Interesting take....
- Thread starter KingKong
- Start date
Its hard to compare Shareef and Webber. To be fair, their career numbers are both respectable, and so is the talent in my opinion. Just different and really impossible to compare.
As far as why Webber was traded. If there really was some big conspiracy, don't you think something would have leaked by now? I mean, Sacramento is a fairly small market, and if there were truly underhanded things going on don't you think someone would know something.
The Chris and Peja thing is the closest to any scandal I can think of, and I don't buy that Peja ousted Webber from Sacramento. I think Webbers contract, age, health risk, as well as the window of opprotunity with the combined pieces of that team were the factors involved in trading Chris Webber. I don't understand how people can't except that as a viable reason.
Then again, maybe there was some grand scheme to move Webber out of Sac.
Then again, maybe the aliens did it.
As far as why Webber was traded. If there really was some big conspiracy, don't you think something would have leaked by now? I mean, Sacramento is a fairly small market, and if there were truly underhanded things going on don't you think someone would know something.
The Chris and Peja thing is the closest to any scandal I can think of, and I don't buy that Peja ousted Webber from Sacramento. I think Webbers contract, age, health risk, as well as the window of opprotunity with the combined pieces of that team were the factors involved in trading Chris Webber. I don't understand how people can't except that as a viable reason.
Then again, maybe there was some grand scheme to move Webber out of Sac.
Then again, maybe the aliens did it.
Last edited:
My original opinion on the trade was it was time to move past Webber, trade him and make the team younger and more athletic while focusing a bit more on defense, but we didn't get those things in the trade. We just got bench players with big contracts. And though Skinner and Corliss certainly are tougher than most of the Kings players, they don't get any play time because this organization is blind to the weakness of it's own philosophy.
I also feel drafting Garcia and choosing Martin over Evans was a mistake. I just don't think Kevin has an NBA body or a good enough shooting stroke to be a longtime NBA player. Mo on the other hand I see contributing to this league for years to come.
I also feel drafting Garcia and choosing Martin over Evans was a mistake. I just don't think Kevin has an NBA body or a good enough shooting stroke to be a longtime NBA player. Mo on the other hand I see contributing to this league for years to come.
You're saying this based on Martin's "dazzling" performances? Evans IS better now and he was better then. Evans is earning minutes on a tough Detroit team and is already getting the nod over Arroyo off the bench. What's Martin's competition? Evans produces more, is more efficient, and more effective. And he does it on a championship level team. What they'll do in the future is pure speculation but I see absolutely nothing that suggests Martin will turn out to be a superior player.
I think there are only 2 things that can make this trade a success. We package off at least one of the undersized big-man trio with a starter for a stud. Or, Webber suffers a huge injury that lays him out for months, validating the perceived risk. I don't see him playing to an appreciable decline that'll make KT/Corliss/Skinner compare much better.
I don't know why people think Webber's knee makes the rest of the guy exceedingly fragile. His chest isn't going to burst, he'll maybe sprain an ankle, and he's been playing in every single game including back-to-backs at 40 minutes per. His knee is pretty much set. It's not going to get much better or worse. This is very probably the stable Webber product and any further decline will be from age. His knee isn't going to burst. If it hasn't in 2 years, it probably won't now. He's not appreciably more susceptible to career-ending injury than the average guy. He might be more prone to straining, bruising, or rolling something because he's pushing his body to move like he was 25. But as long as he gets healthy for the playoffs, a few games doesn't matter too much.
As for a trade. I think nothing less than a starter type will do. We won't be able to trade just bench players for anything good. If we just traded our crap for Brian Grant, we'd just be shuffling **** around. We trade bad contracts for bad contracts and don't get better. No, it has to involve a package with a starter. And it will be exceedingly hard to do it now or in the future. Our trio of forwards aren't going to display more ability than they did last year. Realistically, I don't see KT/Peja for Pierce happening. It had a chance last year (though slight) and what really pissed me off was we let Mobley walk when he had much more value than anyone else we brought to the table.
I don't see Miller/Corliss for Dalembert a success. We can't just get any starter and that example was obviously a downgrade. It has to be an upgrade in talent approaching the significance of what we lost in Webber. Look at our starting five. Now look at the players significantly better than them at their position. How likely is that upgrade.
