Ranking the Top 50 Sacramento Kings, Pick No. 1
You know what everybody loves? No, aside from that you perv. Yes, rankings! Rankings are all the rage nowadays, and with no end to the lockout in sight, we've decided to create a be-all, end-all list of the Top 50 Sacramento Kings, as decided by you, the reader. Every other weekday for the next several weeks, you'll be able to vote in the poll for which player you believe is the best. Feel free to use any criteria you wish in your evaluation, but only take into account a player's career as a Sacramento King. If a player you want to vote for isn't on the poll, feel free to mention him in the comments to be added.
Our first poll is going to be a little bit different from the rest, in that it will only have two choices. That is because any argument on who the greatest player in Kings history is can only include two players: Chris Webber and Mitch Richmond. But who was better? That's up to you.
Here's a statistical recap of both players' time with the Kings.
Webber (1999-2005):
23.5 PPG, .473 FG%, 10.6 RPG, 4.8 APG, 1.5 BLK
4th All-Time in Minutes Played (14,627)
2nd All-Time in Field Goals Made (3,691)
5th All-Time in Free Throws Made (1,406)
3rd All-Time in Offensive Rebounds (969)
1st All-Time in Defensive Rebounds (3,037)
1st All-Time in Total Rebounds (4,006)
5th All-Time in Assists (1,791)
4th All-Time in Steals (568)
2nd All-Time in Blocks (553)
3rd All-Time in Points (8,843)
3rd All-Time in Playoff Games (53), Steals (216)
1st All-Time in Playoff Minutes (2095), Field Goals (471), Offensive Rebounds (152), Defensive Rebounds (365), Total Rebounds (517), Blocks (66), Points (1,148)
2nd All-Time in Playoff Free Throws (202), Assists (216)
4 All-Star Game Appearances
1 All-NBA 1st Team, 3 All-NBA 2nd Team, 1 All-NBA 3rd Team Selections
***
Richmond (1992-1998):
23.3 PPG, .453 FG%, .404 3P%, 3.7 RPG, 4.1 APG
2nd All-Time in Games Played (517)
1st All-Time in Minutes Played (19,532)
1st All-Time in Field Goals Made (4,230)
2nd All-Time in 3-Points Made (993)
1st All-Time in Free Throws Made (2,617)
2nd All-Time in Assists (2,128)
2nd All-Time in Steals (670)
1st All-Time in Points (12,070)
6 All-Star Game Appearances
3 All-NBA 2nd Team, 2 All-NBA 3rd Team Selections
34 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Mitch is still my favorite King
…but I voted for Webber
What? No Peja?
GREENE! You’ve been superfluously apostrophe’d! - andy sims
iashwash, you are the voice of reason - Holmdel
I abstain
After all, we don’t need these guys, we have Hassan Whiteside.
In most polarizing arguments, the truth is found somewhere in the middle.
Follow me on Twitter
Author of Inside-Out Game
by Exhibit G on Aug 15, 2011 8:08 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Since there is no Fredette option,
I’ll go with CW of course!
Bleeding Black and Purple 6710 miles South East of Sacramento.
I would pick Mitch
If his feet where about one inch smaller, he would have averaged 3 more PPG…
by OrangeLazarus on Aug 15, 2011 8:36 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Way too close to call...
There’s no way Webber should be leading by that much (currently 164-38)
Maybe because Webber was in the playoffs consistantly but he had a better team around him. Which makes everything Mitch did even more amazing
Aykis, you forgot All-Star Game MVP for Mitch too
Being the best player in an exhibition game is nice and all
Author of NBA Mashups. Follow me on Twitter here.
It works both ways
Webber benefited from having better players around him, sure. But, he also produced similar stats with other really good players around him that needed the ball as well. The way that team worked, they all made each other better.
"What the fuck did I do?" - McNulty
We need to settle this for reals
Haven’t played NBA Live for a long time—Do they have the prime versions of each player? If so, can we put them on different teams and see who wins?
put me in, Coach
Winning trumps all, IMO.
