C-Webb rips Josh Smith for shooting jumpers

[AHF]

Webber was never on the same level as guys like Duncan, Barkley, etc. Not close because of his unwillingness to mix it up in the paint. He was a very good player but more on the level of Pau Gasol, Chris Bosh or Amare Stoudemire than with guys like Tim Duncan. He had the tools but not the heart, IMO.

Webber criticizing Smith for spending too much time taking jump shots is definitely a pot calling the kettle black situation.

[hawkman]

Ok, I can't accept this "Webber was a bum" nonsense. That is a lie and everyone with a sane mind knows that. Whether you respected his style of play or not, there's no way you can say that he was a useless player. This board continues to surprise me at times.

[Vol4ever]

I quite watching the show with Barkley's big mouth running all the time. I think the show is a joke, although I like Kenny and Magic when he is on. Barkley is a loser.

[crimedog]

In my mind, Webber was a very good but not great player. He was second-tier like Amare, as mentioned by AHF, but a step below a prime Dirk and not in the discussion with a top of his game Duncan.

He was probably worse than Smith with regards to taking jumpers too often, but he had a better shot (more of a set shot than a jumper for both guys really). Whether or not he sets a better example is a moot point though, Smith has a poor shot selection and Webber's job as an analyst is to point that out.

I think that Smith has to take SOME jumpers to at least use it as a threat, but he takes too many from long range which takes him out of position. It is a flaw that definitely hurts his game, although it doesn't make him a completely inneffective player as he shoots 49% and gets to the line a fair bit considering his shot volume (which hurts us this season because his FT shooting went to crap). Its also not my biggest concern with Smith, I could live with his offense as is if he crashed the defensive boards like he's shown himself capable of.

[AHF]

He was probably worse than Smith with regards to taking jumpers too often, but he had a better shot (more of a set shot than a jumper for both guys really). Whether or not he sets a better example is a moot point though, Smith has a poor shot selection and Webber's job as an analyst is to point that out.

Agreed - it is just hard to take with a straight face. It would be like Eddy Curry dogging a guy for not being in tip top shape, Allen Iverson dogging a guy for dominating the ball too much, or Shaq dogging a guy for not being a reliable FT shooter. Just amusing to hear it coming from that particular source.

[bumpyphish1]

I quite watching the show with Barkley's big mouth running all the time. I think the show is a joke, although I like Kenny and Magic when he is on. Barkley is a loser.

If you dont like Barkley, you have no sense of what is good in this world. Fact.

[bumpyphish1]

As far as Webber's ability, it is probably unfair to call him a bum. But, he was never on the level of some of the guys you are mentioning - Amare?! Ha, he wishes. Bosh? Nope, almost.

Webber was never a winner. He won some on good teams but always lost a lot too.

Northcyde calling him a "borderline HOFer" is frickin ludicrous, too.

[AHF]

As far as Webber's ability, it is probably unfair to call him a bum. But, he was never on the level of some of the guys you are mentioning - Amare?! Ha, he wishes. Bosh? Nope, almost.

Webber was never a winner. He won some on good teams but always lost a lot too.

Northcyde calling him a "borderline HOFer" is frickin ludicrous, too.

What have Bosh and Amare done that is so much more impressive than Webber? I am no fan of Webbers but it isn't like Amare has been the #1 guy on a good team. In fact, when he hasn't had fantastic talent surrounding him he has not seemed to elevate his team at all. He does put up big numbers and master some good old-fashioned ole defense, though!

I'd say a similar description applies to Bosh (labeled by the Sports Guy the last two years as the next Shareef Abdur Rahim, which I think is too harsh a label but is one that his played hasn't allowed him to shake).