I don't know why people think Webber's knee makes the rest of the guy exceedingly fragile. His chest isn't going to burst, he'll maybe sprain an ankle, and he's been playing in every single game including back-to-backs at 40 minutes per. His knee is pretty much set. It's not going to get much better or worse. This is very probably the stable Webber product and any further decline will be from age. His knee isn't going to burst. If it hasn't in 2 years, it probably won't now. He's not appreciably more susceptible to career-ending injury than the average guy. He might be more prone to straining, bruising, or rolling something because he's pushing his body to move like he was 25. But as long as he gets healthy for the playoffs, a few games doesn't matter too much.
As for a trade. I think nothing less than a starter type will do. We won't be able to trade just bench players for anything good. If we just traded our crap for Brian Grant, we'd just be shuffling **** around. We trade bad contracts for bad contracts and don't get better. No, it has to involve a package with a starter. And it will be exceedingly hard to do it now or in the future. Our trio of forwards aren't going to display more ability than they did last year. Realistically, I don't see KT/Peja for Pierce happening. It had a chance last year (though slight) and what really pissed me off was we let Mobley walk when he had much more value than anyone else we brought to the table.
I don't see Miller/Corliss for Dalembert a success. We can't just get any starter and that example was obviously a downgrade. It has to be an upgrade in talent approaching the significance of what we lost in Webber. Look at our starting five. Now look at the players significantly better than them at their position. How likely is that upgrade.
I mean, for someone so down on Kevin Martin as a reserve you have a heck of a lot of faith in Michael "I'm not good enough to play for Philly even though Dalembert is injured" Bradley. Not sure how he, Matt Barnes (who wasn't under contract and is a SF) and whatever center that was availalbe for 1/2 the MLE (i.e. someone not very good) is somehow better than Kenny Thomas and Brian Skinner.
And Brick, I'm sorry, but you can't leave SAR out or call him only tangentially related. You know he wouldn't be here without the trade. He was part of the rebuilding plan, just look how hard Petrie courted him as soon as the offseason began.
I'm all for people questioning the trade because they miss Webber's heart and who knows if that will be replaced. And clearly the guy can still play. But the trade benefitted the Kings in many real ways that some detractors are refusing to acknowledge. The Kings don't have to trade a single member of the Philly 3 and it will still have reaped many dividends.
P.S. That 1/2 the MLE in the 1st paragraph is because I'm assuming the Kings would have used 1/2 to try and sign a starting SG after Cuttino bolted, probably Evans.
And Brick, I'm sorry, but you can't leave SAR out or call him only tangentially related. You know he wouldn't be here without the trade. He was part of the rebuilding plan, just look how hard Petrie courted him as soon as the offseason began.
I'm all for people questioning the trade because they miss Webber's heart and who knows if that will be replaced. And clearly the guy can still play. But the trade benefitted the Kings in many real ways that some detractors are refusing to acknowledge. The Kings don't have to trade a single member of the Philly 3 and it will still have reaped many dividends.
P.S. That 1/2 the MLE in the 1st paragraph is because I'm assuming the Kings would have used 1/2 to try and sign a starting SG after Cuttino bolted, probably Evans.
Last edited:
You are asusuming mcuh in an effort to bolster your opinion.
SAR may not have come. He may not have been necessary. Then again, after getting burned by NJ and having limited options, who knows? We still would have fit his "contender" status (with him and Bonzi), and still would have been offering the money. A rare combo, expecially givent hat I don't know how many people would have brought the money back around once the knee issue popped up.
But so we don't get him. Instead we try to resign Cat -- who would have been a far happier customer had Webb stayed. The "no Bonzi because we needed Tag argument is specious -- Tag's ticket was punched as soon as the season ended, maybe even before. So maybe Cat as 6th man -- be a GREAT one. Or Bonzi as a true 6th man and Cat starting.
Or you take that midlevel and go start chasing a deep pool of midlevel talent this year and see who bites at a chance to be a 6th man on a team still trying to win. The general point being that we are in at LEAST as good a popsiton as we are now, only the money we are spending is working for us rather than giving us the most expensive bench this side of the Knicks.
SAR may not have come. He may not have been necessary. Then again, after getting burned by NJ and having limited options, who knows? We still would have fit his "contender" status (with him and Bonzi), and still would have been offering the money. A rare combo, expecially givent hat I don't know how many people would have brought the money back around once the knee issue popped up.
