[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: The Case Against C-Webb
Don't get me wrong - I'm not putting you down. We just disagree about
Webber. I don't agree about Webber's stellar supporting cast (J.Williams an
"amazing?" point guard? He has potential but shot selection is woeful and
A:TO ratio less than desirable). Only reason Sacramento pushed Lakers to 5
games was Webber. He dominated as equally as Wallace did. True, Webber has
more experience and perhaps Walker will mature but Webber has never been one
to look like he could lose 10-20 pounds ever.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: OzerskyJA [mailto:OzerskyJA@cmog.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2000 11:08 AM
> To: 'mgriffin@rillc.com'; OzerskyJA; Celtics@igtc.com
> Subject: The Case Against C-Webb
>
>
> Look, dude, you don't need to put me down. I'm just saying that
> Weber isn't the guy you build a team around. He's got some nice
> all around skills, and now that he has finally put it together,
> he is a very
> tough customer on the block (as is Antoine) and a stupendous rebounder and
> above-average defender as well. (hence his superiority to Antoine at this
> stage of their careers -- remember, Weber, has four or five years
> on Twon.)
> But even in Sacramento, Weber's success has a lot to do with playing
> alongside a top ten center, an amazing point guard, a singular 3 man in
> Corliss Williamson, etc. etc. On top of which he remains a flake and a
> pothead. The other players I mentioned, whatever stage of their
> career they
> happen to be at, are players whom an entire team dynamic revolves around:
> Karl Malone's post play (truly unstoppable, unlike C-Webb), Dikembe
> Mutumbo's shotblocking and rebounding, which changes the entire complexion
> of his team's defense; Zo's offense and defense; Payton and Kidd's ability
> to dominate an entire defense with scoring and passing. These
> guys are true
> difference makers, and I just don't see Weber being that. I don't think
> most NBA players or coaches do, either. Webb isn't the kind of player who
> can carry a team on his shoulders; and that has as much to do with
> personality as it does with talent. He's not a truly dominant
> scorer, like
> Kobe; nor a leader like Kevin Garnett. Nor for that matter does he even
> have the competitive fire of our own Antoine Walker, although
> he's certainly
> as competitive as the next guy. I like him as a player; I think he's an
> all-star; I would trade Antoine for him straight-up if I could,
> if only for
> the short term benefits. But I don't put him in the top echelon of NBA
> players. Period.
>
>
>
> Josh Ozersky
> Marketing Communications Specialist
> Corning Museum of Glass
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Michael Griffin [SMTP:mgriffin@rillc.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2000 12:03 PM
> > To: OzerskyJA; Celtics@igtc.com
> > Subject: RE: Today's Thoughts.
> >
> > Perhaps my knowledge is inferior to this board but I don't
> agree with that
> > assessment at all. If you, as a GM, would actually prefer Mutumbo?!,
> > Malone?!(clearly downside of career), Payton, Kidd, or Zo over Webber -
> > then
> > there isn't any need to have much of a discussion. I'll give you Duncan
> > and
> > Shaq. Kobe is rising, I'd put Webber right there with KG and over Hill.
> >
> > Walker and Webber are NOT close talent-wise. Webber is a
> warrior down low
> > and unstoppable in the post. Pierce "may" also be rising but he plays a
> > position that is replaceable. Just because Pitino gave Walker the max
> > doesn't mean he is on-par talent wise with other players receiving the
> > max.
> > Walker may yet fulfill his potential but Webber has led
> Sacramento to the
> > playoffs two years in a row when he is basically the only option there.
> > Webber is doing for Sacramento what Walker should have done for
> two years
> > in
> > a row for Boston.
> >
> > I guess I think Webber is indeed a franchise player and if he
> were a free
> > agent he'd be more coveted than anyone in this year's group excluding
> > Duncan.
> >
> > Let's take a poll here. Would you classify Webber as a Franchise player
> > or
> > not? I mean rumor or not, people have actually printed a sign and trade
> > with Indiana - Walker for Croshere. Webber and Croshere are two words
> > that
> > would NEVER be in the same sentence.
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: OzerskyJA [mailto:OzerskyJA@cmog.org]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2000 6:11 AM
> > > To: 'mgriffin@rillc.com'; Celtics@igtc.com
> > > Subject: RE: Today's Thoughts.
> > >
> > >
> > > Funny how we both accused John of being high. But
> > > I think you go too far. Any GM would be retarded not
> > > to trade Webber for Walker and Pierce. Webber and
> > > Walker is pretty much a wash, talentwise, with Chris
> > > having maxed out his upside, and Walker only being
> > > 50-50 on ever reaching his (if that). But for Walker
> > > AND Pierce, I would want a franchise player. C-Webb
> > > has never been and never will be that. Top three? I wouldn't
> > > even put him in the top ten: Duncan, Shaq, Kobe, KG, Hill,
> > > Payton, Kidd, Zo, Malone, Mutumbo.
> > >
> > > Josh Ozersky
> > > Marketing Communications Specialist
> > > Corning Museum of Glass
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Michael Griffin [SMTP:mgriffin@rillc.com]
> > > > Sent: Monday, July 24, 2000 5:35 PM
> > > > To: john polyak; Celtics@igtc.com
> > > > Subject: RE: Today's Thoughts.
> > > >
> > > > Not to sound offensive, but are you on drugs? There is no
> way Webber
> > is
> > > > coming to Boston with Antoine and Pierce still on the roster. In
> > fact,
> > > > Sactown wouldn't trade Webber straight up for Walker and Pierce and
> > > > neither
> > > > would any sane GM. Webber might be top 3. With shaq out
> of the way,
> > > > Webber
> > > > might have been the MVP last year. Forston for Spree doesn't work
> > under
> > > > the
> > > > cap rules. I think that has been posted before. Hey, no harm
> > > in wishful
> > > > thinking but your scenario is not possible.
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: owner-celtics@igtc.com
> > > [mailto:owner-celtics@igtc.com]On Behalf Of
> > > > > john polyak
> > > > >
> > > Sent: Monday, July 24, 2000 1:55 PM
> > > > > To: Celtics@igtc.com
> > > > > Subject: Today's Thoughts.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Derek Anderson is talking about San Antonio, what with all the
> > > > > opportunity to join a very good team. If the price is right, he
> > > > > will go to Denver, imo. He likes Denver, also. The price on the
> > > > > table must be big, since Denver is shipping out 3 contracts.
> > > > > And, Abdul-Wahad's contract is going to be nice. TAW and Herron
> > > > > supposedly play good defense. I welcome these two with open
> > > > > arms. Mercer doesn't play defense at the level of TAW. This is
> > > > > a good deal. I think we can trade Fortson for Sprewell. Why?
> > > > > Because Webber wants to play with Spree next season. He has said
> > > > > so. Tell NY to take some cap crap with Danny for Spree. Next
> > > > > season, maybe we'll have space to fit Antoine, Pierce, Webber,
> > > > > Spree, and TAW under the cap. If Portland can figure out how to
> > > > > fit that many superstars under the cap, so can we. The
> > > > > manuevering is possible. Beantown, with Antoine, Pierce, Spree,
> > > > > and TAW must be more attractive than other free agent
> > > > > possibilities. I'm sure some stars don't worr!
> > > > > y about sharing minutes; the stars in the City of Roses don't.
> > > > >
> > > > > .............................................................
> > > > > voted #1 search engine! http://www.iwon.com why wouldn't you?
> > > > > .............................................................
> > > > >
> > >
>