Webber trade, revisited...

[mcsluggo]

hey!

to be fair to ME...
MY post was about how the fact that at this point Matt Barnes is the most valuable asset from that trade... I don't know about the rest of you, but I SURE AS HECK didn't see that one coming.

given the fact that the thread was RELATED to "the trade" (ESPECIALLY the title of the thread), and the undeniable fact that the Kings bent over and grabbed their ankles for "the trade", it was predictable that the thread would degenerate into "THE TRADE MCMLXVII"...

but I was talking about Matt Barnes
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
As far as the trade goes, however....

I have absolutely zero problem with the fact that they traded Webb when they did. THAT was a good idea. The bad Idea was being such wussies about how they did. Given the fact that they weren't going to get back another all-star (for obvious reasons) they SHOULD have EITHER gone OPTION 1: all out for getting back pure crap that would go away quickly (like, oh, say, what about Webber's contract THIS year ?) OR they should have gone for option 2: young with some potential (or draft picks, whatever)

Obviously option 2 would've been harder to swing (perhaps impossible) but the fact is they were too pussified to knuckle-up and do what would've been unpopular at the time, option 1... instead they took back the single worst possible option, middling to bad talent with bad contract structures. Pure, unmitigated, lillylivered wussification.

 

[LPKingsFan]

At the time, Philly had a massive expiring, or soon to be. Glenn Robinson or Jamal Mashburn, don't recall which, exactly. And they had several young, up and comers, including Iguodala and Dalembert.

When I saw the headline "Webb traded to Philly" I was floored, but soon I came around and thought "Oh, at least we're getting cap room and one of their young soon to be stars." But nope.

Bad trade.

And yes, it would have been nice to keep Barnes.

 

[mcsluggo]

hey!

to be fair to ME...
MY post was about how the fact that at this point Matt Barnes ...

wow. I really should never go back and read my own posts!
(I like to preserve illusion in my head that i am NOT a complete idiot)

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Eh, I'd still take Webber on one leg over Barnes, even at this point. Swingmen that hustle and can hit a wide-open three are two-a-penny in this league. And I'll disagree with the opinion that the trade was a good idea at the time, if for no other reason than because I feel that Stojakovic should have been traded first.

 

[nbrans]

This is the worst offseason ever.

 

[Entity]

This is the worst offseason ever.

Don't forget last offseason. No trades No aquisitions and left young prospects like Williams and Amudson out to dry in the DL without any ties to us. We got lucky in getting Williams back. Other than that all we did was lose bonzi last year.

 

[uolj]

Chris Webber was the reigning player of the week when he was traded.

Player of the month.

 

[BALLER4LIFE]

You are not saying that Skinner was a better piece than Williamson? are you?

yeah i would say skinner was a better piece than williamson.. before skinner got hurt he was averaging 8.7 rebounds and 1.7 blocks in less than 28 minutes during the 04/05 season with the kings.. and skinners contract was much less than williamson's.. remember skinner was basically playing goalie for the kings

 

[beb0p]

Regarding the Webber trade. It didn't make us any better... but it also didn't make us any worse. We were a borderline playoff team with Webber (minus Divac), and we were a borderline playoff team after Webber (while Adelman was in charge). But in the process, we saved a few millions. So in my book, we came out ahead, however slightly. And if we can get rid of KT somehow, we'd be way ahead.

I can't stand KT, but since the trade, KT9 is the better player over Webber. Yes, I'm serious. I wouldn't touch either player with a 100-foot pole, but if I MUST choose one and if both guys draw the same salary, I'd pick KT over Webber . Neither player can defend, but at least KT is still quick (for a PF) and he can rebound. Watching Webber since his injury is just painful to me. He can't guard anyone, can't jump, can't run, can't rebound, and brick shots he used to score with his eyes closed. Webber has become a player who will singlehandedly lose a game for you. Kenny Thomas, when used correctly (ie. under Adelman), is still a more useful piece than Webber post-injury.