But so we don't get him. Instead we try to resign Cat -- who would have been a far happier customer had Webb stayed. The "no Bonzi because we needed Tag argument is specious -- Tag's ticket was punched as soon as the season ended, maybe even before. So maybe Cat as 6th man -- be a GREAT one. Or Bonzi as a true 6th man and Cat starting.
Or you take that midlevel and go start chasing a deep pool of midlevel talent this year and see who bites at a chance to be a 6th man on a team still trying to win. The general point being that we are in at LEAST as good a popsiton as we are now, only the money we are spending is working for us rather than giving us the most expensive bench this side of the Knicks.
Cwebb On Allen Iverson,
“I have a comrade that I can go to war with. He makes me be more myself and I think I make him be more himself. I think what we do is try to be the best that we can be. (It helps me) as far as seeing a couple plays ahead, how they are playing him and how I can play off that and how I can score for me. I don’t know that it is so much that he makes me a different player, but he allows me to be me and I know I allow him to be him.”
“I have a comrade that I can go to war with. He makes me be more myself and I think I make him be more himself. I think what we do is try to be the best that we can be. (It helps me) as far as seeing a couple plays ahead, how they are playing him and how I can play off that and how I can score for me. I don’t know that it is so much that he makes me a different player, but he allows me to be me and I know I allow him to be him.”
I mean, I know it's always treacherous waters when you start getting into the "who knows what would have happened" realm. But there are some parts to your scenarios that just don't fit the reality of the situation.
No Webber Trade Scenario A: Reef still comes to Sacramento.
This is quite a leap, given his reported desire to start for a winner. Would he have passed up New Jersey's revised offer and the one year deals he was surely offered for the opportunity to play 16 minutes a game for the Kings? I'd say the odds are decidedly against it. In any event, since Ostertag is gone in this scneario in the Bonzi trade your backup center is Jamal Sampson. Um, yikes.
No Webber-Trade Scenario B: Cuttino Mobley gets all sentimental to re-sign with the Kings for less money to be a 6th Man. Um, I think it's fairly preposterous to assume that Cuttino would have followed Webber instead of taking the Clippers' $$$. And ladies and gentlemen your 2005-2006 backup power forward and center... Michael Bradley and Jamal Sampson.
The deep pool of midlevel talent. Um, yeah... I'm guessing that the best the Kings could have done was to re-sign Evans and Songaila, unless you can name a few good unrestricted agents who were better than them at that price.
In your scenarios the Kings would have gone into the offseason next season way over the cap and stretched perilously thin to the point that there wouldn't be much of an option to trade anyone.
I really think the Kings are in better shape now. SAR is putting up numbers comparable to Webber at 1/4 of the price, and meanwhile the Kings have a much better bench than they would have had in any of your scenarios -- I'd much rather be paying Brian Skinner to play 10 minutes than trying to rely on Michael Bradley. There are two expiring deals at the end of next season instead of one massive deal two years away. The Kings have moved on. I'm happy.
No Webber Trade Scenario A: Reef still comes to Sacramento.
This is quite a leap, given his reported desire to start for a winner. Would he have passed up New Jersey's revised offer and the one year deals he was surely offered for the opportunity to play 16 minutes a game for the Kings? I'd say the odds are decidedly against it. In any event, since Ostertag is gone in this scneario in the Bonzi trade your backup center is Jamal Sampson. Um, yikes.
No Webber-Trade Scenario B: Cuttino Mobley gets all sentimental to re-sign with the Kings for less money to be a 6th Man. Um, I think it's fairly preposterous to assume that Cuttino would have followed Webber instead of taking the Clippers' $$$. And ladies and gentlemen your 2005-2006 backup power forward and center... Michael Bradley and Jamal Sampson.
The deep pool of midlevel talent. Um, yeah... I'm guessing that the best the Kings could have done was to re-sign Evans and Songaila, unless you can name a few good unrestricted agents who were better than them at that price.
In your scenarios the Kings would have gone into the offseason next season way over the cap and stretched perilously thin to the point that there wouldn't be much of an option to trade anyone.
