Grant Napear wins Emperor's New Clothes award

VF21

#KingsFansForever
Staff member
#1
Although I did not get to hear it directly, I've been told that Grant Napear spent several minutes this afternoon on his radio show reiterating how good the Webber trade was and how it had to be done...

Sure, Grant. The trade had to be done. The team is so much better now. Peja isn't unhappy any longer. We have flexible pieces (which is fine if you're a contortionist, but over-rated otherwise). We have all that salary cap freed up by the trade. We don't have to worry about anyone berating team members and trying to exort them to do better and give more on the court. We have clear leadership and remarkable heart and determination. Why didn't I see it all earlier?

At this point, I have nothing to say to Mr. Napear but "Congratulations. Here's your award."
 
#2
The emperor's new clothes are shiny and Gold. Heard it myself on the way to the store. I was going to call in and ask him if the organization handed him a script for these attempted spin jobs or if they let him extemporize. The single most compelling argument he had in favor of the trade was the 6ers record. Apparently, no one on the 6ers besides Chris has ever been scored on in a game and he is really dragging them down. Hell, they are one game under 500! Somehow the fact that we, ourselves are 14-20 and haven't sniffed 500 but once, briefly, this season, is erroneous.
We are MUCH better now, just ask Grant.
 
#3
I honestly think Grant feels that if he says it enough, it will make it true. It's amazing to me that Grant (and others) continue to justify the trade being a good thing for the Kings by pointing to the 76er's record. What about us???? The 76ers may or may not be a better team than last year, but we aren't a fraction of the team we were. We miss Webb's leadership, passion, and his habit of expecting his teammates of stepping up & playing with effort.

Oh well, Congrats to Grant on the award... he has truely earned it!
 
C

Coach

Guest
#4
The bottom line is that the trade really didn't do much for either team. And if the trade hadn't been made, I doubt very much that either team would be any better. It was blah for blah.
 

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
Staff member
#5
Coach said:
The bottom line is that the trade really didn't do much for either team. And if the trade hadn't been made, I doubt very much that either team would be any better. It was blah for blah.
People who think we wouldn't have been better are defying the very recent history. As in last year.

Now, would we have ben a title contender? That's obviosuly very debateable. But we were FAR betgter just last year with Webber than we are now without. And he looks better physically this year than he did a year ago to boot.
 
#6
Bricklayer said:
People who think we wouldn't have been better are defying the very recent history. As in last year.

Now, would we have ben a title contender? That's obviosuly very debateable. But we were FAR betgter just last year with Webber than we are now without. And he looks better physically this year than he did a year ago to boot.
Yup...Double WORD!!
 
#7
Bricklayer said:
Now, would we have ben a title contender? That's obviosuly very debateable.
If debateable means NO FREAKIN WAY!! Then I agree!

Better than what we have now....ABSOLUTELY!! No way we sniff a title with Webber unless you bring back half the departed bench from years gone by.

Didn't I see a list on this board indicating POST/INTERIOR defense as one of the key ingredients to be a title contender?? Webber and Miller do not come close to meeting that criteria.
 
#8
Bricklayer said:
People who think we wouldn't have been better are defying the very recent history. As in last year.

Now, would we have ben a title contender? That's obviosuly very debateable. But we were FAR betgter just last year with Webber than we are now without. And he looks better physically this year than he did a year ago to boot.
No question about it, def. better with Webber.
 
#9
G_M said:
If debateable means NO FREAKIN WAY!! Then I agree!

Better than what we have now....ABSOLUTELY!! No way we sniff a title with Webber unless you bring back half the departed bench from years gone by.

Didn't I see a list on this board indicating POST/INTERIOR defense as one of the key ingredients to be a title contender?? Webber and Miller do not come close to meeting that criteria.
We may not sniff a title w/Webb this year, but I don't think we'd be worrying about trying to someday sniff the 50/50 mark either. At this point, having a team worthy of easily making the playoffs is nothing to sneeze at.
 