And lastly, Webber's would-be $23 millions expiring contract means little. Like any GM is dumb enough to trade for him. With KT's conract, we still have a chance to package him along with Bibby or Artest. There would be no chance to do that with Webber's ginormous contract.

As for Barnes, he is the real deal. I've been saying that since he was with the Clippers. I was jumping up and down when the Kings signed him. And a little po when somehow Mo Evans got ahead of him, and a little sad when he was traded. I wish him the best of luck.

 

[BayAreaKingsFan]

Bebop--

"And lastly, Webber's would-be $23 millions expiring contract means little. Like any GM is dumb enough to trade for him. With KT's conract, we still have a chance to package him along with Bibby or Artest. There would be no chance to do that with Webber's ginormous contract."

Even if no wanted to trade for Webber this year, he would've been a Free Agent at the end of the season and we'd have $23 Million off of our salary cap-- we could've been major players in next summers free-agent market---

Also, maybe the reason that we're having a hard time trading Bibby or Artest is the fact that we insist on someone taking KT in the deal-- No one, I mean NO ONE wants to take on Kenny's horrible deal---

Bottom line is, we weren't going to be any worse with Webber the last 2 years, then we were anyway. And if we would've kept him, we could've really improved the team next summer.

 

[beb0p]

Bebop--

"And lastly, Webber's would-be $23 millions expiring contract means little. Like any GM is dumb enough to trade for him. With KT's conract, we still have a chance to package him along with Bibby or Artest. There would be no chance to do that with Webber's ginormous contract."

Even if no wanted to trade for Webber this year, he would've been a Free Agent at the end of the season and we'd have $23 Million off of our salary cap-- we could've been major players in next summers free-agent market---

Also, maybe the reason that we're having a hard time trading Bibby or Artest is the fact that we insist on someone taking KT in the deal-- No one, I mean NO ONE wants to take on Kenny's horrible deal---

Bottom line is, we weren't going to be any worse with Webber the last 2 years, then we were anyway. And if we would've kept him, we could've really improved the team next summer.

That's fuzzy math. Around $13 millions (Williamson + Skinner, which subsequently turned into Potapenko + Monya) of the $23 millions expired THIS summer. How much of a FA player were we?

Fact is, keeping Webber means we'd be over the cap. We wouldn't have the full $23 millions to sign a player. How much we'd have depends on Petrie's spending habits. If he hadn't signed SAR, Salmons, and Moore, we'd have around $16 millions to spend this summer.

So the problem lies not in trading Webber away, it lies in our GM making some questionable signings since Webber was traded.

And yes, if... IF Petrie had kept C-Web and DID NOT sign any reinforcement during those yrs then we would have around $23 millions to spend next summer. But that's a fantasy. Petrie would still sign someone ON TOP of Webber's fat contract; because keeping Web means we were going for a title, and we had to spend like a contender.

 

[VF21]

Player of the month.

Oh yeah...

Sorry. The whole month of February 2005 is a bit of a blur. Probably selective amnesia.

 

[bajaden]

I have no idea why I'm getting involved in this discussion. Its pointless and solves nothing. I suspect that some of the same people that are critical of the Webber trade would be complaining about what a rotten player he is,and why haven't we traded him yet, if we hadn't traded him.
At the time of the trade, I thought it was a good trade. KT had always seemed like a decent player, and played pretty well the first year. I have
always liked Corlis. And Skinner seemed like just what we needed. Well, Skinner is gone and so is Williamson. Thats 2/3's of the trade off the books. Its not fair to mix apple's and oranges to justify your point. Moore and SAR have nothing to do with that trade. If you want to critizise those signings seperately, then do so.

 

[Bricklayer]

At the time of the trade, I thought it was a good trade.

This of course being the key to the few remaining defenders fo the trade -- they actually liked it when it happened -- presumably listening too much to the submoron chatter of tools liek Napear and Voison -- and just are stubborn at a certain point despite the long death spiral ever since that time and terrible cap position we find ourselves in.