I really think the Kings are in better shape now. SAR is putting up numbers comparable to Webber at 1/4 of the price, and meanwhile the Kings have a much better bench than they would have had in any of your scenarios -- I'd much rather be paying Brian Skinner to play 10 minutes than trying to rely on Michael Bradley. There are two expiring deals at the end of next season instead of one massive deal two years away. The Kings have moved on. I'm happy.
Last edited:
Check one of my previous posts. I named 5 big men we coulda got. I bet you I can name at least 4 more. And most of them come at much less than the MLE. I think Bradley is crap too. But he can take Skinner's crap minutes just fine and give us a couple boards and a couple points or whatever Skinner is producing. You don't think if we brought in a Chris Anderson or Othella Harrington, that they couldn't get what we need? Our so-called "depth" in the frontcourt isn't being utilized so even IF KT/Skinner are better than Bradley/Anderson or whoever, there won't be much difference at those minutes. KT/Skinner will need substantial minutes to win out. And neither pair of scrubs are going to get those minutes behind SAR/Miller or Webber/Miller so what's the point?
Also, if we spent the full MLE on a reserve like Marshall or Haslem, then it's clearly an upgrade over KT/Skinner. And I never compared Barnes to KT/Skinner. I was comparing him to Corliss. Barnes has a higher ceiling and so did Evans for that matter. If we were to develop talent, I'd rather have gone with them over Martin.
One more thing. With Webber, we woulda have more clout to attract free agents on the level of Marshall. Forget Cuttino if he won't come back. What about a Antonio Daniels, Chris Duhon, or even the Finleys, Van Exel, and other cheap cutoffs. We would have a legitimate shot at luring them.
Also, if we spent the full MLE on a reserve like Marshall or Haslem, then it's clearly an upgrade over KT/Skinner. And I never compared Barnes to KT/Skinner. I was comparing him to Corliss. Barnes has a higher ceiling and so did Evans for that matter. If we were to develop talent, I'd rather have gone with them over Martin.
One more thing. With Webber, we woulda have more clout to attract free agents on the level of Marshall. Forget Cuttino if he won't come back. What about a Antonio Daniels, Chris Duhon, or even the Finleys, Van Exel, and other cheap cutoffs. We would have a legitimate shot at luring them.
Last edited:
Wow. I know I like to have it every which way with my logic when I post, but you're taking it to a whole new level.
On the one hand you're criticizing the deal because you don't think KT/Skinner are any good, on the other hand you're saying Michael Bradley would have been just fine. Where's the logic there? Do the Kings need a good bench or do they not need a good bench? Your opinion changes depending on whether Webber is on the roster.
I know you like Webber and were sorry to see him go. But it's really clouding your logic.
On the one hand you're criticizing the deal because you don't think KT/Skinner are any good, on the other hand you're saying Michael Bradley would have been just fine. Where's the logic there? Do the Kings need a good bench or do they not need a good bench? Your opinion changes depending on whether Webber is on the roster.
I know you like Webber and were sorry to see him go. But it's really clouding your logic.
Read it again. I'm saying they're all crap. And we're overpaying for crap from KT/Skinner that we could have gotten from Bradley/MLE at a fraction of the price. For a guy who's hung up on Webber's price tag, you sure have selective memory about KT/Skinner.
We don't have front court depth now and we wouldn't under my plan either. I'm saying play them all ****ty minutes. I'm not trying to exceed KT/Skinner (though I could using the full MLE). I'm just trying to get their exact value at like 3 mil a year.
We don't have front court depth now and we wouldn't under my plan either. I'm saying play them all ****ty minutes. I'm not trying to exceed KT/Skinner (though I could using the full MLE). I'm just trying to get their exact value at like 3 mil a year.
I'm honestly trying to understand what you're saying. I think you're saying that the Kings could have gotten better players with the MLE than they got through the Webber trade. Am I right?
But seriously, sit down and look at the salary cap situation and the roster the Kings had.
If you trade Ostertag for Wells, you have two slots to fill in the offseason: backup center and backup power forward. You have the MLE to spend. Now tell me how you would fill those two slots.
If you don't trade Ostertag you have two slots to fill: starting shooting guard, backup power forward. Same situation, you have the MLE. Go.
But seriously, sit down and look at the salary cap situation and the roster the Kings had.