#10
Hey look at the brightside. With the Webb trade Webber we will grab a high lottery pick, draft the next big superstar, and EVENTUALLY become better.

Why didn't I see the master plan before. :rolleyes:
 
#11
Grant did say that the coaching staff didn't want him anymore and the management didn't want him any more... that they were tired of him and had to get rid of him. Whether it's true or not I think that is what he has been hesitant to say in the past, he's kind of been dancing around it but he got so mad today it just kind of spilled out.
 
Last edited:
#12
KP said:
Grant did say that the coaching staff didn't want him anymore and the management didn't want him any more... that they were tired of him and had to get rid of him. Whether it's true or not I think that is what he has been hesitant to say in the past, he's kind of been dancing around it but he got so mad today it just kind of spilled out.
that may be true, and if so, I just have to say-- be careful what you wish for.
 

VF21

#KingsFansForever
Staff member
#13
So now the "truth" is going to come out? And everything we've been told up until now is a bald-faced lie? The coaching staff and management didn't want Webber any more? They were tired of him and had to get rid of him?

Nice. Would have been even nicer, if that's true, if SOMEONE had manned up and been honest.

If a decision was made that they had to get rid of Webber and they didn't want to say that, then I think Grant Napear made a very big mistake. If you're going toe the party line, you can't go letting the skeletons out of the party closet. If Grant Napear has known ALL ALONG something like this then why is it only coming to light now?

This is not good...
 

VF21

#KingsFansForever
Staff member
#14
Memo to the Maloofs: If you're going to let someone like Howdy Doody know all your inner secrets, you might want to make sure he's NOT a talking puppet or, at the very least, make sure you have someone with a little better control of the situation pulling his strings.

:mad:
 
#16
KP said:
Grant did say that the coaching staff didn't want him anymore and the management didn't want him any more... that they were tired of him and had to get rid of him. Whether it's true or not I think that is what he has been hesitant to say in the past, he's kind of been dancing around it but he got so mad today it just kind of spilled out.

So wait he was mad at what? Management for not wanting webber anymore? What?
 

VF21

#KingsFansForever
Staff member
#17
Grant was mad at callers who were still questioning the Webber trade and Grant's continual and unending comments about the team being better after the trade.
 
#18
Graant said that teh only team wanted him was Philly. He said that even Philly with Webber they are barely a sub -par 500 time. He said they are 2nd in points allowed because Of webbers disgusting defense. His legs are gone for him on defense. Thats why he said it was a good trade for what we gave up. But what did we get in return!!!!!
 
#19
Wow I know it was grant but even for him that's low. Jeez I hate that guy, WEBBER made this team good. Not KT, Scoreless Corliss, or Brian. If I remember correctly PA was below .500 before webber and he and AI got them into the playoffs.
 

VF21

#KingsFansForever
Staff member
#20
I honestly don't know what's true and what's not. I just know this all leaves me with a very bad feeling in the pit of my stomach. I wish ALL the drama would go away and we could just have our Kings back...

:(
 
#21
Bricklayer said:
People who think we wouldn't have been better are defying the very recent history. As in last year.

Now, would we have ben a title contender? That's obviosuly very debateable. But we were FAR betgter just last year with Webber than we are now without. And he looks better physically this year than he did a year ago to boot.
Agree. We would be a lot better. Webber was a leader. A VOCAL leader. Sure Peja might not have been happy, but I am sure Webber let him know how things had to be done around here. This was Webbers team, and when we lost Webber we lost our identity.

The reason why Philly isn't much better with Webber because he does not fit in Philly as the Philly players with the exception with Skinner don't fit here. Webber can't be a leader in a place that already has a leader. That would create bad blood which Webber is smart enough not to do.
 