[buckeye242424]

He was right there with them... on a video game. If you had ever actually played competitive basketball for a coach, you would have a different opinion. I've already spelled out in other threads why Webber was useless and how the Kings success had a whole lot more to do with guys like Turk and Bibby and Vlade than it did with Webber. Besides, it wasn't much success. They got beat in the 1st round like 4 times. Real quick though, he was allergic to post play and rebounding with real men. He was also in love with his ability to brick open 17 ftrs all day. And as your video games don't tell you, he was completely worthless as a defender. And let's not even get into what kind of a man he is and what leadership abilities he did not have.

Webber doesn't know basketball. He knows being almost 7 ft tall and he had good hands. There is a lot more to understanding basketball than that. Like knowing if you are the biggest guy on the court and you have no j, it might help your team more if you play in the post and rebound. But soft, selfish, ignorant guys with "talent" never seem to get that. But that's because they think of themselves before the team.

Josh Smith is twice the player Webber was. Bothi n heart and mind.

People can hate on Webber for his basketball IQ, his commentary and analysis of the game, and his legal issues...but what he did on the court cannot be argued. Stating Smoove is twice the player Webber was is not accurate. Over his long career with multiple teams, he averaged almost 21 points, 10 boards, and 4 assists a game. He made five all-star teams, and was an all NBA First team selection. Those numbers will get some Hall of Fame buzz for crying out loud! In his prime, he was one of the best PF's in the game.

[TroyMcClure]

People can hate on Webber for his basketball IQ, his commentary and analysis of the game, and his legal issues...but what he did on the court cannot be argued. Stating Smoove is twice the player Webber was is not accurate. Over his long career with multiple teams, he averaged almost 21 points, 10 boards, and 4 assists a game. He made five all-star teams, and was an all NBA First team selection. Those numbers will get some Hall of Fame buzz for crying out loud! In his prime, he was one of the best PF's in the game.

All-Star games and the voting that goes with them, have no basis in reality. Reef had ver similar numbers. What does that tell you? He will get no Hall of Fame buzz. There are two sides to the game. Offense and defense. Smoove did more in his first two years defensively than Webber did in a lifetime. And aesthetically speaking, anyone who thinks Webber's shot looked better in form than Smoove's, clearly doesn't know the first thing about shooting a basketball properly. And if you don't think who you are as a person can come into play as to who you are as a player, you really don't know much.

Losing in the first round 4 times at the peak of your game isn't exactly inspiring. In what world did the Kings "challenge" for a title? They had one chance against the Lakers. Due in large part to Webber, they lost. If he had been a real man, maybe that history is different. But he's not, and it isn't.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

As far as Webber's ability, it is probably unfair to call him a bum. But, he was never on the level of some of the guys you are mentioning - Amare?! Ha, he wishes. Bosh? Nope, almost.

Webber was never a winner. He won some on good teams but always lost a lot too.

Northcyde calling him a "borderline HOFer" is frickin ludicrous, too.

Yep . . . it's totally ridiculous.

Because when a guy averages 20.7 ppg . . 9.8 rebs . . and 4.2 asst for his entire career . . . it's just totally inconceivable that he is a borderline HOF. Webber is one of the top 10 best passing big men of all time.

The Sacramento Kings had 13 consecutive losing seasons before Webber got there ( 15 if you include the years the Kings were in Kansas City ). As SOON as Webber got there, they started winning.

The only thing that will keep this guy out of the Hall of Fame, is the Michigan scandal ( which pretty much erased his college career from the books ), and the Kings inability to really make major noise in the playoffs ( mainly because they couldn't get past the Lakers ).

Webber as a player was LIGHT YEARS ahead of Smith. Even a young Chris Webber was much better than Smith. Smith has more athleticism and is better defensively. Webber was far better offensively and a far better rebounder . . and a little tougher than Smith.

Who are the PFs that played in Webber's era? Barkley . . Malone . . Duncan ( even though I still say he's a center ), Garnett . . Nowitski . . Stoudemire. All of those guys are either in the HOF, or are probably going into the Hall of Fame. Webber is a name that should be mentioned right behind those guys.

Some of you guys don't need to let your emotions blind you from being objective.

