the cap without Webber's contract. Doesn't that basically put us without a power forward until Doug and Peja come off the books and we can sign a starting caliber power forward? And don't we have to spend the bulk of our money re-signing Peja? About the best thing we could do is trade Webber for a blow-up doll, and I'm not sure that the salaries would match.

3) Saying that the Kings should emphasize defense more than they did last season is, IMO, a joke, especially if you're saying that they'd be effective at doing so without Webber. We were in the bottom five in almost every defensive statistical category last season - without Webber. Season before last, we were one of the best - with Webber leading the way. Part of the reason that the Kings were better on defense in the playoffs is because they focused on it more; another part is Webber's contributions (and, to be fair, Peja's). Another part is the fact that Vlade didn't get many minutes in the playoffs. They could be better defensively just showing up without Webber, but that's not a testament to Webber's "poor defense." That's a testament to the fact that we replaced Vlade with Greg Ostertag, and we'll hopefully have a healthy Bobby Jackson, plus Mike Bibby another year removed from his foot injury. But we'll still have a gaping hole at power forward.

IMO, if the team could approach last years pre-Webber success on offense, and improve on defense, they'd have a better chance at winning a championship than they do now with Webber in the lineup and in the locker room.Why are people acting like Webber kills our offense? Haven't we been running the same offense for six years? People are dismissing five years of beautiful offense spearheaded by Chris Webber to talk about two months of less than beautiful offense spearheaded by Chris Webber. I can't say that I understand it. You don't think that Webb will return to pre-injury form? That's fine; he doesn't need to in order for us to run the offense through him at either the high or the low post.

By the way, our beautiful offense wouldn't have stood a chance against Detroit in the Finals. And we probably wouldn't have gotten past San Antonio or LA without playing any defense.

We're not going to improve on defense by leaving a hole at power forward, especially a hole that would have to be filled by Darius Songaila or Brad Miller, or any of the minimum salary free agents available right now. I think that's evidenced by the paltry defense we played without Webber last season.

Daved

09-08-2004, 01:53 PM

>Quite frankly, if Peja would have showed up in the playoffs last year they would have had a better chance at winning a championship.
Absolutely. Let's hope he improves on that performance this coming season.

>I disagree, with Webber AND Vlade gone, we would either have to put the passing burden entirely on Miller, or switch to a traditional point-guard run offense. (Which wouldn't be entirely bad, but we wouldn't be the same team that had the early season success of last year.)
Good point... The Kings would also lack a low-post presence. I think those negatives would be offset by the positives. It wasn't necessary for Vlade and Brad to be out there at the same time for the offense to be effective, so the only question is what would they do if Webber is gone when Brad is on the bench. I would hope that they could add more of a transition game again to the offense, which could still be effective when Miller sits.

Daved

09-08-2004, 02:12 PM

>1) If you think the Kings were slow with Webber on the court, imagine how slow they'd be with Greg Ostertag and Brad Miller being the two best big men on the floor.
I'd rather have Songaila start at PF than have Miller move over again, but I think Petrie would be able to find somebody better than Darius either in a trade or out of his magic hat.

>2) Who would that younger, more athletic player be that we could get by getting rid of Webber [for peanuts]? We're still over the cap without Webber's contract. Doesn't that basically put us without a power forward until Doug and Peja come off the books and we can sign a starting caliber power forward? And don't we have to spend the bulk of our money re-signing Peja? About the best thing we could do is trade Webber for a blow-up doll, and I'm not sure that the salaries would match.
I don't know, but like I said, even Songaila as the starter might be enough. I do know that Petrie has consistently found a way to fill in holes in the team, so I don't see why he wouldn't be able to here. The biggest point I'm making is that trading Webber for a blow up doll is not as ludicrous of a proposition as some might say.

>3) Saying that the Kings should emphasize defense more than they did last season is, IMO, a joke, especially if you're saying that they'd be effective at doing so without Webber. We were in the bottom five in almost every defensive statistical category last season - without Webber. Season before last, we were one of the best - with Webber leading the way. Part of the reason that the Kings were better on defense in the playoffs is because they focused on it more; another part is Webber's contributions (and, to be fair, Peja's). Another part is the fact that Vlade didn't get many minutes in the playoffs. They could be better defensively just showing up without Webber, but that's not a testament to Webber's "poor defense." That's a testament to the fact that we replaced Vlade with Greg Ostertag, and we'll hopefully have a healthy Bobby Jackson, plus Mike Bibby another year removed from his foot injury. But we'll still have a gaping hole at power forward.
I'm not sure I understand what you are saying here. You seem to agree with me, so I don't know why the thought of greater emphasis on defense is a joke. As I said above, Webber made the Kings a better defensive team. I think they can be better than they were before he returned last year even without him. The team and coaches have routinely emphasized defense more in the playoffs (thanks in large part to Webber), I think they would have done so again even without him.