#23
G_M said:
Didn't I see a list on this board indicating POST/INTERIOR defense as one of the key ingredients to be a title contender?? Webber and Miller do not come close to meeting that criteria.
Sad thing is that after the trade, the Kings frontcourt rotation doesn't come close to meeting that criteria, either, making the trade that much more baffling. Doesn't help that the only guy on the roster that could even have a shot at improving defense (Skinner) doesn't get consistent minutes, even with SAR's injury. Keon Clark, anyone?
 

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
Staff member
#24
KP said:
Grant did say that the coaching staff didn't want him anymore and the management didn't want him any more... that they were tired of him and had to get rid of him. Whether it's true or not I think that is what he has been hesitant to say in the past, he's kind of been dancing around it but he got so mad today it just kind of spilled out.
Ok, couple of things here.

1) that could very well just be Grant covering his ***. I.e. keeps on screeching and preaching and nobody is buying his ****, and so in desperation decides to try to name drop or whatever.

2) even if true, or partially so, would that really be a surprise? Not buying the coaching staff. Think Grant's speaking out of his *** there (probably working off the skipping practice bit). But the front office clearly made a choice. The only question was whether it was Maloof-based or Petrie-based, but I haven't been riding Petrie's *** here recently because he's shown any more intelligence or acumen than your average Babcock in the last year. They made a choice, and kind of pathetically left Grant to twist in the wind trying to feebly do a hatchet job. Not really sure why its such a big shocker. SOMEBODY clearly wanted Webb gone, because we got back nothing in return, and nothing with contracts just as big and long lasting as Webb's too. I know there was a brief flurry of buying the "flexibility" line of B.S., just out of loyalty to the front office. But that's surely become a much mocked term at this point and I don't think there are many non-Kings employees still buying it.

3) I mean, think about this. Before the Memphis game, Bobby fired a few shots at us actually. Which adds up to on my scoredcard:
-- Webb did not want to go
-- Doug did not want Webb to go, or to go himself. Co-leaders.
-- Mike did not want Webb to go. Still talks to Webb all the time and closer to Webb liekly than anybody still on the team.
-- Bobby did not want Webb to go, and was kind of openly mocking it there a couple of says ago.
-- Barnes thinks it was stupid.
-- Mobley did not want Webb to go, + had quickly bonded with him.

So now add that all up, and you have almsot the entire team there clearly in the "Webb no go" category. Only signficant names not on that list are Peja (and hence the great question, Webb criticized Peja and is gone, Bobby ciriticized Peja and is gone, and they seem to have been right) and Brad (unknown, likely neutral).

This wasn't a team or lockerroom based move. So the impetus had to come from elsewhere. Note too the extreme latitude given Grant, and of course with the AV hate pieces quoting unnamed "inside sources". There just had to be a faction that wanted Webb gone for that kind of thing to be tolerated or even encouraged. That faction looks like blithering idiots at this point, but its beside the point. Just don't think its a surprise it existed. Nor that its last diehards (the rats are diving off the ship now) are desperately flailing about trying to sell their crap.
 
Last edited:
#25
Doug-36 years old, severe ankle problems.
Vlade-64 years old, bad back, barely played after signing with LA
CWebb-32 years old, contract lasts a year longer than Corliss and Skinners.
Bobby Jackson-33 years old, injury prone over previous two seasons.

I don't know, at least Petrie has a pretty big excuse as to why he made those moves. And I think a few as to why he couldn't get a whole lot out of some of those players. I hate to say it, but, WE GOT OLD!
 
Last edited:
#26
Vlade leaving in the off season was really the beginning of the end. He's the one that held it all together- the glue. As much as I love Webb we were still a mediocre to above average team with him, due to his injury. I hated the Webber trade and i still do, but it was Vlade leaving that was really the beginning of our downfall.

(p.s- sorry been away, partying it up at my bro's wedding (10 day event in India)
 
Last edited:
#27
I think Bricklayer is right that somebody wanted Chris gone and look who was the only one not on the please keep webber list: Peja. Man we shoulda traded him when we could've, it makes me REALLY mad that we still have him and he's always injured while Chris is playing well. To be honest I would rather've traded Brad and Peja to keep Chris. Think about it-get a center that covers up webber's defensive troubles(although he's better defensively than brad) and a good SF and we're a really good team again. Oh well, atleast I know it meant a lot to the players that were on the team I loved and actually had a good time watching.
 