PG - Bibby

G - JJ

F- Williams

PF - Webber ( either the young Webber, or the one in his prime )

C - Horford

You put him on this current Hawks roster, and take Smith off, and you have a legitimate NBA title contender. Especially with Webber's rebounding and passing ability? Please.

I'll take #4 over #5 any day of the week.

[buckeye242424]

All-Star games and the voting that goes with them, have no basis in reality. Reef had ver similar numbers. What does that tell you? He will get no Hall of Fame buzz. There are two sides to the game. Offense and defense. Smoove did more in his first two years defensively than Webber did in a lifetime. And aesthetically speaking, anyone who thinks Webber's shot looked better in form than Smoove's, clearly doesn't know the first thing about shooting a basketball properly. And if you don't think who you are as a person can come into play as to who you are as a player, you really don't know much.

Losing in the first round 4 times at the peak of your game isn't exactly inspiring. In what world did the Kings "challenge" for a title? They had one chance against the Lakers. Due in large part to Webber, they lost. If he had been a real man, maybe that history is different. But he's not, and it isn't.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Shoot . . . if you take Horford off, and keep Smith . . and play Webber at center, the same thing still applies. The young Chris Webber would absolutely destroy people either off the dribble, or on the block. With his passing ability, JJ would probably get about 2 or 3 wide more wide open looks a game.

But i forgot . . that guy is a bum . . lol.

[buckeye242424]

All-Star games and the voting that goes with them, have no basis in reality. Reef had ver similar numbers. What does that tell you? He will get no Hall of Fame buzz. There are two sides to the game. Offense and defense. Smoove did more in his first two years defensively than Webber did in a lifetime. And aesthetically speaking, anyone who thinks Webber's shot looked better in form than Smoove's, clearly doesn't know the first thing about shooting a basketball properly. And if you don't think who you are as a person can come into play as to who you are as a player, you really don't know much.

Losing in the first round 4 times at the peak of your game isn't exactly inspiring. In what world did the Kings "challenge" for a title? They had one chance against the Lakers. Due in large part to Webber, they lost. If he had been a real man, maybe that history is different. But he's not, and it isn't.

True, all-star games, MVP's, All NBA's, are opinion and not reality. The reality lies in the statistics over a 13 year career, which I mentioned in a previous post. Webber's career will get HOF discussion, how could they not? I could care less about how Webber's jumper looks, or Smooves....the bottom line is if it was effective. Webber's jumper was extremely effective. His last few years, he was playing on one leg and had to rely solely on his jumper. Bird's jumper wasn't the prettiest or most fundamental shot in basketball, but I would say he could shoot!

I would take a Chris Webber five years into his career over Smoove in a heartbeat. Where do we sign up! If only it was possible....

[TroyMcClure]

Yep . . . it's totally ridiculous.

Because when a guy averages 20.7 ppg . . 9.8 rebs . . and 4.2 asst for his entire career . . . it's just totally inconceivable that he is a borderline HOF. Webber is one of the top 10 best passing big men of all time.

The Sacramento Kings had 13 consecutive losing seasons before Webber got there ( 15 if you include the years the Kings were in Kansas City ). As SOON as Webber got there, they started winning.

The only thing that will keep this guy out of the Hall of Fame, is the Michigan scandal ( which pretty much erased his college career from the books ), and the Kings inability to really make major noise in the playoffs ( mainly because they couldn't get past the Lakers ).

Webber as a player was LIGHT YEARS ahead of Smith. Even a young Chris Webber was much better than Smith. Smith has more athleticism and is better defensively. Webber was far better offensively and a far better rebounder . . and a little tougher than Smith.

Who are the PFs that played in Webber's era? Barkley . . Malone . . Duncan ( even though I still say he's a center ), Garnett . . Nowitski . . Stoudemire. All of those guys are either in the HOF, or are probably going into the Hall of Fame. Webber is a name that should be mentioned right behind those guys.

Some of you guys don't need to let your emotions blind you from being objective.