I on the other hand loudly decried its utter stupidity the moment it happened. It was completely asinine. And as happened a lot in recent years, my complaints have been thoroughly vindicated. It was a panic move, led has led to a long string of followup garbage as well that have helped pin this franchise down and make us once again a team that people almost forget are actually in the league. When I stick to MY guns on this issue, those guns are fully loaded with years of painful evidence. And there is not a thing that can happen now, nothing, that can make it a good trade. The window always was the first two and a half years -- we had to win or acquire nifty assets with those pieces in that time. Because now, this year? Having that mega-expiring would have been infinitely superior to all the contract garbage we have stacked up trying to fill that void. That was oibvious from the start.

The trade was an abject failure. An embarrassment. And generally considered Petrie's worst.

 

[Kevin MartinFan]

Well im not saying i love the trade but we would have been just as bad with webber th elast couple of years or a little better but whats the difference? Its all mediocre no matter how you look at it.

We will have capspace in 2 years so just be patient folks, i have confidence that this thing will be turned around. I love webb and hes my favorite player but The guy cant play anymore and hes terrible to watch now. He will be on his fourth teamin like 2 years folks.

 

[Superman]

I don't want to cross any lines or say too much, so...

Trading Chris Webber when we did and how we did was a huge ****-up by upper management. Not only did we not get better, we didn't create any cap space (which was what the whole deal was supposed to be about), and we got back players with no value. Kenny Thomas won't be moved unless we package him with another player (like Artest or Bibby), and that puts the salaries in a completely different range, which means we have to take back more crap or involve a third team, neither of which is what you'd call a simple process.

Had we kept Webber, we couldn't have been any worse the past two seasons. Maybe things would have worked out differently; maybe Peja wouldn't have been traded and we'd have his deal on the books. But if you look at what the franchise has done since trading Webber, it's obvious that the plan was conceived in error. We weren't able to parlay the so-called "tradeable pieces" into anything legitimate, and here we are, sorry as I don't know what and in salary cap hell, wondering how we're going to return to being a playoff team, much less a contender.

 

[LPKingsFan]

It's so polarizing, the Webber trade is like the Iraq war for Kings fans. Some were for it before there were against it, others holding out for something good to come out of it, others still against it from the get go and even more vocal now.

Unfortunately, those "flexible contracts" have been as handy as those WMD.

 

[Superman]

And yes, if... IF Petrie had kept C-Web and DID NOT sign any reinforcement during those yrs then we would have around $23 millions to spend next summer. But that's a fantasy. Petrie would still sign someone ON TOP of Webber's fat contract; because keeping Web means we were going for a title, and we had to spend like a contender.

We stopped spending like a contender after Webber got hurt, not after he left.

Of course we would have had to make some signings and a bunch of other transactions may have happened, we would have had to sign draft picks, etc. But the bottom line is that the Webber trade was sold as a move that would make it easier for us to consolidate, but what happened is that we weren't able to turn Skinner, Thomas or Williamson into anything of value to us. The reasons why are pretty irrelevant, as is anything that has happened since.

 

[Kevin MartinFan]

We stopped spending like a contender after Webber got hurt, not after he left.

Of course we would have had to make some signings and a bunch of other transactions may have happened, we would have had to sign draft picks, etc. But the bottom line is that the Webber trade was sold as a move that would make it easier for us to consolidate, but what happened is that we weren't able to turn Skinner, Thomas or Williamson into anything of value to us. The reasons why are pretty irrelevant, as is anything that has happened since.

Well we already got cap relief with skinner and williamson gone so what happens if kenny get traded with bibby for expiring and picks? Its the same thing as letting webber's contract come off the books, no?

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Let's keep politics, even anecdotally, out of the discussion. kthxbye.