#28
KingKong said:
Vlade leaving in the off season was really the beginning of the end. He's the one that held it all together- the glue. As much as I love Webb we were still a mediocre to above average team with him, due to his injury. I hated the Webber trade and i still do, but it was Vlade leaving that was really the beginning of our downfall.

Agreed but, The begining was when Webb went down. The end was when Vlade left.
 
#29
Bricklayer said:
Ok, couple of things here.

1) that could very well just be Grant covering his ***. I.e. keeps on screeching and preaching and nobody is buying his ****, and so in desperation decides to try to name drop or whatever.

2) even if true, or partially so, would that really be a surprise? Not buying the coaching staff. Think Grant's speaking out of his *** there (probably working off the skipping practice bit). But the front office clearly made a choice. The only question was whether it was Maloof-based or Petrie-based, but I haven't been riding Petrie's *** here recently because he's shown any more intelligence or acumen than your average Babcock in the last year. They made a choice, and kind of pathetically left Grant to twist in the wind trying to feebly do a hatchet job. Not really sure why its such a big shocker. SOMEBODY clearly wanted Webb gone, because we got back nothing in return, and nothing with contracts just as big and long lasting as Webb's too. I know there was a brief flurry of buying the "flexibility" line of B.S., just out of loyalty to the front office. But that's surely become a much mocked term at this point and I don't think there are many non-Kings employees still buying it.

3) I mean, think about this. Before the Memphis game, Bobby fired a few shots at us actually. Which adds up to on my scoredcard:
-- Webb did not want to go
-- Doug did not want Webb to go, or to go himself. Co-leaders.
-- Mike did not want Webb to go. Still talks to Webb all the time and closer to Webb liekly than anybody still on the team.
-- Bobby did not want Webb to go, and was kind of openly mocking it there a couple of says ago.
-- Barnes thinks it was stupid.
-- Mobley did not want Webb to go, + had quickly bonded with him.

So now add that all up, and you have almsot the entire team there clearly in the "Webb no go" category. Only signficant names not on that list are Peja (and hence the great question, Webb criticized Peja and is gone, Bobby ciriticized Peja and is gone, and they seem to have been right) and Brad (unknown, likely neutral).

This wasn't a team or lockerroom based move. So the impetus had to come from elsewhere. Note too the extreme latitude given Grant, and of course with the AV hate pieces quoting unnamed "inside sources". There just had to be a faction that wanted Webb gone for that kind of thing to be tolerated or even encouraged. That faction looks like blithering idiots at this point, but its beside the point. Just don't think its a surprise it existed. Nor that its last diehards (the rats are diving off the ship now) are desperately flailing about trying to sell their crap.
I completely agree with everything you have said here^, and I have for a long time... that's no secret. The only reason I have trouble moving on, about all of this.. Is that people(Grant and even people on this board) continue to disregard the facts staring them straight in the face. We need some closure on this chapter of our Sacramento Kings(and this ones a doosy), maybe it will come when Pejas gone... or Mike or Brad... as the season goes on and maybe for many more, it's going to be interesting to see what happens both with Philly and Sacramento, and with what comes out as our ex-players retire, and move away from the game. Maybe one of them will write a book... Maybe even Adelman...
 
#30
I can't stand Grant, and yet he has a defensible position. I don't think anyone could really say that the trade was "good" for the Kings in the short term. But there's a very valid argument to be made -- still -- that the trade was "necessary" and therefore "good." I'm not going to re-ignite the argument, but people around here act like there is only one possible opinion to be had on the subject, and that's just not the case. Even if you are beholden to the "The-Webber-Trade-Destroyed-The-Franchise" argument you can still recognize that there are valid counterarguments to be made.