>Why are people acting like Webber kills our offense? Haven't we been running the same offense for six years? People are dismissing five years of beautiful offense spearheaded by Chris Webber to talk about two months of less than beautiful offense spearheaded by Chris Webber. I can't say that I understand it. You don't think that Webb will return to pre-injury form? That's fine; he doesn't need to in order for us to run the offense through him at either the high or the low post.
I get the feeling he won't return to his pre-injury days. I underestimated the surgery's effects on him last year, I don't want to do it again. I thought he played well in the playoffs, but I think the Kings offense can be: a) better without Webber despite his skills/talent, and b) effective in the playoffs without him, despite the lack of a low-post/go-to guy.

>By the way, our beautiful offense wouldn't have stood a chance against Detroit in the Finals. And we probably wouldn't have gotten past San Antonio or LA without playing any defense.
True, but last year's attempt didn't work either. Its about giving yourself the best chance at the championship.

bibbyweb

09-08-2004, 03:16 PM

mcsluggo

09-08-2004, 03:20 PM

Have the Kings EVER been able to continue their fluid, movement offense once the playoffs started, or neared? (or has ANY team the last 15 years)

Every year the Kings (and every other high octane) offense gets slowed down in march and beyond. <<<In my opinion, this is a weakness of the nba, allowing the thuggery level to increase just because its playoffs time makes the games less enjoyable to watch.>>> But regardless, this happens EVERY year, not just last year. Even if you abstract away from the Kings losing Bjax, (and for all intents and purposes miller and vlade too) THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN SCORING LESS because of the increased thuggery.

Does anybody honestly believe that Peja would have had an easier time shedding Hassel (or whomever was draped on his back) just because webber wasn't there? Why do you believe so?

The King's game wasn't the only game to change at the end of the season, The nba game changes in march. it happens every year. EVERY year, not just last year.

thedofd

09-08-2004, 03:24 PM

We've been down the trade CWebb/don't trade CWebb road a number of times this summer. If the Kings felt they absolutely had to get rid of him for the good of the team, they might not have to give him away. There are teams out there that might be willing to take the risk that he'll return to full health because: A) they have bad contracts or problem players of their own to dump or B) they need to shake up a stagnant situation.

Of course, the Kings couldn't expect to get a superstar in return. The best they could probably do is fill some holes (notably power forward, backup small forward or shooting guard) or bet on younger players developing.

TO MAKE IT CLEAR, I'm not advocating trading CWebb. In fact, the Kings'
biggest challenges right now, in my view, ironing out Peja's dissatisfaction and finding someone who can swing between the two forward spots in a backup role. But just for fun, here are some potential CWebb trades off the top of my head that work, according to RealGM.com:

To Portland, for Shareef, Qyntel Woods and Vladimir Stepania

To New York, for Allan Houston (yeah, I know), Kurt Thomas and Mike Sweetney

To Chicago, for Curry and Antonio Davis

To Memphis, for Lorenzen Wright, Mike Miller and Posey.

mcsluggo

09-08-2004, 03:25 PM

I understand that many people don't like webber. Fine. but to think that the exact same team the kings had in the playoffs, merely sans webber, would have been better than the team with webber is simply ridiculous. Why does anyone believe that Vlade would've suddenly re-emerged, or bjax wouldve stormed the court or miller's shoulder wouldv'e magically healed, or peja would've been able to shake the second skin defenders.

Obviously webber's absence couldn't've healed bjax or miller. If you believe it COULD have miraculously healed vlade or peja, then WHAT THE HELL DOES THAT SAY ABOUT THEM? Webber has been their team-mate for the last 5 (ish) years. Its not he was just some mysterious stranger coming out the jungles of brooklyn, and they had no idea what to expect.

Did vlade and Peja suck the last 5 years?
why not?
they were forced to play with the Webber anvil that entire period as well?

monk

09-08-2004, 03:59 PM

Why would anybody want to trade the team's best player?

Kingsgurl

09-08-2004, 03:59 PM

McSluggo, JB Kings, Ryle, excellent points. Good to have you guys back.

Superman

09-08-2004, 04:10 PM

I'd rather have Songaila start at PF than have Miller move over again, but I think Petrie would be able to find somebody better than Darius either in a trade or out of his magic hat.

...

I don't know, but like I said, even Songaila as the starter might be enough. I do know that Petrie has consistently found a way to fill in holes in the team, so I don't see why he wouldn't be able to here. The biggest point I'm making is that trading Webber for a blow up doll is not as ludicrous of a proposition as some might say.For three years we've been right there, but unable to do it. And now you're saying that replacing Chris Webber with the likes of Darius Songaila is going to give us a good shot at winning a championship? We couldn't get past old one-dimensional Dallas with Keon Clark (better defender and scorer than Songaila) in the lineup instead of Webber.

We need someone who can block shots, rebound, and even give us some back to the basket scoring. Someone who can run the offense from the high post would help, too. Sounds like Webber, to me.

