Kings still have work to do - ESPN Insider

#91
trade Webber?

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.
 
#92
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?
 
#95
Daved said:
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?
 
Last edited:
#96
>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
).

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

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
Staff member
#97
thedofd said:
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.
 
#98
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.
 
M

Markezi

Guest
#99
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.
 
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?
 
Bricklayer said:
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.
 
Markezi said:
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.
 
Daved said:
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.
 
thedofd said:
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.
 
C Diddy said:
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.

C Diddy said:
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.
 
>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!
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.
 
thedofd said:
"

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.
 
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.
 
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.
 

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
Staff member
thedofd said:
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.
 
M

Markezi

Guest
Superman said:
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.
 
M

Markezi

Guest
thedofd said:
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.
Agreed. It is fascinating to me how keeping an open mind to the benefits of trading Webber makes some people absolutely livid and venemous.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
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.
 
Last edited:
Markezi said:
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.
 
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?
 
Daved said:
Superman said:
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!
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.
 
Markezi said:
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?