PG - Bibby

G - JJ

F- Williams

PF - Webber ( either the young Webber, or the one in his prime )

C - Horford

You put him on this current Hawks roster, and take Smith off, and you have a legitimate NBA title contender. Especially with Webber's rebounding and passing ability? Please.

I'll take #4 over #5 any day of the week.

Have you ever played basketball, northcyde? Saying Webber was tough is just stupid. What did he ever do that displayed toughness? Seriously. Those are just useless words.

The video game dumping of Josh for Webber tells me a lot about your knowledge. Also, I've never seen Webber make a great pass that wasn't a back door, princeton offense layup. That was the primary play basically of their offense, by the way. And let's see where Smith gets to in his career. Really funny how little importance you place on defense. You just glossed over it, as if it were nothing.

Webber was A SELFISH, lazy, tall dude with good hands. That's it.

So, if it was ALL Webber when they were getting better, why isn't it ALL Webber when they choked against the Lakers... or in the first round like 4 times after that? Truth is, it was a team and he, as a leader, failed them.

[TroyMcClure]

True, all-star games, MVP's, All NBA's, are opinion and not reality. The reality lies in the statistics over a 13 year career, which I mentioned in a previous post. Webber's career will get HOF discussion, how could they not? I could care less about how Webber's jumper looks, or Smooves....the bottom line is if it was effective. Webber's jumper was extremely effective. His last few years, he was playing on one leg and had to rely solely on his jumper. Bird's jumper wasn't the prettiest or most fundamental shot in basketball, but I would say he could shoot!

I would take a Chris Webber five years into his career over Smoove in a heartbeat. Where do we sign up! If only it was possible....

I could care less about how Webber's jumper looks, or Smooves....the bottom line is if it was effective. Webber's jumper was extremely effective.

You should be banned from Hawksquawk for knowing so little about basketball as to say that. Yeah, it was effective. For the defense!

By the way, shooting isn't magic. How something looks generally has a lot to do with how it works. That's why real shooters generally don't have wack shots.

Larry had great form. He had huge hands and held the ball a little on either side. He had a huge window and had great wrists. Webber threw up line drive bricks with no give. Please.

[Dsinner]

Have you ever played basketball, northcyde? Saying Webber was tough is just stupid. What did he ever do that displayed toughness? Seriously. Those are just useless words.

Webber was A SELFISH, lazy, tall dude with good hands. That's it.

Useless words that apparently you have a hard time reading. He said he was tougher than Josh and as of right now I'd have to agree. That doesn't mean he was a tough physical player, it means he was tougher than Josh. You don't have to have played the game to agree with that.

So you're telling me one of the best passing PF's (arguably) to ever play the game (averaged 4+ assists) is selfish? OK. I'm not Webber fan (I've hated him since college) but some of the opinions I am reading seem to be based on their loathing of a player moreso than reality. The guy averaged 20 and 10 for a loooong time and would have had a ring had it not been for the zebras. To say he isn't a winner, is lazy and selfish (basketball wise) is flat out ridiculous.

[Dsinner]

You should be banned from Hawksquawk for knowing so little about basketball as to say that. Yeah, it was effective. For the defense!

By the way, shooting isn't magic. How something looks generally has a lot to do with how it works. That's why real shooters generally don't have wack shots.

Larry had great form. He had huge hands and held the ball a little on either side. He had a huge window and had great wrists. Webber threw up line drive bricks with no give. Please.

Get off your high horse. Especially considering "bball knowledge". Webber was considered around the league to have a good jump shot. In fact, that was one of his strengths as a player. In fact I remember the Lakers wanting him because he would have fit in to their triangle offense effectively with that jump shot. Saying it was a weakness to his game shows your true agenda. That or your actual limited knowledge. Do me a favor and look up how, at the time, the rest of the league felt about his jump shot. I think you might learn something.

[Dsinner]

NM, I did it for you...

