Kings still have work to do - ESPN Insider

M

Markezi

Guest
Heuge said:
First of all, Webber did not cost us 1st to 4th. There were many other factors which have been mentioned over and over again. Stop ignoring them, the deserve some mention.
Also, if not fr Webb in the playoffs. We are a first round exit. Look at the stats.
Ease up on the animosity - eh? I happen to agree with you that there are a number of factors, and each with a different level of responsibility (i.e. some more than others).

I would contend (as others do also around here) that, as far as specifically referring to Webber, the Kings likely wouldn't have ended up in the 4th seed - so it's ridiculous to say "we are a first round exit." Put away the crystal ball - it ain't workin'.
 
Let's not forget this take on the situation by Jerry Reynolds:

http://www.sacbee.com/content/sports/basketball/kings/story/10610942p-11529641c.html

CWebb

Posted by: tcuzz
September 1, 2004 at 6:38 PM
Question: How come the Kings don't just cut him loose. He's a broken player and now is causing morale problems. Maybe you won't answer this because the Kings are afraid to admit it.
answer: The Kings do not see Chris Webber as a broken player. Obviously he wasn't as effective on the court last season as he had been previously. Logic would indicate that serious knee injuries may have been a factor. Chris is 31 and there is every reason to believe that he can return close to 100 percent from his injury in time. I watched Chris workout yesterday and his movement and body looks significantly better than at the end of the season. Certainly Chris was frustrated at times and probably said and did things not in his or the team's best interest, but that's not unusual among world-class athletes coming back from injuries.



Franchise player

Posted by: milosdosen
August 29, 2004 at 4:46 PM
Question: How are you Sir? Do you think Kings need a new franchise player, since C-Webb is not a true All-Star anymore? What is your version of what happend to Kings' game last year in the second part of season? What happened with that famous team work? Thank you, Jo
answer: I think the Kings basically need to be healthy in the playoffs. Certainly the team did not play as well down the stretch of the season do in part to Webber coming back from injury but almost equally important was the injury to Bobby Jackson. Both factors impacted team talent and chemistry to some degree. I truly believe this team still is among the elite NBA teams and off-season happenings may improve the squad.


Obviously, the red highlights are mine, but I thought Jerry's remarks were interesting. Also some good stuff going forward on Chris in there but the point is that while the Kings org. apparently still believes in CWebb's future, they are clear eyed enough to admit there were problems when he came back. That's my take on it anyway.
 
thedofd said:
Again, let me be clear: I'm not advocating dumping CWebb. But if the Kings decided that was the route to go -- essentially made an institutional decision that the team as currently constructed cannot win a championship -- what would the cap ramifications be? Are the existing contracts of their other players scheduled to increase so much as to make signing a significant free agent impossible? Just asking.
We don't have the cap space with or without Webber to sign any big name (or highly serviceable) free agents. If we were to simply trade him for a pick this season, we'd still be over the cap.

And after Doug's contract is up, we'll only be $4 or 5 million under.

Getting rid of Webber doesn't free up any cap space. And trading away star players isn't exactly a good way to lure free agents to your already small market team.
 
Markezi said:
Thanks for posting the article. It can definitely be interpreted a number of different ways. I interpreted it as Adelman saying that it never crossed his mind NOT to give Chris the role he'd always had - even in the wake of everything that had happened (injury, drug problem, chemistry working well). If they won - Webber would get the credit (but only if he deserved it IMO - heck, Bibby got all the credit in 2002 - not Webber), and if they lost, Webber would get the blame.
Two things:

1) I interpreted as him saying that he was going to put Webber back in the lineup and play him as normal, with hopes that he could be the best player on the team as he had been for the previous five seasons.

2) Webber's 24 points, 11 rebounds, 5 assists and 1.6 blocks a game wouldn't have mattered in the 2002 playoffs? I know that Bibby was the man hitting all the clutch shots, but who was setting the picks, grabbing the rebounds, playing the tough defense, setting Bibby up? Bibby wouldn't have gotten all the credit - at least not deservedly.

The fact is, they did lose, so therefore, is it not fair to say that Rick's decision didn't work?
It definitely is. But who's to say that any other decision would have worked? Would have preferred that we went into the playoffs playing the kind of defense that we were playing early in the season? Rick did what he thought was best for the team, based on what the team needed and what a healthy Webber could do for it.

This line kills me, "I never doubted my decision. It was the right thing to do for this team. I don't know what else you do in that circumstance."

