The Other Side of C-Webb

by Tom Ziller on Jan 21, 2008 8:20 PM PST in Old School

Jim O'Brien shared his post-Kings experience with Chris Webber. It's not exactly pretty.

Speaking openly about Webber for the first time since he was fired at the end of 2005, O'Brien said before Indiana's game at Philadelphia that the forward was never interested in practice or truly committed to the offensive scheme.

"Webber didn't practice at all that year prior to coming to us," O'Brien said. "He didn't practice at all the previous six weeks. I think he was just at the point where he didn't necessarily feel where he was in need of practice, or could practice, or couldn't practice and play at the same time."

O'Brien said he wanted to actively use Webber, who had lost some mobility and agility after microfracture knee surgery, in the low post to open up shots for three-point threat Kyle Korver.

"He said, 'Coach, I don't do the low-post thing anymore,"' O'Brien recalled. "We just made a major trade to bring in this 6-11 guy and he said, 'No.' I said, 'Yes, you do."'

So Webber didn't practice with the Kings at all in 2004-05, and actually told O'Brien he doesn't do the low-post thing anymore? Beyond our worst suspicions about his... committment at that point. And the trade makes a bit more sense.

Tweet Comment 10 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Ugh

This is disappointing, though it does come from a source that was fired in part due to Webber, so I don't know if there is a sour grapes factor.

I always admired Chris Webber for attempting to come back as he did, opting to play instead of staying home and collecting the same check. But if he was not practicing it had to cause a disruption to the team. Say it ain't so C-Webb, say it ain't so.

SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!

by section214 on Jan 21, 2008 8:35 PM PST reply actions

I was going to make a diary but i wont bother now

One of the larger, and unsaid reasons said by me up to this point, for doing the Webber trade, in my opinion, was the effect, and I mean the negative effect that Webber had on Bibby. There was also the supplemental damage that was happening to Brad Miller on a daily basis that was hindering his total effectiveness.

I think the Kings made the Webber deal for several reasons:

Very very overpaid at that point (he was always overpaid but he was woefully overpaid by 2005)
They wanted to see if Bibby,Miller and Stojakovic could move the team forward as the core (none of them could do it--only Miller seems to have a serious shot at putting the team in positive traction when he plays well, a fact that couldn't be said about Bibby or Stojakovic
It put the team under the luxury tax threshold allowing the Maloof's to save/make money

I've said all those things before, but the Kings had to know if any of those 3 could be a core group member (none of the 3 qualify any longer). I think the Webber deal was a lynchpin that saw the true effectiveness of the franchise to evaluate pay and develop talent as a whole. As it stands this franchise is still en flux in large part because you pay a high price for overpaying many members of your team over time.

I am the stone that the builder refused I am the visual, the inspiration That made Lady Sing the Blues..I'm the spark that makes your idea bright...

by pookeyguru on Jan 21, 2008 9:09 PM PST reply actions

Peja

carried the team on his back while Webber was injured. Off the top of my head, I think he averaged 23.6 ppg and was a major threat not only from outside but on those killer back cuts. He recorded his career high of 41 points against Posey. (Peja said, "I hope he'll remember what I scored on him, because it's his jersey number." Sweet!)

Of course, that was back when Bibby was a point guard, and he, Miller and Vlade would find him.

Don't make me come in there!

by LeaguePassAddict on Jan 22, 2008 7:28 AM PST up reply actions

The Trade

I think the trade was actually simpler than that. The Webber trade was a bet that he wouldn't be able to finish his contract. The Kings figured Webber was done and that he was a season away from not being able to walk, let alone play. They wanted to get something out of him, and at the time Kenny Thomas was a 15 point, 10 rebound guy and Corliss was instant offense off the bench.

In hindsight, it was a bad trade. But I was for the trade before I was against it, because I thought Webber's career would end at any minute. I was wrong, and so was Petrie.

by Carl on Jan 22, 2008 8:49 AM PST up reply actions

I was for the Webber trade

but I am pretty skeptical of a blanket statement like Webber didn't practice at all before he came over. This is a guy who was out almost all of the previous season with a major injury. You're telling me he didn't practice at all and a coach like RA let him get away with that?

Look at how bad K-Mart's stamina was after three weeks of minimal practice. I don't think Webber would be able to play as many minutes as he did if he didn't practice at all.

There were some things I didn't like about Webber, but I never heard any coach or team member say he dogged practices. Am I wrong here? Do any of you remember hearing these kinds of allegations before this?

by SavageBeast on Jan 21, 2008 10:21 PM PST reply actions

The Blanket on this info is small & easy

to contain in Sac. There is almost no credible information coming from Amick unless he see's something or strife allows someone to float something to him underground.

This is why I think you've seen all the "throw a guy a bone" pieces about Bibby and Thomas that you've seen. Amick is trying to get those guys talking again for his own information and seeing who will say what down the road of the new guys. Or something like that anyway.

I am the stone that the builder refused I am the visual, the inspiration That made Lady Sing the Blues..I'm the spark that makes your idea bright...

by pookeyguru on Jan 21, 2008 10:26 PM PST up reply actions

It kinds of adds up

Not that I'm Rant Napaers biggest fan, but even he alluded to some of this kind of behaviour, not turning up to games, leaving games when he wasn't playing

Whats a coach going to say if he is dogging it or not showing up, he is your star player, if you want to trade him good luck if you publisice that nugget

by Murf on Jan 22, 2008 7:53 AM PST reply actions

Here's Another Version of Webber Tale

http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080122/SPORTS03/801220401/1002/SPORTS

Here's the meat of what's different (note the Kings record with and without C-Webb):

"O'Brien then was asked if he regretted that former Sixers president and general manager Billy King made the trade.

"We needed a trade," O'Brien said. "We were very small. We were playing with two power forwards who were 6-6 in Kenny Thomas and 6-4 in Corliss Williamson. That was not a workable situation. What we didn't know, or what I didn't know at the time, was that the previous two years, Sacramento's record with Webber in and Webber out [of the lineup] was shockingly different."

The Kings were 38-31 when Webber played during that span. They were 51-16 when he didn't.

O'Brien said he soon found out why.

"Webber didn't practice at all that year prior to coming to us," he said. "I think he was just at the point where he didn't necessarily feel he was in need of practice, or could practice. It became apparent that he was not going to give the Philadelphia 76ers everything that we had hoped for."

Cheeks took over the next season, and Webber averaged 20.2 points and 9.9 rebounds per game. But the Sixers went 38-44 and missed the playoffs. Webber's production went way down last season, and he was waived with the Sixers still owing him $19 million for this season."

by coolcatreportdotcom on Jan 22, 2008 8:12 AM PST reply actions