PDA

View Full Version : Chris Webber, where does he rank in relation to all time PF's.



JordansBulls
02-16-2009, 02:53 PM
Was he good enough to win a title as the best player on the team?

How does he compare to Dirk or KG or Mchale?

DerekRE_3
02-16-2009, 03:01 PM
Was he good enough to win a title as the best player on the team?

How does he compare to Dirk or KG or Mchale?

Yes, before he was hurt he was at the same level as KG. And I'd take a prime Webber over a prime Dirk any day.

Webber is one of the 6 players in NBA history to average 20 points, 10 rebounds, and 4 assists over his career. For his career, he averaged 21 points, 10 rebounds, and 4.2 assists. He is one of the best passing big man to ever play. He could shoot, he could post up, and he could handle the ball as well. He is one of the most versatile bigs to ever play.

And he was good enough to be the #1 option on a championship team, a couple more made free throws, the Kings would have a title.

Unfortunately, he had terrible luck and his prime was taken away by a devastating knee injury, he was just 29 when he got hurt. In his first full season with the Sixers, he still managed to get 20 and 10 despite hobbling around on basically one leg.

JayW_1023
02-16-2009, 03:07 PM
Talentwise he could've been the best at his position. He could score inside and from the perimeter and was one of the best passers from the high post in the league. Those Kings teams were unique with him and Vlade being their inside out set up guys.

C-Webbs demons are his lack of defense and his frequent disappearing acts in clutch situations. He was a bit of a choker and injuries have caused him to shy away as a post player and become almost strictly a jump shooting big man.

His potential talentwise was unlimited, but he was an underachiever. But he was still way more consistent than other big men who became scared of the paint in the latter stages of their careers, namely Rasheed Wallace and JO.

Webber in his prime is still better than Amare is now. A tad below KG. Dirk is a more dynamic offensive player in his prime...quicker and more aggressive, more clutch. Webber has the edge in rebounding and playmaking. They are about equal I guess.

Webber is slightly more versatile in his prime offensively than KG, notably his post up game was more polished than KGs...but KG's dominant defense gives him the edge.

Webber was a slightly better passer and more fluent and athletic player than Duncan, and had a better jump shot as well...but Duncan was far more dominant with a much better post game, waaaayyyy better defense and better rebounding.

Webber was still among the best overall powerforwards in the league...but the problem was that he was soft as scrambled eggs.

DerekRE_3
02-16-2009, 03:08 PM
Talentwise he could've been the best at his position. He could score inside and from the perimeter and was one of the best passers from the high post in the league. Those Kings teams were unique with him and Vlade being their inside out set up guys.

C-Webbs demons are his lack of defense and his frequent disappearing acts in clutch situations. He was a bit of a choker and injuries have caused him to shy away as a post player and become almost strictly a jump shooting big man.

His potential talentwise was unlimited, but he was an underachiever. But he was still way more consistent than other big men who became scared of the paint in the latter stages of their careers, namely Rasheed Wallace and JO.

Webber in his prime is still better than Amare. A tad below Dirk and KG. Dirk was a more dynamic offensive player in his prime...quicker and more aggressive, more clutch. Webber has the edge in rebounding.

Webber is slightly more versatile in his prime offensively than KG, notably his post up game was more polished than KGs...but KG's dominant defense gives him the edge.

Webber was a slightly better passer and more fluent and athletic player than Duncan, and had a better jump shot as well...but Duncan was far more dominant with a much better post game, waaaayyyy better defense and better rebounding.

Webber was still among the best overall powerforwards in the league...but the problem was that he was soft as scrambled eggs.

Before he got hurt, he wasn't that soft. People forget about how well he defended Shaq in the post for stretches in the playoffs. Everyone seems to remember post knee injury Webber.

JordansBulls
02-16-2009, 03:18 PM
So was he good enough to win as the best player or was he better suited as a 2nd option?

nstachowski
02-16-2009, 03:19 PM
He was amazing before his knee turned to ****. I dont know where I would rank him all-time, but it would be pretty far up there.

albertc86
02-16-2009, 03:19 PM
Webber was underrated. The Lakers stopped him from winning multiple championships.