We are NOT a championship caliber squad with Songaila starting at power forward, nor with him as our third big man (unless Tim Duncan and Shaq are 1 and 2).

I'm not sure I understand what you are saying here. You seem to agree with me, so I don't know why the thought of greater emphasis on defense is a joke.You don't get better defensively by just "emphasizing defense more". I can't remember how many times Adelman said in the Bee that he had the guys working on defensive drills, rebounding, etc., almost exclusively. It made little to no difference, because we didn't have the personnel. And we don't have the personnel with a blow up doll instead of Webber, either. We wouldn't have made it past Dallas without Webber; our defense just wasn't good enough.

As I said above, Webber made the Kings a better defensive team. I think they can be better than they were before he returned last year even without him. The team and coaches have routinely emphasized defense more in the playoffs (thanks in large part to Webber), I think they would have done so again even without him.We probably would be better defensively sans Webber this season than we were last season, but that's due in large part to Greg Ostertag.

We need three big men who can play serious basketball in the NBA; I'm not ready to ask Darius Songaila (or some other minimum salary scrub) to fill Chris Webber's 20/10/4 shoes.

I get the feeling he won't return to his pre-injury days. I underestimated the surgery's effects on him last year, I don't want to do it again.Like I said, it's not necessary for him to return to pre-injury form in order for him to run the offense from the high post. He's been doing it for years now, just as Vlade was, and it takes no great deal of athleticism to do it.

I thought he played well in the playoffs, but I think the Kings offense can be: a) better without Webber despite his skills/talent, and b) effective in the playoffs without him, despite the lack of a low-post/go-to guy.Without Chris Webber, we are last year's Dallas Mavericks. All offense, no defense. I don't understand why you'd want to leave such a huge hole at the 4 spot, just because of 2 months of less than expected play last season.

And we all know how well Peja (our top scorer) played in the playoffs. Can't blame that on Webber.

True, but last year's attempt didn't work either.Neither did any other year's attempt. And the two years we had the best shot at a championship ('02 and '03), Chris Webber was either right there playing a large part in our postseason drive or was on the sideline watching his team get beat by an inferior team.

Its about giving yourself the best chance at the championship.Are you telling me that we have a better shot at winning a championship with Songaila starting at power forward than we do with Chris Webber starting at power forward?

Daved

09-08-2004, 04:11 PM

>Unless we have get someone with really good low post capabilities, it is impossible for the kings to win a championship.
I simply disagree - it is not impossible.

Regarding the question of whether the Kings would be able to perform on offense in the playoffs without Webber - I don't know. I do think Peja would have played better last year without Webber there (it is Peja's fault that he did not - not Webber's). I also think that the Kings offense could succeed in the playoffs despite the different style of play. This would be especially true this coming year if Webber was not there - as they would have had approximately a season and a half to get good at it and adjust it as necessary to the playoff style.

>Why would anybody want to trade the team's best player?
There can be many reasons. Why were the Diamondbacks considering trading Randy Johnson? Why did the 49ers trade Terrell Owens? Why did the Lakers trade Shaq? (Ok, so those examples all have in common a trade request - I guess we should trade Peja http://www.kingsfans.com/forums/images/smilies/biggrin.gif).

Seriously, though, when your best player is your best player only by a little bit, and when you have several other all-star caliber players whose contributions to the team could be enhanced by his departure, then it is entirely conceivable that losing your best player can make your team better.

Bricklayer

09-08-2004, 04:14 PM

TO MAKE IT CLEAR, I'm not advocating trading CWebb. In fact, the Kings'
biggest challenges right now, in my view, ironing out Peja's dissatisfaction and finding someone who can swing between the two forward spots in a backup role. But just for fun, here are some potential CWebb trades off the top of my head that work, according to RealGM.com:

To Portland, for Shareef, Qyntel Woods and Vladimir Stepania

To New York, for Allan Houston (yeah, I know), Kurt Thomas and Mike Sweetney

To Chicago, for Curry and Antonio Davis

To Memphis, for Lorenzen Wright, Mike Miller and Posey.
Because everyone knows that the route to a championship is to acquire as many middling players as you can.

Superman

09-08-2004, 04:15 PM

Peja struggled in the playoffs because 1) he was given more attention in the playoffs, and 2) he hasn't learned to use his size to get his shot off on smaller defenders.

If he would have miraculously played better without Webber, than that means that he gave up and didn't try as hard as he could have. And if that's the case, then we should trade him.

Markezi

09-08-2004, 04:33 PM

Daved

09-08-2004, 04:35 PM

I understand that we've been so close the last few years thanks to Chris Webber. I believe he will be a very good, maybe great, player this year. I believe he is the Kings best player. I will stipulate all of that - my arguments don't assume otherwise. I am not blaming Webber for any of the teams previous failures.