And Webber led the Kings when they were winning. Mitch is certainly a close second for he was literally the Rock of the Kings in the 90’s when the team wasn’t very good. Mitch would be in the HOF right now had he played on a better team during his prime. But b/c he was in Sacramento, the national media never got a chance to truly marvel at Mitch’s brilliance.
Children, before you go to sleep check under your bed for the BOOGIE MAN!!
Had to go Webber
Both guys were the team’s best player for multiple years. Webber’s years turned out a bit better. The stats are so similar in terms of impact that the wins — no fault of Mitch, of course — take the cake.
I chose Webber
Without Webber, this team might have moved long ago. With Richmond we were playoff contenders once. With Webber we were Championship contenders, for a few years. Granted, Mitch didn’t have near the supporting cast of C-Webb, but its telling to me that once Webber went down with injury we weren’t the same. He was the driving force of this team, and should have been the centerpiece for one or two titles.
Author of NBA Mashups. Follow me on Twitter here.
Not that Mitch had bad stats or anything,
but 23.5 PPG, .473 FG%, 10.6 RPG, 4.8 APG, 1.5 BLK??? Whuff!
I think people forget just how good Webber was
He was a top 5 NBA player for a couple years. The assist numbers are pretty crazy as well for a big man who was also the primary scoring threat. I doubt we’ll ever see that again.
Author of NBA Mashups. Follow me on Twitter here.
Can't fault anyone for choosing Webber...
…but I had to go with Mitch. I’ll admit that I’m biased because Richmond is the reason why I became a Kings fan in the early ’90’s: watching him score on double- and triple-teams on a nightly basis while also playing tough-nosed defense was special.
I’ve written about this before, but I think Richmond doesn’t get his fair due. For instance, he scored the most points of any guard in the ’90’s (seven of those years were obviously in Sac), and his 22.5 points per game over the decade are well ahead of Reggie Miller (20.6) and Clyde Drexler (20.4). Richmond also rarely missed any games (aside from the one season when he fractured his wrist) and those Sac teams weren’t even as terrible as you might remember (32 wins on average, which would be a nice improvement over the last few years).
As for Webber, there’s no question the Kings don’t become a title contender without him. His numbers are phenomenal and he’ll almost certainly make it to the HOF. But it’s also not fair to ignore the supporting cast he had around him in Sac. If you really want to play the devil’s advocate, the Kings were 43-15 in 2003-04 before C-Webb returned. All I’m saying is that it’s not as easy as “Webber made the team great” and “everything went downhill after the knee injury.”
Writer on Kings.com | Blogcritics feature "When Kingdom Come" | Twitter: @doktakra
by doktakra on Aug 15, 2011 11:14 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Re: '03-'04...
Look at the schedule the Kings had after Webber came back vs before. Of the team’s last 16 games, I believe only 5 or 6 were at home; the team’s first game against the other top 4 teams in the Western Conference was the Christmas game against the Mavericks (which the Kings lost). Moreover, the Kings won 6 of their first 8 games with Webber back before the schedule went insane with all the road games and games against the likes of a 58-24 Timberwolves team.
This is all off the top of my head, so forgive me if I’m off somewhat.
"Where hope goes to die"
Still...
My point is that Webber had an amazing supporting cast around him. There’s no chance a team comprised of Spud Webb-Walt Williams-Lionel Simmons-Michael Smith-Olden Polynice goes anywhere near 43-15, no matter who they play.
I used ‘03-04 as an extreme example, but keep in mind that the Kings beat every Western playoff team except Dallas (the fifth seed) before Webber came back. Sac obviously wasn’t a better team without pre-injury Webber, but at least a postseason contender with multiple All-Star-caliber players.
Going back to Richmond for a second, the guy scored 2,500+ more points than any other Sacramento-era King and single-handedly carried much less-talented teams to better records than we’ve seen in recent years. As section pointed out, many fans didn’t see Richmond play and Webber’s accomplishments are fresh in our minds, but I’m surprised the poll isn’t even remotely close.
