According to TNT he is out for the rest of the playoffs. This is karma paying him a visit. I mean what it have to really been fair for him to play in the postseason when the University of Michigan can't? 
Joe Mama
Joe Mama
Chris Webber
- Thread starter Joe Mama
- Start date
elindholm
edited for content
But I also read that Bobby Jackson is good to go in Game 3.
Let's be honest. Jackson means more to that team than Webber does. Jackson's heart and aggression will more than make up for the loss of Webber's pouting and elbow jumpers.
Let's be honest. Jackson means more to that team than Webber does. Jackson's heart and aggression will more than make up for the loss of Webber's pouting and elbow jumpers.
PhiLLmattiC
Last of a Dying Breed
damn chris webber is out for the rest of the playoffs. i hate knee injuries i'm going through one now myself. this was probably the best chance he would have had at winning the championship too. I think you guys are right though the team can still do it without him. Thats if they don't run into the lakers.
arthurracoon
The Cardinal Smiles
Bibby and Divan need to step up
arthurracoon
The Cardinal Smiles
I mean Divac
Billythekid
All Star
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2002
- Posts
- 693
- Reaction score
- 0
This sux. SA might be nice people and all but watching them is freakin boring! Sac are an exciting team to watch more so then the Mavs, so I was hoping they'd go all the way. What a damn shame.
And make no mistake, Bobby Jackson might be the heart pulse of this team but C Webb is the body around the pulse.
this is a damn shame.
And make no mistake, Bobby Jackson might be the heart pulse of this team but C Webb is the body around the pulse.
this is a damn shame.
hcsilla
ASFN Lifer
You can't say this seriously, elindholm.Webber is still their best player.
elindholm
edited for content
You can't say this seriously, elindholm.Webber is still their best player.
I do say it seriously. The Kings are a better team than the Lakers even with Webber on the bench. They've played enough games without him over the last couple of years to know that they don't need him to win. The difference in the playoffs is courage and leadership. Webber offers neither. With him out of the way, the Kings can take their lead from the two point guards. They aren't really a better team without him, but they aren't much worse. Thanks to the Kings' depth and Webber's habit of disappearing in the clutch, I'd say he's easily the least essential "superstar" in the league.
I do say it seriously. The Kings are a better team than the Lakers even with Webber on the bench. They've played enough games without him over the last couple of years to know that they don't need him to win. The difference in the playoffs is courage and leadership. Webber offers neither. With him out of the way, the Kings can take their lead from the two point guards. They aren't really a better team without him, but they aren't much worse. Thanks to the Kings' depth and Webber's habit of disappearing in the clutch, I'd say he's easily the least essential "superstar" in the league.
hcsilla
ASFN Lifer
I see your points and I agree with you except that Kings are a better team without Webber than the Lakers.
But I disagree with the statement "Jackson means more to that team than Webber does".
Originally posted by Joe Mama
I mean what it have to really been fair for him to play in the postseason when the University of Michigan can't?
Joe Mama
Classic line. I don't believe in karma, but if there ever was such a thing, I can't think of a more deserving player. I hate it when a college gets screwed in the present for the actions of one its former players.
PhiLLmattiC
Last of a Dying Breed
If I was put in Chris Webbers position back in Michigan I think I would have taken the money too. I'm sure he had no idea where the money was comming from and even if he did he wouldn't care and i'm pretty sure some of you guys would have done the same thing. It was still wrong though.
JCSunsfan
ASFN Icon
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2002
- Posts
- 22,115
- Reaction score
- 6,551
Its quite enlightening to see how much the rest of the Sac team steps up when Webber is out. Espn was showing some stats on that this morning (or was it yesterday). Clark, Turko, Bibby, Bobby, all increased their scoring when Webber was out.
Some of that is to be expected just because there are less touches to go around, but the difference was across the board as a team and quite significant--in the range of 4-7 ppg.
I think I agree with Eric on this. In terms of wins and losses, the Kings would be hurt more losing BJackson than Webber.
Some of that is to be expected just because there are less touches to go around, but the difference was across the board as a team and quite significant--in the range of 4-7 ppg.
I think I agree with Eric on this. In terms of wins and losses, the Kings would be hurt more losing BJackson than Webber.
Last edited:
Billythekid
All Star
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2002
- Posts
- 693
- Reaction score
- 0
Bobby Jackson is a spark plug. Chris Webber's a V8 engine
Missing C Webb's 20 odd points and 10 plus rebs is HUGE!! They might step up in his absence and win the series but losing Webber in the reg season is totally different to losing him in the playoffs where it's likley to be a more slow down affair (maybe not the Dallas series) and to miss a big body like C Webb in the half court is a devastating loss.
Missing C Webb's 20 odd points and 10 plus rebs is HUGE!! They might step up in his absence and win the series but losing Webber in the reg season is totally different to losing him in the playoffs where it's likley to be a more slow down affair (maybe not the Dallas series) and to miss a big body like C Webb in the half court is a devastating loss.
SirStefan32
Krycek, Alex Krycek
I've been following the Kings very closely for the last four years, and I have to say that I think Eric is right.
Agreed...what does Webber do besides rebound a little and shoot the jumper? He'd be a much better player if he could learn to post up and take a beating.