The current team is different, even if only a little, than the ones that came close in 2002 and 2003. They have the talent and ability to succeed even without their best player.

>If he would have miraculously played better without Webber, than that means that he gave up and didn't try as hard as he could have. And if that's the case, then we should trade him.
It could also mean that he would have performed better in a different offensive system that focused on him instead of Webber. I question Peja's heart, too, but I think it is something that can be overcome.

>Are you telling me that we have a better shot at winning a championship with Songaila starting at power forward than we do with Chris Webber starting at power forward?
Yes, I think so. I'd prefer that they try. Why is that so inconceivable?

thedofd

09-08-2004, 05:03 PM

Because everyone knows that the route to a championship is to acquire as many middling players as you can.
Well, the route to the championship hasn't run through Chris Webber, so far as I know.

God, do we have to go through this again? I'm not advocating trading Chris. But if the Kings decide that, whether because of chemistry or because they don't see him getting back to pre-injury form, they absolutely must trade Chris, they're not going to get as much for him as we'd all hope.

Brick, if you're a moderator, you might consider taking a more moderate tone. Your sarcasm doesn't add much, in my book.

Superman

09-08-2004, 05:16 PM

I'm not necessarily going to argue that the Kings are a better team without Webber, but they are a healthier team, a more likeable team, and the future of the team would be much brighter. However, considering the negative effect Webber has had on this team over the past two years (specifically referring to the neverending onslaught of injuries), they very well could prove to be a better team. The mental and physical health of a team many times can be the thing that tips a team from very good to elite - there's no doubt that this was the factor last season when the Kings raged without Chris in the lineup.

I also think it's naive to think that Webber will be anywhere near the player he has ever been with this injury at this age. He will be lucky to play 60 games this year. The history of this injury is that it will be aggravated again, and more surgery will be necessary at some point. This is not a sprained ankle. It's almost always a career-ending injury. Placing hopes on Webber to lead this team to the promised land at this point in time is not realistic.
Good points.

Something else to consider regarding the Kings fast start is the fact that they had a relatively soft schedule in the first part of the season.

Either way, I understand your viewpoint. I don't necessarily agree with it, especially when you say that this is almost always a career ending injury. Is it serious? Yes. But I think that Webber can be much better this season than he was last year, more active, have better lateral movement, and be more comfortable from start to finish.

Superman

09-08-2004, 05:22 PM

The current team is different, even if only a little, than the ones that came close in 2002 and 2003. They have the talent and ability to succeed even without their best player.I assume you think that this team is better sans Webber than it was in 2003, when we had the deepest bench in the League (Pollard and Turkoglu couldn't see time). What makes that the case?

It could also mean that he would have performed better in a different offensive system that focused on him instead of Webber. I question Peja's heart, too, but I think it is something that can be overcome.The fact that he shot 38% in the playoffs says something about his ability to elevate his game and adjust to the pressure that he'll always get in the playoffs. If he couldn't do that this season, why should we expect that he could do it without Webber? Put Songaila at power forward, and that's one more man that they can double off of.

The fact that Peja's attempts per game dropped, I can see that being due to Webber's presence. But the fact that his percentages dropped is no one's fault but his own. If 6'10" Peja Stojakovic can't get his shot off against 6'5" Trenton Hassell, then he needs a big man to play with. Songaila isn't the answer.

Are you telling me that we have a better shot at winning a championship with Songaila starting at power forward than we do with Chris Webber starting at power forward?Yes, I think so. I'd prefer that they try. Why is that so inconceivable?...

Let me just say that that is NOT the answer I was expecting.

C Diddy

09-08-2004, 06:17 PM

Well, the route to the championship hasn't run through Chris Webber, so far as I know.

Exactly. Same goes for Malone, Stockton, Barkley, etc. The route to the championship never ran through them either. What were the GM's thinking not trading them for a bunch of low-middle tier players who have 1/3 of the talent that Malone, Stockton, Barkley do.

Heck, Toronto has never won a title with Vince Carter, you think they'd take Songaila, Christie, and Martin in exchange?

Don't get upset at the moderators for attacking a weak opinion. That's what a forum is about. Either come strong or play in the +1 threads in the Lounge.

thedofd

09-08-2004, 06:28 PM

Exactly. Same goes for Malone, Stockton, Barkley, etc. ."

We're not talking about them, are we? We're talking about Webber, coming off a major knee injury. It's interesting that you bring up Malone and Stockton; some Kings fans probably fear that the Kings are going to end up just like the Jazz -- good enough to tease every season but never quite reaching the promised land.

Don't get upset at the moderators for attacking a weak opinion. That's what a forum is about. Either come strong or play in the +1 threads in the Lounge.
Who the hell are you to tell anyone how to post? What makes you think your opinion is more valuable than anyone else's? Is that strong enough for you? Go play with ... well, just go.