Does anyone still believe it was the right thing to do for this team? Even Rick? I just have to question being satisfied with a 2nd round exit, a plummet from 1st to 4th seed, and the ripping apart of the team and its chemistry.
Like heuge said, stop ignoring the other factors. They are worthy of mention, also.

Secondly, I don't think anyone's satisfied with the way the season ended. I think some people are more concerned about the kind of basketball we were playing and what kind of basketball we needed to be playing in order to be successful in the playoffs.

Do you think that we would have won 4 out of 7 with Dallas playing their kind of offense and defense? I don't, especially not with Bobby Jackson out and Brad Miller hurt.

Rick even throws this out, "I guess this sounds easy for me to say, but I'd ask people what they would have done. Sat him down and played him 20 minutes a game? I guess I could have done that"

Yes, it was an option. Still, I respect Adelman enough to understand his decision, and then to realize, too late, that his decision had serious flaws, but with the playoffs starting, there was no going back on it.
What's the advantage to playing him 20 minutes a game? This is an honest question.
 
VF21 said:
I guess it boils down to what you expect of a professional athlete who plays on your favorite team. NOT what you would like as an ideal situation, but what you actually expect and will tolerate. IMPO I believe too often athletes are expected to be not only highly skilled at the game but perfect human beings off the court as well. It doesn't happen in real life, so I don't understand the idea that it should happen in the NBA.

Just my three cents...
I don't know who is asking for perfection? I would like relatively law-abiding players, with a twinge of honesty. Like I said, making mistakes is human and we all do it, that is perfectly ok with me. But at least admit it when you make a mistake. If you're a basketball player, that behavior better not keep you from doing your job. Especially if you want other players to follow your lead. It doesn't take all that much self-discipline to keep yourself eligible to play basketball. Is it too much to ask that an athlete to follow the rules? Well then I am asking too much and I will continue to ask it. And I have little or no respect for those can't keep those rules. And I would rather see them on another team.
 
M

Markezi

Guest
Superman said:
What's the advantage to playing him 20 minutes a game? This is an honest question.
Why is it outrageous to think that slowly integrating him into the offense was a good option? He was useless to the team on defense due to his lack of movement, and his offense was significantly different from the way the Kings had been playing for the first 3/4 of the season - why go from zero to 60 immediately, and then have him maintain that from that point forward?

I believe the biggest effect of all was Vlade's well-known disappearing act with Webber on the floor - and last season was the worst of all. We go from Vlade running the offense beautifully from the top of the key, to wondering if Vlade was still on the roster. Ball movement changed/nearly stopped, Peja gets less looks, and when it counts the most, in crunchtime, the Kings suddenly didn't know what to do anymore. That time, more than any other time during the game, I think it's fair to question the decision to have Webber on the floor.

By the way, I'm talking about regular season here. As I mentioned in my post, I understand Adelman's decision, and I totally understand having to stick by it once it was made - he didn't have time to change the course of things once the playoffs were right there in front of them.
 
Markezi said:
Why is it outrageous to think that slowly integrating him into the offense was a good option? He was useless to the team on defense due to his lack of movement, and his offense was significantly different from the way the Kings had been playing for the first 3/4 of the season - why go from zero to 60 immediately, and then have him maintain that from that point forward?

I believe the biggest effect of all was Vlade's well-known disappearing act with Webber on the floor - and last season was the worst of all. We go from Vlade running the offense beautifully from the top of the key, to wondering if Vlade was still on the roster. Ball movement changed/nearly stopped, Peja gets less looks, and when it counts the most, in crunchtime, the Kings suddenly didn't know what to do anymore. That time, more than any other time during the game, I think it's fair to question the decision to have Webber on the floor.

By the way, I'm talking about regular season here. As I mentioned in my post, I understand Adelman's decision, and I totally understand having to stick by it once it was made - he didn't have time to change the course of things once the playoffs were right there in front of them.
Coach had two options: Work him in slowly and possibly have greater success in the regular season and risk not having him ready for the playoffs or play him as many minutes as he could to increase the chances he'd be ready for the playoffs at the risk of possibly hurting the regular-season record.

I can understand the point of view thinking the first option was better, but I agree with Adelman - you take your lunps in the regualr season and do everything you can do to help your chances in the playoffs.
 
I've not read the whole thread but are people still arguing about what happened in the regular season? Whether we were fourth or second made little difference unless you think SA would've been an easier opponent. And the way we played Houston all year, there was no guarantee we would've gotten by them.

Allowing Webb to play didn't hurt our team us as much as some people would like to think.
 