Lakers Looking At Adding Webber

Hooped Up | January 15, 2008

Now that their franchise-center-in-training will be taking at least an eight-week break, the Lakers are perilously thin in the middle.

Kwame Brown has started 178 games in his seven-year career, and newly anointed backup Ronny Turiaf is more of a power forward.

In an update provided by a team source, Chris Mihm is at least two weeks from returning, if not longer, from a sore right Achilles tendon.

Thus, the Lakers are sifting through the free-agent bin and coming up with such names as Chris Webber, P.J. Brown, and DJ Mbenga.

The Lakers were intrigued by Webber a year ago and have been in contact with his representatives. They think he fits the mold of a triangle-offense player — good passer, good jump shot — but are concerned about his physical condition. Webber, who will be 35 in March, has not played since last season. He averaged 11.2 points, 7.2 rebounds, and 29.9 minutes in 61 games with Philadelphia and Detroit but did not re-sign with the Pistons after their playoff run.

Bballone.com...

Chris Webber was a dominating in force in the fab five. He had it all, talent, speed, strength and a jump shot that will get you from anywhere. The fab five sophomore was a no doubt choice in the 1993 NBA draft. After leading his heavy preseason favorite Michigan Wolverines to the 1991 NCAA Championship game, playing Duke in the Superdome for the prized Championship trophy and bragging rights for that year.

Auburnjournal.com...

Webber was a genius in the high post. He could pass like Magic Johnson, drive to the basket, back his man down or straighten up and shoot a jump shot. He had some of the best hands ever seen on a basketball court and a knack for rebounding, which has been one of the Kings’ Achilles heels since he left.

You get the picture. You can argue the man's heart, you can argue his defense (or lackthereof) you can argue pretty much anything else but one thing you can't argue is the fact the man had an above average jump shot. Arguing anything else is strictly agenda driven or bball IQ deficient.

[TroyMcClure]

NM, I did it for you...

Lakers Looking At Adding Webber

Hooped Up | January 15, 2008

Now that their franchise-center-in-training will be taking at least an eight-week break, the Lakers are perilously thin in the middle.

Kwame Brown has started 178 games in his seven-year career, and newly anointed backup Ronny Turiaf is more of a power forward.

In an update provided by a team source, Chris Mihm is at least two weeks from returning, if not longer, from a sore right Achilles tendon.

Thus, the Lakers are sifting through the free-agent bin and coming up with such names as Chris Webber, P.J. Brown, and DJ Mbenga.

The Lakers were intrigued by Webber a year ago and have been in contact with his representatives. They think he fits the mold of a triangle-offense player — good passer, good jump shot — but are concerned about his physical condition. Webber, who will be 35 in March, has not played since last season. He averaged 11.2 points, 7.2 rebounds, and 29.9 minutes in 61 games with Philadelphia and Detroit but did not re-sign with the Pistons after their playoff run.

Bballone.com...

Chris Webber was a dominating in force in the fab five. He had it all, talent, speed, strength and a jump shot that will get you from anywhere. The fab five sophomore was a no doubt choice in the 1993 NBA draft. After leading his heavy preseason favorite Michigan Wolverines to the 1991 NCAA Championship game, playing Duke in the Superdome for the prized Championship trophy and bragging rights for that year.

Auburnjournal.com...

Webber was a genius in the high post. He could pass like Magic Johnson, drive to the basket, back his man down or straighten up and shoot a jump shot. He had some of the best hands ever seen on a basketball court and a knack for rebounding, which has been one of the Kings’ Achilles heels since he left.

You get the picture. You can argue the man's heart, you can argue his defense (or lackthereof) you can argue pretty much anything else but one thing you can't argue is the fact the man had an above average jump shot. Arguing anything else is strictly agenda driven or bball IQ deficient.

Dude, put down the pipe. So, the annonymous opinion of blahblah.com and such PROVES your point? Seriously, that's just stupid. Find at least one quote from a HOF shooter and maybe I'll reconsider.