Grant Napear wins Emperor's New Clothes award
- Thread starter VF21
- Start date
people need to stop comparing the kings and the sixers. two different teams, two different conferences. both teams have largely underachieved, the sixers questionably so. it's very obvious why the kings are underachieving, though, and it can be attributed to an imbalanced starting unit that is without leadership, focus, or direction. the kings were a winning ball club with webber last season. without webber this season, they are a losing ball club. simple as that. don't talk to me about seasons past when webber has been injured. the kings had other leadership to fall back on in those days, and carried on in the absence of their superstar. but alas, those days are gone. the "big three" in sacramento remain, however, and can't get things done without webber. they were gettin it done with webber just last season, amidst change (ie: the trade that brought cuttino mobley to the kings starting unit).
this shouldn't even be debateable. i'm looking at very recent history here. with webber, the kings were winning last season. without webber this season, the kings are not winning. a leader who wants to win more than anything is not something to undermine or undervalue. no other remaining king, with the possible exception of mike bibby, has ever vocally stated their desire to win as much as chris webber did and still does.
in short, the kings that remain DO NOT MIND losing. one of them, rahim, is accustomed to it, but ABSOLUTELY NO ONE in a kings uniform (williamson, maybe??), has openly stated that they are disgusted with the way the kings are playing and the losses that are resulting.
i KNOW, with every ounce of my being, that chris webber would not accept the losing that the kings are experiencing right now, with every ounce of his being, if he were still a part of this team. his desire to win is something you cannot put a price on, especially when your team is primarily full of softies who have neither the fire or the inclination necessary to care about whether the team is winning or losing.
to this day, i am amazed at how many kings fans out there do not get it. a superstar is a superstar, regardless of injury. a superstar does not stand solely by his statistics, but also by his leadership and his desire to win. does anybody question allen iverson's desire to win? the dude goes 110% every game. webber gives the same, though is limited physically.
i will say this much, and i don't really care either way what anybody thinks on the matter, but i would prefer an injured chris webber leading his team from the sideline than the garbage we got in return for him, or his dispassionate so-called replacement, for that matter.
this shouldn't even be debateable. i'm looking at very recent history here. with webber, the kings were winning last season. without webber this season, the kings are not winning. a leader who wants to win more than anything is not something to undermine or undervalue. no other remaining king, with the possible exception of mike bibby, has ever vocally stated their desire to win as much as chris webber did and still does.
in short, the kings that remain DO NOT MIND losing. one of them, rahim, is accustomed to it, but ABSOLUTELY NO ONE in a kings uniform (williamson, maybe??), has openly stated that they are disgusted with the way the kings are playing and the losses that are resulting.
i KNOW, with every ounce of my being, that chris webber would not accept the losing that the kings are experiencing right now, with every ounce of his being, if he were still a part of this team. his desire to win is something you cannot put a price on, especially when your team is primarily full of softies who have neither the fire or the inclination necessary to care about whether the team is winning or losing.
to this day, i am amazed at how many kings fans out there do not get it. a superstar is a superstar, regardless of injury. a superstar does not stand solely by his statistics, but also by his leadership and his desire to win. does anybody question allen iverson's desire to win? the dude goes 110% every game. webber gives the same, though is limited physically.
i will say this much, and i don't really care either way what anybody thinks on the matter, but i would prefer an injured chris webber leading his team from the sideline than the garbage we got in return for him, or his dispassionate so-called replacement, for that matter.
Last edited:
You know, all the people who were against the Webber trade keep acting like it's irrelevant how well Philadelphia is doing. And in the next breath they'll talk about how Webber wouldn't let the Kings lose, how he made everyone better, how much he has a will to win, gives 110%. If Webber is still such an impact player that he would have turned the Kings into a 50 win team, such a leader... isn't it reasonable to expect that he wouldn't let Philly lose, he'd make his teammates better, with every ounce of his being? It's perfectly valid to look at Philadelphia and think, "gee, the Sixers aren't better than they were last year, even though they have Webber, Igudala is better, Korver is better, Dalembert is better, Iverson is having a career year... and yet their record with Webber is just about the same as they had with Kenny Thomas." If Webber is still such a superstar, don't you think he'd be making a bigger difference? Or does sometimes even people with great heart lose their ability to impact the game in the way they once did?