JayW_1023
02-16-2009, 03:21 PM
Webber was good enough to be a first option on any team he played for...but the problem is that he never quite seemed comfortable being the go to guy in the clutch...much like Garnett is.

DerekRE_3
02-16-2009, 03:23 PM
So was he good enough to win as the best player or was he better suited as a 2nd option?

Webber could be the 1st option because not only could he create for himself, he could create for others. You can run an offense through a prime Webber. He had a post game, mid-range game, and in the high post or low post he could hit cutters or find the open man if he was doubled. If you don't double him, he has a good chance of scoring or getting fouled. If you double him, he finds the open man. In addition to that, he was great in the pick and roll/pick and pop game.

Lakersfan2483
02-16-2009, 03:26 PM
C. Webb was extremely talented for a man his size, he could handle the ball, could pass like a point guard and had a good mid range jumper. He was a very good rebounder and a solid post player. My criticism of Webber was the "dissapearing acts" he used to pull during crunch time, he seemed to fold during the 4th quarter of a close ball game.... No, he wasn't "mentally" tough enough to lead a team to a title....

In terms of talent, when Webber was in his prime, he was a top 5 power forward all-time in terms of strictly talent.... As far as where he ranks all-time, he's definitely behind guys like Duncan, Petit, Malone, Barkley, KG, Mchale, Dirk

Lakersfan2483
02-16-2009, 03:26 PM
So was he good enough to win as the best player or was he better suited as a 2nd option?

He had no. 1 option talent, but would have been better suited as a no. 2 option...

Lakersfan2483
02-16-2009, 03:29 PM
Webber was good enough to be a first option on any team he played for...but the problem is that he never quite seemed comfortable being the go to guy in the clutch...much like Garnett is.

Agreed, although Garnett is better in the clutch than Webber.

Kyle N.
02-16-2009, 04:15 PM
So was he good enough to win as the best player or was he better suited as a 2nd option?

Just look at 2002. He pretty much won them a championship. The refs just didn't agree.

JordansBulls
02-16-2009, 04:56 PM
Webber could be the 1st option because not only could he create for himself, he could create for others. You can run an offense through a prime Webber. He had a post game, mid-range game, and in the high post or low post he could hit cutters or find the open man if he was doubled. If you don't double him, he has a good chance of scoring or getting fouled. If you double him, he finds the open man. In addition to that, he was great in the pick and roll/pick and pop game.

So with someone of the level of Paul Pierce or Vince Carter he could have won as the man.

DerekRE_3
02-16-2009, 06:40 PM
So with someone of the level of Paul Pierce or Vince Carter he could have won as the man.

The 2002 Kings with the Webber, Peja, Divac, Bibby, Christie, Hedo, and Jackson core had enough talent to win. Like I said before, a couple missed free throws were the only difference between us and the Lakers. That series was one of the closest of all time, but one team had to come out victorious.

And saying that with a Pierce or Carter as a sidekick would have been enough to win it all is somewhat short sighted, there's so much more to it than that.Do you mean replace Peja with Vince or Pierce and you have a championship team?

michaelbt18
02-16-2009, 08:57 PM
nnnnnndrrrrrk!! Nah Webber sucked. If they had some other PF on the team they would have won for sure.

sacgiants1213
02-16-2009, 09:19 PM
nnnnnndrrrrrk!! Nah Webber sucked. If they had some other PF on the team they would have won for sure.

No. Give up, you lose.

shatty
02-16-2009, 09:47 PM
The "timeout" is my first ever basketball memory so i always felt bad 4 C webb because of how that haunted his legacy.I think in his prime better then Dirk just more gritty and nasty.I never saw Mchale cause im to young but i mite take Kg overall he is just more of a pure scorer.But u put C webb with paul pierce and ray allen i bet he would have had some rings too. P.S im pretty sure Webber was high on kush through out his playin days and is still smokin the sticky on tnt where he looks ripped daily haha anyone agree?