 

[Jerryaki]

Well we already got cap relief with skinner and williamson gone so what happens if kenny get traded with bibby for expiring and picks? Its the same thing as letting webber's contract come off the books, no?

you're kidding, right? let's see what magic pupu platter we can turn kenny thomas into. webber, even a hollow shell of the star we once had, was productive and a good leader of this team. if you're fine for trading him for three mediocre guys (even though i was proud of corliss last year), then there's really not much to argue about.

 

[beb0p]

This of course being the key to the few remaining defenders fo the trade -- they actually liked it when it happened -- presumably listening too much to the submoron chatter of tools liek Napear and Voison -- and just are stubborn at a certain point despite the long death spiral ever since that time and terrible cap position we find ourselves in.

There is where I don't understand. Are you saying there would not be a downward spiral or terrible cap pisition if Webber wasn't traded? I just don't see it. Webber, as a shadow of his former self, would not have taken us to the promise land, or even to the second round. And keeping Webber would in no way discouraged Petrie from signing SAR or Salmons. In fact, think back to the 2004 summer - with Songalia gone and C-Web injury-prone, Petrie would surely sign SAR as a backup/spot starter. And Petrie would still sign Salmons as a last-dich effort to win a title before Webber's contract expires. We'd be in worse shape than we are in now cap-wise and the rebuilding would be delayed by at least another year. Not to mention we may actually be worse-off with a slow, limping PF as the key player.

And no, I don't listen to Rant or Voisin. I think they're usually clueless, but even they saw that the Kings were going nowhere with Webber.

 

[Bricklayer]

There is where I don't understand. Are you saying there would not be a downward spiral or terrible cap pisition if Webber wasn't traded? I just don't see it. Webber, as a shadow of his former self, would not have taken us to the promise land, or even to the second round. And keeping Webber would in no way discouraged Petrie from signing SAR or Salmons. In fact, think back to the 2004 summer - with Songalia gone and C-Web injury-prone, Petrie would surely sign SAR as a backup/spot starter. And Petrie would still sign Salmons as a last-dich effort to win a title before Webber's contract expires. We'd be in worse shape than we are in now cap-wise and the rebuilding would be delayed by at least another year. Not to mention we may actually be worse-off with a slow, limping PF as the key player.

And no, I don't listen to Rant or Voisin. I think they're usually clueless, but even they saw that the Kings were going nowhere with Webber.

I am saying that even IF we were going to go down the same spiral with Webber (not exactly proven given that every single year he has put up better numbers than the trash that replaced him), it was infinitely better to do it with Webber, with our history and heart and identity intact, then to go down the same spiral anyway with a bunch of random garbage. Even if we somewhow magically turn Kenny into an ender this year, and SAR as well (who would NOT be here wiht his long term deal if Webber had been retianed -- ironically in the past an argument made by people supporting the trade), then that does no better then get you back to the exact same situation you would have had if you had kept Webber. But without years of garbage, turnover, and pointless angst in between. If you are going to suck and get cap room after the '07 season, you do it with the guys who got you there, who then are forever associated with the franchise. You lock in the identity. Say the farewells, have the retirement ceremonies, and act remotely like a class organization.

As is we remarkably managed to do neither -- we did not get any better on the court, in fact likely have been WORSE without Webber, and amazingly we have gotten ourselves into a WORSE financial position too. The "flexible pieces" were anything but, and even if you ignore the obvious SAR and Corliss/Mikki deals, even the contracts that have expired this year have done absolutely nothing for us -- before Webber's is up (next summer) we have gained exactly ZERO dollars of usuable cap room by trading him (never been significantly under the cap once), and in fact have a nice unmoveable anvil tied around our ankle in Kenny. We've likely gotten WORSE in both respects, and in order to justify trading away the best player your franchise has ever had rather than riding him to retirement you have to have gotten BETTER. not just done the same, but gotten significantly better to justify tearing up the franchise. We didn't even come close.