Writer on Kings.com | Blogcritics feature "When Kingdom Come" | Twitter: @doktakra
by doktakra on Aug 15, 2011 7:03 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I went with Mitch
It’s not his fault that he played with a large number of scrubs, and for years he was the guy that the other team built their entire defensive scheme around. Webber benefitted greatly from playing with superior talent around him. Switch the two guys, and I have my doubts that C-Webb could have survived his time in Sacramento surrounded by the “talent” that shared the floor with the Rock.
All of this said, I’m not surprised that Webber is winning (though the margin is surprising). There are a ton of Kings fans that never saw Richmond play, and if you never saw him play, you have no idea exactly how good he was. And C-Webb probably also benefits from being the better retired Sacramento King, as he has been very vocal in the efforts to keep the Kings here. If all of that is helping to tip the scale in Webber’s favor, I have no problem with it.
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
by section214 on Aug 15, 2011 11:29 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
I admit, I never saw Richmond
But to me the difference is simple. If it weren’t for injuries, Webber’s in the best PF of all time discussion along with his contemporaries such as Malone, Duncan and KG
"What the fuck did I do?" - McNulty
Agreed 100%
If Webber doesn’t hurt is knee, there is no discussion. But he did, and it factors in. Heck, Lionel Simmons would rank much farther up the list if he had good knees. So would Kevin Martin. Injuries are part of the equation.
Again, I have no problem with anyone selecting Webber over Richmond. But it has to be for what he accomplished, not for what he might have accomplished.
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
by section214 on Aug 15, 2011 12:59 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I agree with both of you.
Without the injuries, there would be no discussion: Webber, Webber, Webber. The injuries still have to factor in, though, so there is a discussion to be had.
On balance, though, I still think Webber wins that debate because, like Richmond, he had the stellar regular-season numbers (arguably more stellar because of assists and rebounds) – but Webber also led the team on a much higher stage for several years. Yes, his ‘01 playoff performance was abysmal, but he was pretty gutsy in 2000, solid in 2003, the reason we made it to game 7 of the second round in 2004, and his 16-game performance in the spring of 2002 is arguably as legendary as Bibby’s (just look at how he carried the team in games 5, 6 and 7).
It’s not Richmond’s fault that he did not have the same chance to prove himself in the playoffs. However, the fact remains that Richmond was largely unproven, while Webber was proven.
"Where hope goes to die"
This is going to be quite the project
210 players have suited up for the Sacramenton Kings, so this list will comprise nearly the top quarter. And fewer than 80 players have logged the equivalent of a full season (82 games) with the Kings.
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
We shouldn't be debating this at all.
Richmond joined the L*kers…
"We're not talking about me and Darko in the same sentence." - Chris Webber vs KAHN!
by caseycheesecake on Aug 15, 2011 2:41 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Voted for Webb
As great as Mitch was, at the end of the day the vast majority of his points were scored on horrible teams that accomplished nothing, compared to C-Webb turning the fortunes of the franchise around overnight.
MexicAN AmericAN VegAN
Rock
His stats on a bad team might be inflated but if you saw him play and you saw every defense of every team realize that the Kings were Mitch Richmond and Co. and nothing much else,, you respect those stats even more, not less.
Webb was great and realized the best of his game here in Sacramento. But his greatness was manifested with a stellar supporting cast – Vlade, Peja, Bibby, Christie, JWill – guys who would be starters on other teams.
WIthout Mitch those awful Kings teams would be dismal. The icing on the cake is that Mitch was also the piece that brought Webber to the Kings. Wonderful when he was here, wonderful in what he became via trade. Richmond is the King of the Kings.
by betweentheeyes on Aug 15, 2011 11:02 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
also
Mitch was MVP of the All-Star game 1995
by betweentheeyes on Aug 15, 2011 11:03 PM PDT up reply actions

by 






