If you trade Ostertag for Wells, you have two slots to fill in the offseason: backup center and backup power forward. You have the MLE to spend. Now tell me how you would fill those two slots.
If you don't trade Ostertag you have two slots to fill: starting shooting guard, backup power forward. Same situation, you have the MLE. Go.
Still go for Wells. Bradley is back up PF. Chris Anderson is back up Center. They can go either position. Just for you, I'll also sign Zaza Pachulia. I still got about 1/4 the MLE left over. Sign Juan Dixon. Did we have the LLE too? Slipped my mind.
And no, I'm saying we coulda got players that will give us the same minutes and production as KT/Skinner and Webber is better than SAR, so we come out ahead. We may or may not get a player better than KT (i.e. Marshall) but that's besides the point. All we need is to match their production which isn't hard.
Edit: Having trouble finding Anderson's contract. I thought I found it somewhere, but no big deal. Get Othella Harrington or whatever if it bothers you.
And no, I'm saying we coulda got players that will give us the same minutes and production as KT/Skinner and Webber is better than SAR, so we come out ahead. We may or may not get a player better than KT (i.e. Marshall) but that's besides the point. All we need is to match their production which isn't hard.
Edit: Having trouble finding Anderson's contract. I thought I found it somewhere, but no big deal. Get Othella Harrington or whatever if it bothers you.
Last edited:
Zaza would have been the best signing, at $16 million over four years, since Anderson is really a power forward. Anderson's athletic but not strong enough to play Center. However, Bradley as a backup PF is horrifying. I still think I'd take KT and Skinner over Bradley and Zaza. Although Zaza's defense is not great, so you're back to square one there.
I think it's hard to match the production/quality of KT and Skinner for cheap. Bench play is critical. So far the bench has been underachieving and it's really hurt the team. I think they're going to get better, but if they don't they might prove you correct.
P.S. With the MLE there was room to sign either Zaza or Anderson but not both. The Kings didn't have the LLE. And although they could have used Bird rights over Songaila the Maloofs didn't want to pay the luxury tax.
I think it's hard to match the production/quality of KT and Skinner for cheap. Bench play is critical. So far the bench has been underachieving and it's really hurt the team. I think they're going to get better, but if they don't they might prove you correct.
P.S. With the MLE there was room to sign either Zaza or Anderson but not both. The Kings didn't have the LLE. And although they could have used Bird rights over Songaila the Maloofs didn't want to pay the luxury tax.
I'll have to take your word on Anderson's contract. But take Othella or Eddie Griffin then. Heck, both. We can afford it plus Zaza. Cut Bradley. Damn, we shoulda done this from the start, lol. Woulda saved some arguing. Shoulda just got into details.
Oh, and before the inevitable slamming of Griffin. I just want to say don't let him shoot. Just need him to board.
Oh, and before the inevitable slamming of Griffin. I just want to say don't let him shoot. Just need him to board.
Last edited:
Those are my sentiments as well. Having SAR corliss KT and Skinner looks to me as a better situation then Webber Bradley, possibly Darius, and whomever we could have gotten for the MLE. Also the flexible part of KT Skinner and Corliss, is not so much any one of them being tradeable or traded, but it does give us good room if we want to move say Pedja Bibby and/or Miller for a young star.
Ummmm yeah it does Philly spent part of their MLE on Hunter. Det spent about 2 mill on mo, PA spent about 3 mill on hunter if i remember correctly. Still trade BJax for wells and keep/get those guys... Not so hard.
After that we'd be:
Bibby/Hart
Wells/Mo/Kevin
Peja/Mo
Webb/Hunter/Brad
Brad/Hunter
a lot better bench than we have now, hunter is a better blocker than skinner and plays good d, Mo gives us some scoring off the bench, that roster looks a lot better than:
Bibby/Hart
Wells/Martin/Garcia
Peja/Nobody
SARS/Kenny
Brad/Nobody
After that we'd be:
Bibby/Hart
Wells/Mo/Kevin
Peja/Mo
Webb/Hunter/Brad
Brad/Hunter
a lot better bench than we have now, hunter is a better blocker than skinner and plays good d, Mo gives us some scoring off the bench, that roster looks a lot better than:
Bibby/Hart
Wells/Martin/Garcia
Peja/Nobody
SARS/Kenny
Brad/Nobody