And I'm sorry, last season the Kings lost a heck of a lot more than Chris Webber, so if people are tired of me bringing up how Philadelphia is doing I'm tired of people saying "look, we were a 50 win team last year and it was all because of Chris Webber." Yes, Chris Webber got it done last year. He held the team together. But the Kings also lost Doug Christie last year. They lost Bobby Jackson in the offseason. They lost Maurice Evans. Songaila. It wasn't all Chris Webber leaving the team. The team was on the decline last season, just as it has been on the decline since Webber's injury. This isn't a "blame Petrie," situation, it's just the facts. Players age. They lose value. Franchises can't sustain success with the same players indefinitely. It's more than reasonable to expect that the decline would have continued with Webber at the helm.
The fact remains that Webber puts up "pretty" numbers, as Bricklayer would say, he has a heart, and yet his team is below .500. When you want to say that Webber would have made the Kings vastly better it's pretty instructive to think, gee, how is his new team doing? Answer? Not much better than the Kings.
And I'm sorry, last season the Kings lost a heck of a lot more than Chris Webber, so if people are tired of me bringing up how Philadelphia is doing I'm tired of people saying "look, we were a 50 win team last year and it was all because of Chris Webber." Yes, Chris Webber got it done last year. He held the team together. But the Kings also lost Doug Christie last year. They lost Bobby Jackson in the offseason. They lost Maurice Evans. Songaila. It wasn't all Chris Webber leaving the team. The team was on the decline last season, just as it has been on the decline since Webber's injury. This isn't a "blame Petrie," situation, it's just the facts. Players age. They lose value. Franchises can't sustain success with the same players indefinitely. It's more than reasonable to expect that the decline would have continued with Webber at the helm.
The fact remains that Webber puts up "pretty" numbers, as Bricklayer would say, he has a heart, and yet his team is below .500. When you want to say that Webber would have made the Kings vastly better it's pretty instructive to think, gee, how is his new team doing? Answer? Not much better than the Kings.
I only have one point to make about comparing Kings and Sixers. Chris Webber was the leader of last year's Kings. He is now gone and the Kings are leaderless, non-chalant half the time, and rudderless...and they suck.
AI is the leader of the Sixers.....he still is whether Chris is there or not. You cannot compare Webb's leadership here and there. He is not, and never will be, the leader of the Sixers. It is absolutely apples to oranges.
AI is the leader of the Sixers.....he still is whether Chris is there or not. You cannot compare Webb's leadership here and there. He is not, and never will be, the leader of the Sixers. It is absolutely apples to oranges.
That's definitely a valid point, and certainly one of the biggest problems with the Kings this year is that they've been rudderless and adrift, which is clearly an area where Webber would have helped.
But still, I believe the comparison between the teams is valid. Webber is in an ideal situation comporable to his abilities. He's a second banana, he's a facilitator. He no longer has the ability to be a dynamic scorer, so he's a complimentary scorer, which is, incidentally, a situation he never showed any signs of embracing in Sacramento. He's giving the Sixers his all, they're getting the most out of him. And yet they're not very good. If Webber is such a superstar that he would have turned the Kings' ship around (or at least kept it afloat) I think it's reasonable to expect that he would at least make the Sixers better. He hasn't.
But still, I believe the comparison between the teams is valid. Webber is in an ideal situation comporable to his abilities. He's a second banana, he's a facilitator. He no longer has the ability to be a dynamic scorer, so he's a complimentary scorer, which is, incidentally, a situation he never showed any signs of embracing in Sacramento. He's giving the Sixers his all, they're getting the most out of him. And yet they're not very good. If Webber is such a superstar that he would have turned the Kings' ship around (or at least kept it afloat) I think it's reasonable to expect that he would at least make the Sixers better. He hasn't.
Last edited:
no, you're oversimplifying the issue. webber is not "the leader" in philly. iverson is. webber can fire his team up, play with his will to win, etc, but when it's all said and done at the day's end, it is iverson's team. the 76ers live and die by the way allen iverson plays, and by the way he leads. you know that. i know that. the whole nba knows that.
in sacramento, webber was king, literally. with his career on the decline, i don't know that even chris webber would stand up to allen iverson, who is playing some of his most inspired ball to date, despite a .500 record. in sacramento, however, chris webber was cemented as "the undisputed leader of the team." he knew it, the owners knew it, the coach knew it, and his teammates sure as hell knew it, and they followed him. do you see any of the current kings lining up to follow any of their teammates? i don't. bibby's trying, but it's not really in his character.
webber was the right player at the right time for sacramento, and had he been traded to any other team without an existing cemented "undisputed leader" superstar, then, yes, i would say that webber would continue to make his team better. i don't think anyone can question his desire to win a championship. recently, in a halftime interview w/ kenny and charles, chris webber stated that he wished he had had one more chance to bring a title to the city of sacramento. i'm not making this up. the thread's still in the nba forum if ya wanna check it out. i'm afraid the same cannot be said of any of the three we got in return for webb, though, or the "replacement" that is currently injured and on the bench (gee....the irony of it all).