I guarantee you that the Kings discussed at least one of those trades prior to the trade deadline. Whether they discussed it seriously or not or whether they started the dialogue or just listened, I can't say. But they weren't totally insulted by them, given the circumstances.

If CWebb comes back healthy, I suspect no one will be talking about trading him.

Daved

09-08-2004, 06:33 PM

>I assume you think that this team is better sans Webber than it was in 2003, when we had the deepest bench in the League (Pollard and Turkoglu couldn't see time). What makes that the case?
Yes I do. Depth 6-12 isn't as important as 1-8. Miller is better than Divac was, Ostertag is better than our backup "centers" were, Stojakovic improved a little, Bibby is playing much better, assuming Jackson is healthy he isn't any worse, and Christie may or may not be the same depending on how things go. I think even with Songaila starting (which, again, I doubt would be necessary), the move from Keon/Hedo to Darius isn't as big of a negative as those are positives.

>Let me just say that that is NOT the answer I was expecting.
Sorry! http://www.kingsfans.com/forums/images/smilies/smile.gif If that possibility can be accepted, I think it would be easier to at least understand the arguments why. Just because many of the Kings fans who want Webber out use "specious" and inflammatory arguments doesn't mean there isn't valid reasoning out there also.

C Diddy

09-08-2004, 06:44 PM

"

We're not talking about them, are we? We're talking about Webber, coming off a major knee injury. It's interesting that you bring up Malone and Stockton; some Kings fans probably fear that the Kings are going to end up just like the Jazz -- good enough to tease every season but never quite reaching the promised land.We're talking about Chris Webber and shipping him off for a bunch of nobodies. You countered Bricklayer's opinion by stating "the championship hasn't run through Webber..." so unless you didnt really read what Bricklayer was responding to, you are insinuating that because Webber hasn't got us a title, we should ship him. My point was that there are a lot of great players who never won a title.

Who the hell are you to tell anyone how to post? What makes you think your opinion is more valuable than anyone else's? Is that strong enough for you? Go play with ... well, just go.
Again, it seems like you aren't reading the entire post before you responded. I wasn't telling you how to post, I was telling you that if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

If you can't bring a strong opinion on this site, your take is gonna be attacked by the many, many knowledgeable fans on this site.

But hey, if I was out of line, then I apologize.

Kingsgurl

09-08-2004, 07:35 PM

The history of this injury is that it will be aggravated again, and more surgery will be necessary at some point.
The history of this injury is that it takes a while to recover from. Who has required additional surgery to fix the same problem? Doug Christie had the same surgery, and while he was much younger and his recovery time quickened by the fact the body heals faster when young, he seems to move quite well laterally.

Kingsgurl

09-08-2004, 07:36 PM

Who the hell are you to tell anyone how to post? What makes you think your opinion is more valuable than anyone else's? Is that strong enough for you? Go play with ... well, just go

You started that one, telling Brick how to post as a moderator. This discussion was going along quite amicably before that.

NME

09-08-2004, 07:42 PM

If CWebb comes back healthy, I suspect no one will be talking about trading him.
Well, I wouldn't say no one. ;)

JoMama

09-08-2004, 07:46 PM

Well, I wouldn't say no one. ;)
You can take that one to the bank. :D

Bricklayer

09-08-2004, 07:57 PM

Well, the route to the championship hasn't run through Chris Webber, so far as I know.

God, do we have to go through this again? I'm not advocating trading Chris. But if the Kings decide that, whether because of chemistry or because they don't see him getting back to pre-injury form, they absolutely must trade Chris, they're not going to get as much for him as we'd all hope.

Brick, if you're a moderator, you might consider taking a more moderate tone. Your sarcasm doesn't add much, in my book.
You can keep your book. And yes, we have to go through this as long as you keep raising the issue. Stop, and I promise I will stop replying as well.

Let's try another book. Let's call it "History of NBA Championships in the Modern Era". You should check it out.

If you do, you will note that there was perhaps ONE team in the past 25 years in the NBA that won the chmapionship based on its depth -- the old Bad Boys Pistons. The Showtime Lakers were 6 deep. The Celtics about the same. Ditto the 76ers. The PJ Bulls and Lakers were extraordinarily dependant on a handful of all-time talents with role players all around. Even the surprise Pistons this year played 5 in the Finals to win it.

The point being this -- the two most easily identifiable weaknesses the Kings have had over the years vis a vis the championship teams have been 1) injuries (NO modern championship team has ever had stars down for their playoff run), and 2) a LACK of dominant players. Neither Webber (close) nor Peja (not as close) is on the same level of greatness as the HOF players that typically head up a championship team.

Now you can trade Webber for anyone you want. But don't kid yourself that that means anything but pure rebuilding for the Kings unless you can somehow magically bring back a HOF type player for Webber. Peja alone is nowhere near the caliber of #1 option that you need to get it done, and you can surround him with as many good but not great players as you want. So if you're going to dump Webber you are almost by defintion going to be getting FURTHER from a title, not closer. And further for us at this point can roughly be translated into "out of the picture".