Missing56&33
02-16-2009, 10:02 PM
Webber was good but his inability to win a championship takes him out of the conversations with the Barkley's , Malone's and Tim Duncan's. I know Barkley and Malone did not win a championship but they were both far better than Webber, IMO. He had a chance in Sac but came up short. I got to be honest when I think of Chris Webber I think about the TO in the NCAA championship game vs Carolina. If he had won a championship maybe i see him differently but hes still a hall of famer.

Missing56&33
02-16-2009, 10:05 PM
Put it this way if I had a team and needed a PF in his prime to help me win a championship and i had to chose from Webber or Oakley I chose<<<<<<<<<<<<

DerekRE_3
02-16-2009, 10:17 PM
Webber was good but his inability to win a championship takes him out of the conversations with the Barkley's , Malone's and Tim Duncan's. I know Barkley and Malone did not win a championship but they were both far better than Webber, IMO. He had a chance in Sac but came up short. I got to be honest when I think of Chris Webber I think about the TO in the NCAA championship game vs Carolina. If he had won a championship maybe i see him differently but hes still a hall of famer.

It was not Chris Webber's fault we lost to the Lakers, it was the Kings TEAM that lost.

And think about this...Chris Webber hurt his knee right in the middle of his prime. He was 29 when he blew his knee out.

Last year, Kevin Garnett finally got his ring after he was criticized for not being able to take his team to the top. What would Garnett's legacy be if he had blown out his knee at 29 like Webber did? It would have happened in the 2005-2006 season, before he came to Boston and won his title.

Webber just had bad luck. If that knee injury doesn't happen, there's a good chance he has a ring and the Kings have a championship banner. And to the people that call Webber soft...He played an entire season with ligament damage in his knee. He was in pain for an entire year, but didn't say anything because we were in the middle of contending for a championship. Finally, in the playoffs against the Mavs, his knee finally just gave out and the rest is history.

Missing56&33
02-16-2009, 10:28 PM
It was not Chris Webber's fault we lost to the Lakers, it was the Kings TEAM that lost.

And think about this...Chris Webber hurt his knee right in the middle of his prime. He was 29 when he blew his knee out.

Last year, Kevin Garnett finally got his ring after he was criticized for not being able to take his team to the top. What would Garnett's legacy be if he had blown out his knee at 29 like Webber did? It would have happened in the 2005-2006 season, before he came to Boston and won his title.

Webber just had bad luck. If that knee injury doesn't happen, there's a good chance he has a ring and the Kings have a championship banner. And to the people that call Webber soft...He played an entire season with ligament damage in his knee. He was in pain for an entire year, but didn't say anything because we were in the middle of contending for a championship. Finally, in the playoffs against the Mavs, his knee finally just gave out and the rest is history.


I liked Chris Webber, I rooted for the Kings in 2002 when the lakers beat them in the semi finals. It was unfortunate that they loss but opportunities to win a championship in any sport has to be taken not given. Your legacy depends on what you do in your career, its a game of inches and luck. But thats what separates the good ones from the great ones. The Kings just couldn't get pass the Lakers. The Knicks just couldn't get pass the Bulls.

KOBE and MJ>WEBBER and EWING

Miami_Megatron
02-16-2009, 10:29 PM
was he good enough to win a title as the best player on the team?

How does he compare to dirk or kg or mchale?

#136 just behind kawamie brown.....

albertc86
02-16-2009, 10:35 PM
Webber was good but his inability to win a championship takes him out of the conversations with the Barkley's , Malone's and Tim Duncan's. I know Barkley and Malone did not win a championship but they were both far better than Webber, IMO. He had a chance in Sac but came up short. I got to be honest when I think of Chris Webber I think about the TO in the NCAA championship game vs Carolina. If he had won a championship maybe i see him differently but hes still a hall of famer.

Your logic doesn't hold any water. How would Webber's inability to win it all take him out of the discussion with the likes of Barkley and Malone? Neither Malone or Barkley won a title, either. He may not have been better than them but you can't include them in the discussion either if that's the case.

Missing56&33
02-16-2009, 10:42 PM
Your logic doesn't hold any water. How would Webber's inability to win it all take him out of the discussion with the likes of Barkley and Malone? Neither Malone or Barkley won a title, either. He may not have been better than them but you can't include them in the discussion either if that's the case.