Mike
slinslin
Welcome to Amareca
Mmm... Webber rebounds, scores and on top of that and most importantly he is a great playmaker with outstanding passing skills.
He dribbles tha ball well enough attack the basket and he has a nice baby hook and spinmove in the post.
Webber posts up more than Kevin Garnett who many would consider the best or 2nd best forward.
It's not like Tim Duncan posts up a lot more than Webber.
He dribbles tha ball well enough attack the basket and he has a nice baby hook and spinmove in the post.
Webber posts up more than Kevin Garnett who many would consider the best or 2nd best forward.
It's not like Tim Duncan posts up a lot more than Webber.
The biggest problem with Webber is that he still doesn't like to step up and be the MAN when the game is on the line. As the time ticks off the game clock he starts to disappear.
Several articles have been written on how the Kings do without CWebb and most stated that they play at a "60-win" level without him.
Several articles have been written on how the Kings do without CWebb and most stated that they play at a "60-win" level without him.
slinslin
Welcome to Amareca
Also Webber is likely the BEST high-post player in the entire league.
Him being in the high-post opens up lanes for the cutters.
Him being in the high-post opens up lanes for the cutters.
elindholm
edited for content
Also Webber is likely the BEST high-post player in the entire league.
I agree that Webber is an excellent passer. In fact, I think it is the strongest part of his game. He is most likely the best-passing big man in the league, except maybe for Sabonis.
Oh, and Tsakalidis of course.
I agree that Webber is an excellent passer. In fact, I think it is the strongest part of his game. He is most likely the best-passing big man in the league, except maybe for Sabonis.
Oh, and Tsakalidis of course.
LakeShowMan
Registered
The Kings can not beat the Lakers or Spurs in a 7 game series without Webber, period.
SirStefan32
Krycek, Alex Krycek
Why not?
I agree that C-Webb is an excellent player. He has a very nice jumper, passes the ball well, and has developed an ugly, but effective jump hook.
Having said that, Webber does not like to step up and be "the man", as Brian already observed. Also, movement without the ball is the main and the most important part of the Kings game. Many times, when Webb has the ball, everybody stands and watches CWebb play 1-on-1.
When Webb is out, Everybody steps up. I think they can beatLA without Webber. I am very surprised, however, that they can not beat Dallas.
I agree that C-Webb is an excellent player. He has a very nice jumper, passes the ball well, and has developed an ugly, but effective jump hook.
Having said that, Webber does not like to step up and be "the man", as Brian already observed. Also, movement without the ball is the main and the most important part of the Kings game. Many times, when Webb has the ball, everybody stands and watches CWebb play 1-on-1.
When Webb is out, Everybody steps up. I think they can beatLA without Webber. I am very surprised, however, that they can not beat Dallas.
Chaplin
Better off silent
Well, they definitely have to worry about Dallas before they can even think about LA--and that's if LA even advances in the first place.
LakeShowMan
Registered
I know he isn't the 4th quarter player that everyone wishes he could be, but he is still the most important player on that team.
When playing the Lakers he is the toughest match-up. The Lakers can't guard him, and when they do run doubles he does a very good job of getting teammates open shots. Also, he is pretty much the only guy who can break down the Lakers half court defense by himself. Remember, Bibby got almost all of his shots off of pick and rolls, and almost exclusively when they were running it with Webber. The Lakers go under a lot of screens, giving him (Bibby) open jumpers mostly because the are guarding against giving Webber open shots. Clark, Pollard and Divac just don't scare the defense enough for this to be as effective. Also, it takes all three of those guys total effort to try and contain Shaq, if they had to do that as well as trying to be offensive threats they would undoubtly come up short on one or both sides of the court. I agree that Webber isn't necesarally clutch, but his all-around game and threat on offense is what makes them a tough match-up for LA, with him out they would have a hard time being effective against the Lakers in a 7 game series.
As for a series with San Antonio, he would be integral. The Lakers are struggling against SA because they have no one to match up with Tim Duncan (except for Shaq, and they can't risk foul trouble). When left alone he scores with ease and/or gets to the foul line. If the Lakers double, then the role players get open shots (which they knock down at home). When playing against a player like that, the only thing you can do against them is make them work on the defensive end in hopes of wearing them out or getting them in foul trouble (game 4 of this series). Without Webber they have no match up for Duncan. Not that I am saying that Webber can guard him one-on-one, but I think he would have the best chance of anyone on that roster (maybe Pollard but he gets off balance a lot and commits stupid fouls), plus he will make Duncan work on the other end. Without him who is going to do that? Robinson and Rose can play Divac, who else is going to make Duncan anymore than a rebounder and weakside helper? Clark? NO. Pollard? HELL NO. Funderburke? Don't make me laugh.
The Kings may be the deepest team in the league, but Webber is the only irreplaceable guy on the roster, when you consider these certain skills. He is the key to beating both those teams.
It really doesn't matter anyway, because they have no answer for Dirk and Van Exel and I don't think they can beat Dallas w/out Webber there to take advantage of Dirk on defense. Hell, if none of these guys can do anything against Dirk on that side of the court how could any of them make Duncan work, or find a way to breakdown the Laker defense?
Similar threads