This team likely gets one more year unless Peja sulks and forces his way out of town. One more shot. There are no teams impossible to beat for us out there, even with our flaws. Everybody else has them too. If we fall short again, I have little doubt Webb will be very much on the table, Adelman will be gone, Bobby will be gone, Doug might be gone, unless we try to play the caproom game, Peja will be dangled. Team will be blown up. But when and if Webb gets moved, its over. Time to start from scratch. You need a truly dominant player to have any sort of shot at all. Webb is the closest thing we have. He keeps us in the hunt if somebody else stumbles. Once he's gone, doesn't matter if somebody else stumbles or not -- we no longer have the horses. Two 12ppg scorers do not come close to equalling one 24ppg scorer in the NBA. Its not a game of acumulation. Its a game where great players have a disproprtionate effect on the outcome. If you can't get an upgrade for Webber by trading him, then doing so is an admission that that tropy isn't coming to town for a long long time.

Markezi

09-08-2004, 09:36 PM

Good points.

Something else to consider regarding the Kings fast start is the fact that they had a relatively soft schedule in the first part of the season.

Either way, I understand your viewpoint. I don't necessarily agree with it, especially when you say that this is almost always a career ending injury. Is it serious? Yes. But I think that Webber can be much better this season than he was last year, more active, have better lateral movement, and be more comfortable from start to finish.
It's rare enough when a starter comes back from this injury at a young age. To come back from it post 30 is unheard of. The fact that he played at all last season is absolutely incredible - he proved his point: his body handled the challenge.

Unfortunately, he made the point at the expense of many other things.

I would be very happy to see him come back to 90%+ - but I'll be honest, my happiness would be with ulterior motives...that he would be better trade fodder. I just don't buy the argument that trading an all-star caliber player ends our hope for a run at the title when the player in mind has never been able to take us there before - even in the rare example when he was healthy.

Markezi

09-08-2004, 09:45 PM

Kingsgurl

09-08-2004, 11:24 PM

Agreed. It is fascinating to me how keeping an open mind to the benefits of trading Webber makes some people absolutely livid and venemous.I've got a pretty open mind about it, or any trade that would improve the Kings. Trading him for a 'void at PF' would not. Bottom line.

Kingsgurl

09-08-2004, 11:31 PM

It's rare enough when a starter comes back from this injury at a young age. To come back from it post 30 is unheard of. The fact that he played at all last season is absolutely incredible - he proved his point: his body handled the challenge.

.
Gee, you mean like Doug? Who are these myraid other players you keep reffering to? The ones requiring additional surgeries, etc? Mashburn comes to mind, but his surgery was never any where near as successful as Chris' from the get go, and he isn't contemplating additional surgery. Chris hasn't 'proved his point' The only point Chris wants is a Championship. What he did prove is he has the desire to come back from this.

bdouble013

09-08-2004, 11:31 PM

Like Kingsgurl said its not that some of us are opposed to trading Webber. Its just that by trading him most of us hope that the Kings can get something in return that will get us closer to wining a championship. If they can't get closer to a ring then whats the point?

Superman

09-09-2004, 12:44 AM

I assume you think that this team is better sans Webber than it was in 2003, when we had the deepest bench in the League (Pollard and Turkoglu couldn't see time). What makes that the case?Yes I do. Depth 6-12 isn't as important as 1-8. Miller is better than Divac was, Ostertag is better than our backup "centers" were, Stojakovic improved a little, Bibby is playing much better, assuming Jackson is healthy he isn't any worse, and Christie may or may not be the same depending on how things go. I think even with Songaila starting (which, again, I doubt would be necessary), the move from Keon/Hedo to Darius isn't as big of a negative as those are positives.2002-03 rotation: Bibby, Christie, Peja, Chris (whom you conveniently left out of your synopsis, which is curious since he was 23/10/5, played more consistently and bailed us out in the clutch several times that year), Vlade, Bobby, Keon, Jimmy.

2004-05 rotation, sans Webber: Bibby, Christie, Peja, Songaila (or whoever else you're imagining at the spot), Miller, Bobby, Ostertag, ...?

I'll take the 2003 rotation.

Let me just say that that is NOT the answer I was expecting.Sorry! http://www.kingsfans.com/forums/images/smilies/smile.gif If that possibility can be accepted, I think it would be easier to at least understand the arguments why. Just because many of the Kings fans who want Webber out use "specious" and inflammatory arguments doesn't mean there isn't valid reasoning out there also.That's true. But I don't see any reason as being valid enough to leave a gaping hole at power forward, especially when we have someone as capable as Webber manning the position. If he can block a shot or two a game, grab 10+ rebounds and keep his percentages high, we'll be fine.