I say that because Webber was an all star but he didnt' actually make his teammates better. Barkley and Malone did. The injuries definitely hurt Webber no doubt about that. The Kings could have made an few more runs but once he got hurt the Kings went down hill. Injuries are a part of the game. He had the worst knee injury you can have. I just see him under Barkley, malone, AD, rodman, guys like that. jmo

kmoneyjuice
02-16-2009, 10:52 PM
Webber was underrated. The Lakers stopped him from winning multiple championships.

The Lakers didn't stop anything, worst ref'd games in NBA history. He should have had 2 ships.

JordansBulls
02-16-2009, 10:58 PM
Webber was good but his inability to win a championship takes him out of the conversations with the Barkley's , Malone's and Tim Duncan's. I know Barkley and Malone did not win a championship but they were both far better than Webber, IMO. He had a chance in Sac but came up short. I got to be honest when I think of Chris Webber I think about the TO in the NCAA championship game vs Carolina. If he had won a championship maybe i see him differently but hes still a hall of famer.

Barkley nor Malone nor even Ewing won a title. I don't get your post.

Missing56&33
02-16-2009, 11:10 PM
Barkley nor Malone nor even Ewing won a title. I don't get your post.

its about how you view the player in comparison to other great players at their perspective postions. Barklely and Malone or Ewing never won a title but they all got to the finals. If not for one particular person ,I wont name him but some if not most would say he is the greatest player ever to play the game, they would have won championships. That is what separates players,how far they got and who beat them. If you lose to MJ its more exceptable. Make it to a final helps your case also.

Kyle N.
02-17-2009, 12:22 AM
its about how you view the player in comparison to other great players at their perspective postions. Barklely and Malone or Ewing never won a title but they all got to the finals. If not for one particular person ,I wont name him but some if not most would say he is the greatest player ever to play the game, they would have won championships. That is what separates players,how far they got and who beat them. If you lose to MJ its more exceptable. Make it to a final helps your case also.

But if you lose to Kobe and Shaq it's not acceptable? If you put Jordan on the current Kings he would NOT win a championship then in that case would not be the greatest of all time. Every situation is different.

Kyle N.
02-17-2009, 12:27 AM
Webber was good but his inability to win a championship takes him out of the conversations with the Barkley's , Malone's and Tim Duncan's. I know Barkley and Malone did not win a championship but they were both far better than Webber, IMO. He had a chance in Sac but came up short. I got to be honest when I think of Chris Webber I think about the TO in the NCAA championship game vs Carolina. If he had won a championship maybe i see him differently but hes still a hall of famer.

If he had won a championship I'd see reffing differently.

twoearl
02-17-2009, 12:40 AM
webber is about somewhere between 16 and 19 on the greatest pf list of all time.

C_Mund
02-17-2009, 12:44 AM
I really believe that C-Webb was instrumental in implementing a new-school type of ball where the offense runs through the high post. That's something that can't be taken away from him.
That early 2000's Sac team was incredible, and really helped my love of basketball come around after high school

td0tsfinest
02-17-2009, 01:10 AM
If the shaq and kobe tandem never existed, I could see Webber with a couple of rings. That kings team was an amazing one.

It had a combination of everything. Great 3pt shooting (peja and bibby), great defending (christie), one of the best low post duo at the time (C-Web and Vlade) and their bench was stellar (Cleaves, bobby jackson, hedo turkoglu).

I honestly think that 2001-02 was their year but only one game stood between them and a championship.

Missing56&33
02-17-2009, 01:52 PM
But if you lose to Kobe and Shaq it's not acceptable? If you put Jordan on the current Kings he would NOT win a championship then in that case would not be the greatest of all time. Every situation is different.

dont get me wrong chris was an good pf. Im happy that the Kings retired his number he put the Kings back on the map but IMO in response to the thread, rank in all time pf's hes up there no doubt but hes not in the elite group. Just below i would rank him. If he had beat the lakers(western conference crown at least/ get to the finals) I would put him up there but he seems to come up short when it counts. Poor guy didn't even get a ring in Detroit when they were on top.