VF21

#KingsFansForever
Staff member
allrightythen said:
I don't know who is asking for perfection? I would like relatively law-abiding players, with a twinge of honesty. Like I said, making mistakes is human and we all do it, that is perfectly ok with me. But at least admit it when you make a mistake. If you're a basketball player, that behavior better not keep you from doing your job. Especially if you want other players to follow your lead. It doesn't take all that much self-discipline to keep yourself eligible to play basketball. Is it too much to ask that an athlete to follow the rules? Well then I am asking too much and I will continue to ask it. And I have little or no respect for those can't keep those rules. And I would rather see them on another team.
It's all "relative," as you have pointed out.

Admit it when you make a mistake? Admit what, to whom and when? And, even more importantly, why? I especially stress that last one because no matter what Chris Webber said or did after the fact, it would never be enough. Webber made mistakes. No one denies that. What I object to is that he has to continue to pay for them over and over and over, at least in some people's eyes. He is being judged by a standard most of us could never live up to. I've made mistakes in my life. I've paid the price for them. And I've been allowed to move on.

I simply continue to object to the placement of Webber under a microscope when so many others in the NBA have been found guilty to lesser or greater offenses and are allowed to be forgiven.

He has not killed anyone. He has not assaulted his wife or partner. He has not refused to pay support for a myriad of illegitimate children. He hasn't been arrested for discharging a fire arm, or carrying a firearm.

But this is an argument that will never be resolved. I may not agree with the feelings some of our members have about Webber, but I certainly won't pretend they aren't shared by a number of Kings fans.

I'm hoping that this year Webber and the rest of the team can get it together on the court, do what they're being paid a lot of money to do, and put all the controversy behind them.

GO KINGS! - ALL OF THEM!!
 
Markezi said:
Why is it outrageous to think that slowly integrating him into the offense was a good option? He was useless to the team on defense due to his lack of movement, and his offense was significantly different from the way the Kings had been playing for the first 3/4 of the season - why go from zero to 60 immediately, and then have him maintain that from that point forward?
If he had come back in December like we thought at first, that's probably what would have happened.

But when you have a month to get him ready for the playoffs, there's no time for 20 minutes a game. We needed Webber, and the only way to get him ready was to play him. The problem - to me - isn't that Adelman played Webber the way he did, but that Webber wasn't as healthy as we needed him to be.

And still, he played as good as anyone in the playoffs.

I believe the biggest effect of all was Vlade's well-known disappearing act with Webber on the floor - and last season was the worst of all. We go from Vlade running the offense beautifully from the top of the key, to wondering if Vlade was still on the roster. Ball movement changed/nearly stopped, Peja gets less looks, and when it counts the most, in crunchtime, the Kings suddenly didn't know what to do anymore. That time, more than any other time during the game, I think it's fair to question the decision to have Webber on the floor.
Vlade's disappearing act was Vlade's fault; I'm pretty sure you agree with me there. If not, forgive me. But Vlade got paid $12 million last year to play basketball. If he was healthy, there's no excuse for half-assing it for 2 months just because Webber is in the lineup.

Why wouldn't you have Webber in the lineup during crunch-time? I know he's not "clutch" beyond a doubt, but he's done more than Vlade, Peja and Brad combined have in the last two minutes of games over the past two seasons. Plus, he potentially gives our offense another dimension. Remember Brad shooting a fadeaway over Michael Finley in the post? Webber at 60% is probably going to score or get fouled if he has single coverage from Michael Finley 8 feet from the basket. But we'll probably never be able to substantiate that claim, because he'd get doubled quicker than you could imagine.

By the way, I'm talking about regular season here. As I mentioned in my post, I understand Adelman's decision, and I totally understand having to stick by it once it was made - he didn't have time to change the course of things once the playoffs were right there in front of them.
Like I said, I'd totally support Webber being slowly integrated if we had more than a month to do so before the playoffs. We didn't.
 
M

Markezi

Guest
Superman said:
Why wouldn't you have Webber in the lineup during crunch-time? I know he's not "clutch" beyond a doubt, but he's done more than Vlade, Peja and Brad combined have in the last two minutes of games over the past two seasons. Plus, he potentially gives our offense another dimension. Remember Brad shooting a fadeaway over Michael Finley in the post? Webber at 60% is probably going to score or get fouled if he has single coverage from Michael Finley 8 feet from the basket. But we'll probably never be able to substantiate that claim, because he'd get doubled quicker than you could imagine.
Regarding your first point - because that's when they were struggling the most (again, I'm talking regular season here - you don't "integrate" players back into the lineup during the playoffs). The team always looked to Webber first for just about everything when he was on the floor. Suddenly, it's crunchtime and instead of moving off the ball and running their offense, they'd dish to Webber at the top of the key and stand still. With his lack of explosion and movement, he was impotent. It was infuriating. Don't misinterpret this as blaming Webber - every person on that floor was deferring (including Adelman) and it killed them.
 