Superman

09-09-2004, 12:55 AM

I would be very happy to see him come back to 90%+ - but I'll be honest, my happiness would be with ulterior motives...that he would be better trade fodder. I just don't buy the argument that trading an all-star caliber player ends our hope for a run at the title when the player in mind has never been able to take us there before - even in the rare example when he was healthy.
Do you agree that the Kings are better and more capable of winning a championship with a 90% Webber than they are without him?

Before you answer, consider 2003, when Webber was probably between 75-80% healthy all season long (back problems, ankle problems, knee problems, hand problems). We finished 59-23, and when everybody was clicking, Webber went down. We lost to an inferior team that many were expecting us to sweep, mostly because they had no answer for Webber.

Then think about 2002, when we were at our absolute closest. No Peja, but the Webber-Bibby tandem got us to Game 7 of the WCF.

I get the sneaky suspicion that Webber could win the MVP and we could win 60 games, and you'd still want him gone. Excuse me for saying this, but there's a difference between thinking that we could be a better team without a certain player having a personal vendetta against a person and just wanting him gone no matter what, even if it's a one step forward, two steps back type of thing.

How does getting rid of Webber make us a better team?

#1sacfan

09-09-2004, 08:04 AM

Why would anybody want to trade the team's best player?
Nobody wants to trade Pedja, they are talking about trading Webber

slugking50

09-09-2004, 09:50 AM

Nobody wants to trade Pedja, they are talking about trading Webber
lol.... Your funny. Im not really a Webber fan but I wouldn't be crazy enough to say that:p

I'd like Webber to head out but only for a deal that would better the team and not make this team alot worse (which every deal possible has been).

With Webbs salary and his unknown condition he is untradable. I don't see why its even an issue to talk about. No GM would be dumb or crazy enough to do a deal... so lets give it a rest people..... sheesh. Please?

If Webber did not come back last year Dallas would've beat us in 4 games. Our defense was pitiful!! Webber made our defense much better.

This team should be much better defesively while sacrificing some offense. I know in the first 10 games we'll here Webber is killing our offense but in the Postseason this team will be much better. Of course thats if Peja gets toilet trained ansd Webbs somewhat healthy.

thedofd

09-09-2004, 12:09 PM

You can keep your book. And yes, we have to go through this as long as you keep raising the issue. Stop, and I promise I will stop replying as well.
I didn't raise the issue. I was responding to a post by Daved, who essentially said: Get rid of Webber at all costs. I disagree. Webber is, when healthy, the Kings' biggest asset. I said that if circumstances -- fear that Webber wouldn't return to anything near peak form or ongoing chemistry issues -- forced the Kings into making a trade, there could be deals out there for him, even at a point where his future is cloudy.

Whether the trades I pulled out of my (ahem) hat were acceptable or not to Kings fans, I think this much is true: Webber's trade value right now is at an all-time low. The best you could hope to get for him -- again, right now -- would be someone to throw into the 4 spot and perhaps a backup or two. Do I advocate doing that? No. But it's unrealistic to think that, until the state of Webber's health is known and he re-establishes himself as a preeminent power forward, that you can trade him for anyone who is going to make fans ooh and ahhh.

" ... the two most easily identifiable weaknesses the Kings have had over the years vis a vis the championship teams have been 1) injuries (NO modern championship team has ever had stars down for their playoff run), and 2) a LACK of dominant players. Neither Webber (close) nor Peja (not as close) is on the same level of greatness as the HOF players that typically head up a championship team.
Couldn't agree with you more. Of course, those who would trade Webber would use both of those points to support their position: CWebb inevitably has injuries that keep him out for long stretches and CWebb lacks something -- be it tangible or intangible -- that will allow him to be the dominant player on a championship level team. That's not a knock on Chris; as someone else mentioned, lots of great players have failed to win championships. Not everyone can be Michael Jordan or Larry Bird. And the Kings have had exceptionally bad luck. But this is reality ...

Now you can trade Webber for anyone you want. But don't kid yourself that that means anything but pure rebuilding for the Kings unless you can somehow magically bring back a HOF type player for Webber. Peja alone is nowhere near the caliber of #1 option that you need to get it done, and you can surround him with as many good but not great players as you want. So if you're going to dump Webber you are almost by defintion going to be getting FURTHER from a title, not closer. And further for us at this point can roughly be translated into "out of the picture".

This team likely gets one more year unless Peja sulks and forces his way out of town. One more shot. There are no teams impossible to beat for us out there, even with our flaws. Everybody else has them too. If we fall short again, I have little doubt Webb will be very much on the table, Adelman will be gone, Bobby will be gone, Doug might be gone, unless we try to play the caproom game, Peja will be dangled. Team will be blown up. But when and if Webb gets moved, its over.
Don't know if I agree with you totally here. While I agree that the NBA is wide open this year -- why not the Kings? -- I remember what Bill Walsh used to say in the heyday of the 49ers: Better to make moves a year too early than a year too late.