 

[VF21]

If you are going to suck and get cap room after the '07 season, you do it with the guys who got you there, who then are forever associated with the franchise. You lock in the identity. Say the farewells, have the retirement ceremonies, and act remotely like a class organization.

You have summed up 2 1/2 years of frustration into a few succinct sentences. Thank you.

 

[Entity]

I am saying that even IF we were going to go down the same spiral with Webber (not exactly proven given that every single year he has put up better numbers than the trash that replaced him), it was infinitely better to do it with Webber, with our history and heart and identity intact, then to go down the same spiral anyway with a bunch of random garbage. Even if we somewhow magically turn Kenny into an ender this year, and SAR as well (who would NOT be here wiht his long term deal if Webber had been retianed -- ironically in the past an argument made by people supporting the trade), then that does no better then get you back to the exact same situation you would have had if you had kept Webber. But without years of garbage, turnover, and pointless angst in between. If you are going to suck and get cap room after the '07 season, you do it with the guys who got you there, who then are forever associated with the franchise. You lock in the identity. Say the farewells, have the retirement ceremonies, and act remotely like a class organization.

As is we remarkably managed to do neither -- we did not get any better on the court, in fact likely have been WORSE without Webber, and amazingly we have gotten ourselves into a WORSE financial position too. The "flexible pieces" were anything but, and even if you ignore the obvious SAR and Corliss/Mikki deals, even the contracts that have expired this year have done absolutely nothing for us -- before Webber's is up (next summer) we have gained exactly ZERO dollars of usuable cap room by trading him (never been significantly under the cap once), and in fact have a nice unmoveable anvil tied around our ankle in Kenny. We've likely gotten WORSE in both respects, and in order to justify trading away the best player your franchise has ever had rather than riding him to retirement you have to have gotten BETTER. not just done the same, but gotten significantly better to justify tearing up the franchise. We didn't even come close.

Best post I have seen since I became a member of KingsFans. This should go into the KingsFans post Hall of Fame. In fact it should be an article in a newspaper. Preferable one the Maloofs and Petrie will read.

 

[Jerryaki]

You have summed up 2 1/2 years of frustration into a few succinct sentences. Thank you.

where do i find the clapping smiley face?! well put, brick.

 

[mcsluggo]

that was indeed an inspirational message.

Unfortunately, I think it was also really a pipe dream. Can you even IMAGINE the state of the locker room if the proud players that carried the kings to one missed foul shot, one crooked game, and then one turned ankle from the championship were just sorta held on to, together, to spiral downward into this current sorry state of affairs? MAN!!! the finger pointeing, acrimony, despair would've been something to see! And not very enjoyable for the Kings players OR fans.

I do agree, it would be nice to at least have some nostalgia to root for. I'm just not sure its feasible.

 

[6th]

where do i find the clapping smiley face?! well put, brick.

How's this one, Jerryaki?

 

[Heuge]

this poll is way off, I recall significantly more folks applauding this wicked trade.

 

[Geoff]

This is the trade that never dies,
It comes around like pesky flies,
Geoff Petrie traded Chris Webber to try and save some dough,
He got back crap, and now the team sucks hard and really blows, cause it's the trade that never dies...


I dunno, I get a perverse pleasure in discussing this topic because I still can't believe:

• that the trade actually occurred
• that there were fans who supported the trade
• that the trade ended up with the players that it did.

I became a kings fan during the 2002 Laker series, so I don't know what the history was before that point. I never thought that Webb was the second coming of MJ, nor did I think that his detractors didn't have good points. However, I never did understand why some fans had this intense hatred of him, and even if I did wince at times when he made shots, I knew that he was bringing it every night. He was doing his best to win, and that's all anyone could have asked for.

If the powers that be traded him because of a lack of class and a desire to just kick him to the curb...well, I think the events since that trade till now are just karma coming back with a freakin' vengeance. Too bad we fans have to partake of it too, but look at it this way: Whatever we are feeling, Geoff and the Maloofs are feeling it much MUCH worse. They the ones footing the bill