(again, I'm talking regular season here - you don't "integrate" players back into the lineup during the playoffs).
BINGO!!!!!!! That is EXACTLY why he had to play Chris the minutes he did during the regular season. There was a very short window of opportunity to get Chris the reps needed to find out what the knee could and could not do, get him comfortable out on the floor. It was publicly stated by the coaching staff prior to his return that things would probably be a little rocky, but that they were willing to sacrifice some regular season wins.
 
M

Markezi

Guest
Kingsgurl said:
BINGO!!!!!!! That is EXACTLY why he had to play Chris the minutes he did during the regular season. There was a very short window of opportunity to get Chris the reps needed to find out what the knee could and could not do, get him comfortable out on the floor. It was publicly stated by the coaching staff prior to his return that things would probably be a little rocky, but that they were willing to sacrifice some regular season wins.
Um, the Kings slipped from 1st to 4th seed and were ousted in the 2nd round of the playoffs without a home court advantage. Seems to me like that's underachieving for a team that was supposed to be one of the top contenders. Actually, I would say that in addition to Bobby's injury, it shows that the decisions that were made after the All-Star break were a complete failure. Adelman most definitely did not have to play Chris 40+ minutes from day one.
 
I disagree. I think our results in the Post Season would have been far worse if Chris was not able to play at the level he played at. I guess it's all relative, out in the second is a failure, all told. I don't see the Kings team of the early season, for all their dazzling beauty on offense, succeeding further in the Post Season, and given the fact that they were signifigantly worse than even Dallas, defensively, a first round exit was probable.
It really is a moot point now. The new season will get underway, Chris will be there from the beginning, no integration. A new identity for this team begins, as it does every season, a metamorphisis. I hope to see more focus on defense, a return to the likes of year before last. The offense should be fine.
 
Seems to me like that's underachieving for a team that was supposed to be one of the top contenders
They were one of the top contenders, even with the injuries. I never saw anyplace that had them as the odds on favorite to win it all (betting line wise) They finished top 4 in the West, which is where everyone said they would. Underachievement? Or just short of acheiving the ultimate goal?
 
Markezi said:
Adelman most definitely did not have to play Chris 40+ minutes from day one.
He didn't play Chris for 40+ minutes from day one. Only 7 of the 23 games Chris played he had 40+ minutes.(that's 30% for those willing to do the math) Chris's eleventh game is where he first had over 40. The first back to back games the Kings had in his return he was DNP'd for the second game. At least twice he had less than 30mins.
 
Last edited:

Entity

Hall of Famer
I have been lurking around here for a few weeks now not posting anything. Basically because no news gets on my nerves. I can't beleive we are a little over a month away from the start of the new season and ppl are still talking about last year and Chris Webber being hurt costing us the season and all that bull. NEWSFLASH Chris Webber is still here he isn't going to be traded he isn't going to be benched. You can move on with your lives now and watch the Kings on the road to the championship with Webb. Or you can bellyache all year at how he sucks and we will still win the championship. Seems to me it would be more fun for a fan to get behind the team and cheer for everything they do right, not to go through the season miserable booing everytime 1 player on the team makes a mistake. Because despite your bitching and dispite any hatred toward him Chris Webber is still THE best all around player on the Sacramento Kings team and 1 of the best in the league at any %.
 
VF21 said:
It's all "relative," as you have pointed out.


I simply continue to object to the placement of Webber under a microscope when so many others in the NBA have been found guilty to lesser or greater offenses and are allowed to be forgiven.

He has not killed anyone. He has not assaulted his wife or partner. He has not refused to pay support for a myriad of illegitimate children. He hasn't been arrested for discharging a fire arm, or carrying a firearm.

I'm hoping that this year Webber and the rest of the team can get it together on the court, do what they're being paid a lot of money to do, and put all the controversy behind them.

GO KINGS! - ALL OF THEM!!
Who forgave who? If you want to start talking about other players and their mistakes thats ok, we can do it. But I only bring up Webber because he was the previous topic of conversation and I'm not as interested in the rest of the teams and players in the NBA as I am the Kings and Webber.