Could the Kings be torn apart if they don't win this season? Absolutely, and perhaps at that point it's the right move. I'd like to see the team as currently constructed -- with the addition of someone who can back up both forward positions -- get another shot at winning a championship.

But if the team is broken up, does it mean a total rebuild? Taking Webber out of the equation for a moment, the Kings still have a good, young three-player nucleus in Bibby, Peja and Miller. If you could trade C-Webb for a decent power forward, someone who could ultimately replace DC at two guard and another backup player or draft pick, you wouldn't necessarily have to fall into Charlotte Bobcats territory while the roster is in transition. You might not have a 60-win team for a couple of years, but they could remain competitive and fun to watch while reloading.

You started that one, telling Brick how to post as a moderator. This discussion was going along quite amicably before that.
Look, we're all Kings fans. Some of us are knowledgable, some of us are just fans with opinions, some of us are just looking for an argument. I'd like to consider myself in the first group. Without giving a resume, let's say that I've followed the NBA religiously since the early 1970s and have a decent connection in the Kings' front office who throws me a bone from time to time.

I appreciate the opportunity to exchange views with other fans. The value of this board as opposed to others is that it has a higher than average number of passionate, fans who know a thing or two about the NBA. But even if some of the poster are a bit off on their facts or have an opinion that is in the minority, we can disagree, correct or make suggestions respectfully and cordially, without sarcasm or snarkiness.

I think it's perfectly fair game to have some fun with someone who suggests, for example, trading Darius Songaila for Shaq. But if someone takes the time to go to realgm.com and suggest a trade that has some logic in the context of the salary cap and the board discussion, we shouldn't be so quickly dismissive. It seems to me that there's a rather cliqueish attitude on this board at times; anything that X says is peachy keen, anything that Y says is automatically wrong. That's a disservice to those of us who just want to have some fun talking basketball.

Thanks for "hearing" me out.

Superman

09-09-2004, 12:53 PM

Couldn't agree with you more. Of course, those who would trade Webber would use both of those points to support their position: CWebb inevitably has injuries that keep him out for long stretches and CWebb lacks something -- be it tangible or intangible -- that will allow him to be the dominant player on a championship level team. That's not a knock on Chris; as someone else mentioned, lots of great players have failed to win championships. Not everyone can be Michael Jordan or Larry Bird. And the Kings have had exceptionally bad luck. But this is reality ...

I think that the last time Webber was healthy, he had that something extra - both tangible and intangible - that would have put us over the top. I'm willing to give him a chance to show that he still has it, rather than move him as a knee-jerk reaction to the poor ending of the season. Many of the people who are convinced that we need to purge this team of all things Webber were convinced of that several years ago; the last two months of the season only put them even further over the edge.

Reality is that, without Webber (or a player who can do what he can do when healthy), we are a lot further away from a championship than we are with him. Especially when you start talking about "addition by subtraction." A gaping hole at power forward is NOT the answer; neither is Darius Songaila.

I appreciate the opportunity to exchange views with other fans. The value of this board as opposed to others is that it has a higher than average number of passionate, fans who know a thing or two about the NBA. But even if some of the poster are a bit off on their facts or have an opinion that is in the minority, we can disagree, correct or make suggestions respectfully and cordially, without sarcasm or snarkiness.

Many disagree with you, and openly lobby for the right to post however they see fit, whether some people feel that it's rude or not. In the future, the best way to address a concern with the way another poster posts (Brick was posting as a member of the board, not a moderator), is to address him/her privately about it.

#1sacfan

09-09-2004, 01:30 PM

Look, we're all Kings fans. Some of us are knowledgable, some of us are just fans with opinions, some of us are just looking for an argument. I'd like to consider myself in the first group. Without giving a resume, let's say that I've followed the NBA religiously since the early 1970s and have a decent connection in the Kings' front office who throws me a bone from time to time.

I appreciate the opportunity to exchange views with other fans. The value of this board as opposed to others is that it has a higher than average number of passionate, fans who know a thing or two about the NBA. But even if some of the poster are a bit off on their facts or have an opinion that is in the minority, we can disagree, correct or make suggestions respectfully and cordially, without sarcasm or snarkiness.

I think it's perfectly fair game to have some fun with someone who suggests, for example, trading Darius Songaila for Shaq. But if someone takes the time to go to realgm.com and suggest a trade that has some logic in the context of the salary cap and the board discussion, we shouldn't be so quickly dismissive. It seems to me that there's a rather cliqueish attitude on this board at times; anything that X says is peachy keen, anything that Y says is automatically wrong. That's a disservice to those of us who just want to have some fun talking basketball.

Thanks for "hearing" me out.
Great Post. This is what I have been saying here for a long time. There is a group of people here who share some of the same opinions and there opinions (as well as the mods) have now become FACT on this site and anyone that disagrees with them is either crazy or stupid or not even worth listening to.

Keep on posting brother, at least one person on this board respects you.