i will concede that webber is not doing much to alter the course of philly's destiny if you will concede that, in sacramento, he would have played with the same old inspired will to win that many of us came to love, and that the team would be better off because of his leadership.
in sacramento, webber was king, literally. with his career on the decline, i don't know that even chris webber would stand up to allen iverson, who is playing some of his most inspired ball to date, despite a .500 record. in sacramento, however, chris webber was cemented as "the undisputed leader of the team." he knew it, the owners knew it, the coach knew it, and his teammates sure as hell knew it, and they followed him. do you see any of the current kings lining up to follow any of their teammates? i don't. bibby's trying, but it's not really in his character.
webber was the right player at the right time for sacramento, and had he been traded to any other team without an existing cemented "undisputed leader" superstar, then, yes, i would say that webber would continue to make his team better. i don't think anyone can question his desire to win a championship. recently, in a halftime interview w/ kenny and charles, chris webber stated that he wished he had had one more chance to bring a title to the city of sacramento. i'm not making this up. the thread's still in the nba forum if ya wanna check it out. i'm afraid the same cannot be said of any of the three we got in return for webb, though, or the "replacement" that is currently injured and on the bench (gee....the irony of it all).
i will concede that webber is not doing much to alter the course of philly's destiny if you will concede that, in sacramento, he would have played with the same old inspired will to win that many of us came to love, and that the team would be better off because of his leadership.
Last edited:
But, the Kings were afloat last year before the trade. Also, Webb's style of play is much better suited to Adelman's offense, not to AI's offense.
At any rate, I have made my point. We will continue to disagree on this issue. No big to me. I am not under any delusion that I must make everyone else agree with my way of thinking.
At any rate, I have made my point. We will continue to disagree on this issue. No big to me. I am not under any delusion that I must make everyone else agree with my way of thinking.
Oh yeah, definitely, I made the "inspired will to win" admission in response to 6th's point. And I saw the Webber interview on TNT. I don't doubt that he wanted to win. But you know who else wanted to win a championship in that interveiw? Charles Barkley. It wasn't for lack of effort or heart on his part, he single-handedly took the Suns to the Finals he was so good. But in the end of his career, ability got in the way. That's what's happening with Webber. The heart is still there. Sadly, the abilities aren't. He'll put up his numbers, but he's not the same player. He's not really an impact player anymore, and while he might have helped the Kings to win a few more games I really doubt he would have had a major impact.
good. i'm glad we're understanding where each of us stands. for the most part, we disagree on the magnitude of the impact that webber would have had if he had remained a king. i believe he has the ability to make an impact still, given a situation where he could lead a team like he could in sacramento. i believe his impact in sacramento this season, had he not been traded, would have been more substantial than you do, but that's something i'm content to disagree with you on. at least we're on the same page.
and, for the most part, i think what we've been discussing here is reason enough to justify the feelings that many of us have concerning the webber trade. the kings are losing, and i believe it is due primarily to an imbalance in the starting unit and an utter lack of leadership. chris webber wouldn't be enough to restore balance, but he would certainly have answered the call to leadership. i still stand by my statement that i'd rather have an injured webber on the sideline leading his team than the dispassionate SAR. as crazy as that sounds, i mean it. with SAR, the kings are a losing team. with an injured webber, the kings would be a losing team, but at least i would know that the passion in the lockerroom still existed. as a fan of the game of basketball, i wanna root for a winning team. but when my team isnt winning, i wanna at least know they are giving everything they've got. i hate not being able to believe that right now.
and, for the most part, i think what we've been discussing here is reason enough to justify the feelings that many of us have concerning the webber trade. the kings are losing, and i believe it is due primarily to an imbalance in the starting unit and an utter lack of leadership. chris webber wouldn't be enough to restore balance, but he would certainly have answered the call to leadership. i still stand by my statement that i'd rather have an injured webber on the sideline leading his team than the dispassionate SAR. as crazy as that sounds, i mean it. with SAR, the kings are a losing team. with an injured webber, the kings would be a losing team, but at least i would know that the passion in the lockerroom still existed. as a fan of the game of basketball, i wanna root for a winning team. but when my team isnt winning, i wanna at least know they are giving everything they've got. i hate not being able to believe that right now.