You're right, he hasn't done anything all that terrible, but it cost him and the team and the fans. How far behind him is all this stuff? I hope its all over completely, but if its happening in his 30s, is it ever going to stop? Can we count on this guy? My problem is that it keeps going.

Finally, I will support him and cheer for him if is in a Kings uniform because I am a Kings fan and I will continue to be and I will support for any player they deam worthy to where a Kings Jersey. I hope all this controversy stuff is behind them and we don't here anything more and its all just basketball.

Go Kings, All of Them.!!!!!!!!! Whoever they might be.
 
Kingsgurl said:
They were one of the top contenders, even with the injuries. I never saw anyplace that had them as the odds on favorite to win it all (betting line wise) They finished top 4 in the West, which is where everyone said they would. Underachievement? Or just short of acheiving the ultimate goal?
I mentioned earlier in the summer that before the season began, we were expected to drop a lot of games without Webber and were projected to hardly finish in the top 4 for the regular season. Even people on this board that know how well we normally play without Webber felt that way.

I'm not saying that that makes it okay for us to have finished the way we did; it's not. But I am saying that it's not the end of the world. We were resigned to that "reality" in October, and it became reality in April. Different road to that reality than expected, but it wasn't the end of the world and it didn't push us out of contention, as some people think.

And as has been said over and over again, pre-Webb we played no defense. Arguably worse than Dallas, according to the numbers. After Webb came back, our defense was much better, especially in the playoffs.

We still had a chance to win a title last season, with "The Chris Factor." We lost by three to Minnesota with Bobby sidelined, Brad hurt, Vlade playing like my mom (he passes a little bit better), and Peja not being able to hit dark with a flashlight. All that considered, and we were three points behind them. We were primed to beat LA; I don't care how well they played closing San Antonio out. The Spurs were afraid of the Lakers, and we likely wouldn't have been. The only team that I think would have really outplayed us is Detroit (honorable mention to the Spurs, but they were out when we were), and ironically that's because of the type of offense we played last season, both before and after Webber returned to the lineup. We never saw the Pistons with Rasheed.

Basically, whether you agree with any of that or not, my point is that we still had a chance at winning the championship with Webber. I happen to think that it was even better, seeing as how defense was our catalyst in getting past the Mavs. Our drop to fourth didn't knock us out of contention; it likely made our postseason path even easier than it would have been from first.
 
Entity said:
I have been lurking around here for a few weeks now not posting anything. Basically because no news gets on my nerves. I can't beleive we are a little over a month away from the start of the new season and ppl are still talking about last year and Chris Webber being hurt costing us the season and all that bull. NEWSFLASH Chris Webber is still here he isn't going to be traded he isn't going to be benched. You can move on with your lives now and watch the Kings on the road to the championship with Webb. Or you can bellyache all year at how he sucks and we will still win the championship. Seems to me it would be more fun for a fan to get behind the team and cheer for everything they do right, not to go through the season miserable booing everytime 1 player on the team makes a mistake. Because despite your bitching and dispite any hatred toward him Chris Webber is still THE best all around player on the Sacramento Kings team and 1 of the best in the league at any %.
well said. need more posts from u man
 
Markezi said:
Regarding your first point - because that's when they were struggling the most (again, I'm talking regular season here - you don't "integrate" players back into the lineup during the playoffs). The team always looked to Webber first for just about everything when he was on the floor. Suddenly, it's crunchtime and instead of moving off the ball and running their offense, they'd dish to Webber at the top of the key and stand still. With his lack of explosion and movement, he was impotent. It was infuriating. Don't misinterpret this as blaming Webber - every person on that floor was deferring (including Adelman) and it killed them.
I agree with that. But like you said, I can't fathom someone blaming that on Webber. I either want Bibby and Webber running two man, or I want Peja moving around behind picks set by Brad and Webber with Doug and Mike showing either in the corners or at the elbow. I can't blame Webber for the team dumping the ball in to him and standing around watching him.

I can blame Webber for trying to do more than he was physically able to. But often times, he got the ball, held it waiting for something to develop, and then was forced to try to create something with 5 or 6 seconds left on the shot clock.

I understand your frustration with the way the offense was run (especially pertaining to Webber) late in the season. I share that frustration with you. But I don't think that that's indicative of the way our offense has to be or is going to be this season. We've played several seasons of successful basketball with Webber initiating the offense; I'm not inclined to look at two or three months of less movement as a precursor of things to come, especially when it's never been that bad before.