Yeah, we're really not that far off, and I share your frustration that this team is just coasting. I just wasn't that excited last season even though the Kings were winning, because from a basketball standpoint we really weren't fooling anybody. 50 wins and out. Not a contender, and not for the foreseeable future with Webber's salary on the books and the team deferring to someone who no longer had the ability to carry a team. I thought it was time to move on, maybe I was wrong, maybe I was right. Who knows? (I'm guessing KP has an opinion on that question)
I disagree. I think Webb is at his best when he touches the ball more, and drives the offense. The Kings offense was designed for players like Webb, with good hands & passing abilities. He is giving the Sixers his best, and he is playing well, but his impact is not going to compare to the impact he had on the Kings for two reasons 1. the offense is not running through him, and 2. he will never be the leader of that team. And, as far as him not being a dynamic scorer, he is more dynamic this year than last in that he is healthier & doing things like an occasional dunk. And last year the Kings were a much better team. My question is not "why doesn't Webber have more of an impact on the 76ers?" but, "why would he have any less impact on the Kings this year, when he is healthier, than he did last year?"
Bad trade. Easy to see. I've written too many posts on it since before Webber was even traded. The Kings offense is broken and their defense is no better, rebounding is worse...they took on bad contracts and are losing a ton of games. I was not completely against moving C-Webb, just not for the awful contracts and talent we got back. Whatever the motivations someone miscalculated, this team is at the bottom of the Western conference now. When the postseason comes and we have no Kings basketball to watch, maybe it will sink in, it's going to suck. I'd much rather get to the 2nd round and make some noise, maybe attract a Free agent or make another trade to put us back in contention. All the while keeping the Kings interesting and fun to watch. This season has been horrible, awful, whatever you want to call it.
Last edited:
I agree with this whole post, and I especially like the point I bolded. I love Webb and what he did for this team, and would have been sad no matter what circumstances he was traded under. However, if there had been a great trade that really made the team better, or relieved salaries, or SOMETHING, it would be much easier to live with. This particular trade, however, just adds insult to injury.
I'm sitting down to a heaping plate of crow. I was actually for the Webber trade. People remember the knee, because that was the last major injury, but remember the previous seasons with the ankles etc.? Remember the criminal charges? Violating the NBA substance policy which delayed his return (in hind sight probably a good thing)?
As fantastic as he was, he just looked like a 20 million dollar time bomb. Now, I cringe when I see the phrase "movable pieces". As far as basketball value, we got nada in return. As far as personallity goes, I'll take a screwed up Webber over any of the guys we got in return. Webb CARED! He cared about the team. I did not place adequate value on that, and I was wrong.
Now, this is Sacramento, not Philly. With the Sacramento injury curse, if Webb had stayed he'd be the most bad *** wheelchair basketball player around. No way the knee would've stayed intact here. If I remember right, the team had traded a chronically injured Pollard (and Hedo) for Miller. Looked like a good deal at the time. So, the Maloofs may have had a false sense of security. Whatever. It's over and the team is the less for it.
As fantastic as he was, he just looked like a 20 million dollar time bomb. Now, I cringe when I see the phrase "movable pieces". As far as basketball value, we got nada in return. As far as personallity goes, I'll take a screwed up Webber over any of the guys we got in return. Webb CARED! He cared about the team. I did not place adequate value on that, and I was wrong.
Now, this is Sacramento, not Philly. With the Sacramento injury curse, if Webb had stayed he'd be the most bad *** wheelchair basketball player around. No way the knee would've stayed intact here. If I remember right, the team had traded a chronically injured Pollard (and Hedo) for Miller. Looked like a good deal at the time. So, the Maloofs may have had a false sense of security. Whatever. It's over and the team is the less for it.
wow.
I don't know about anyone else, but as someone who has protested the Webber trade from the very minute it went down, your post made me feel just a little better.
Why? Not because you've admitted you were wrong.
Because you now see what some of us were trying so hard to point out:
Webber cared. And that caring - the Warrior King mentality - is a big part of what made the Kings who they were.
Thank you for taking the time to make those comments. As silly as it might sound, it's those kinds of comments that make it easier for me, at least, to get some closure and move on.
I don't know about anyone else, but as someone who has protested the Webber trade from the very minute it went down, your post made me feel just a little better.
Why? Not because you've admitted you were wrong.
Because you now see what some of us were trying so hard to point out:
Webber cared. And that caring - the Warrior King mentality - is a big part of what made the Kings who they were.
Thank you for taking the time to make those comments. As silly as it might sound, it's those kinds of comments that make it easier for me, at least, to get some closure and move on.