I would have liked to see Chris on the 2000 Olympic team but he wasn't picked, could have at least got an Olympic medal. Hes missing all those awards that counts IMO. He was a good pf and did well in the playoffs I applaud him for that. His numbers should get him in the hall of fame

CHief_0_o_Wahoo
02-17-2009, 03:15 PM
One of my all time favorite big men to watch, and in my opinion he is very under rated. I would put C Web pretty high on the list of great PF ever to play.

Kyle N.
02-17-2009, 03:23 PM
dont get me wrong chris was an good pf. Im happy that the Kings retired his number he put the Kings back on the map but IMO in response to the thread, rank in all time pf's hes up there no doubt but hes not in the elite group. Just below i would rank him. If he had beat the lakers(western conference crown at least/ get to the finals) I would put him up there but he seems to come up short when it counts. Poor guy didn't even get a ring in Detroit when they were on top.

I would have liked to see Chris on the 2000 Olympic team but he wasn't picked, could have at least got an Olympic medal. Hes missing all those awards that counts IMO. He was a good pf and did well in the playoffs I applaud him for that. His numbers should get him in the hall of fame

Yeah, alright I see where you're coming from.

dre1990
02-17-2009, 03:23 PM
Yes, before he was hurt he was at the same level as KG. And I'd take a prime Webber over a prime Dirk any day.

Webber is one of the 6 players in NBA history to average 20 points, 10 rebounds, and 4 assists over his career. For his career, he averaged 21 points, 10 rebounds, and 4.2 assists. He is one of the best passing big man to ever play. He could shoot, he could post up, and he could handle the ball as well. He is one of the most versatile bigs to ever play.

And he was good enough to be the #1 option on a championship team, a couple more made free throws, the Kings would have a title.

Unfortunately, he had terrible luck and his prime was taken away by a devastating knee injury, he was just 29 when he got hurt. In his first full season with the Sixers, he still managed to get 20 and 10 despite hobbling around on basically one leg.



:clap:

Kyle916
02-17-2009, 03:28 PM
dont get me wrong chris was an good pf. Im happy that the Kings retired his number he put the Kings back on the map but IMO in response to the thread, rank in all time pf's hes up there no doubt but hes not in the elite group. Just below i would rank him. If he had beat the lakers(western conference crown at least/ get to the finals) I would put him up there but he seems to come up short when it counts. Poor guy didn't even get a ring in Detroit when they were on top.

I would have liked to see Chris on the 2000 Olympic team but he wasn't picked, could have at least got an Olympic medal. Hes missing all those awards that counts IMO. He was a good pf and did well in the playoffs I applaud him for that. His numbers should get him in the hall of fame

Eh, he's pretty elite.

JordansBulls
02-17-2009, 03:53 PM
webber is about somewhere between 16 and 19 on the greatest pf list of all time.

:speechless:

Who are 15 guys better than him?

djeller1139
02-17-2009, 04:06 PM
One of the best. If he hadn't been injured so often, and had he been teamed up with another star, he would have won a championship. Still, he made that Kings team in the early 2000's an amazing and exciting team. I've always loved C-Webb as a player. One of my favorites.

chicagowhitesox
02-17-2009, 04:14 PM
imo he was a guy that could be the best player on a championship team. i'd say top 7 or so PFs ever.

frizbo72
02-17-2009, 04:44 PM
I really believe that C-Webb was instrumental in implementing a new-school type of ball where the offense runs through the high post. That's something that can't be taken away from him.
That early 2000's Sac team was incredible, and really helped my love of basketball come around after high school

So what was Karl Malone doing for the 15 years prior to that? He had Stockton but the offense still went through Malone everytime.

quiksilver2491
02-17-2009, 05:16 PM
When Webber was at his prime was when my interest in basketball really began. I really loved those early 00s Kings teams, they were just great to watch. Webber in his prime was right around the same level as Duncan and KG IMO, however his prime didn't last nearly as long as either of them. Injuries definitely cut his career short of what it could have been.

I have always felt sincerely bad for the guy, from what happened at Michigan through a lot of his NBA career, he just never seemed to get things to go his way. Even with that said he still had one amazing career, he was one of the most versatile big men to ever play the game.

BlondeBomber41
02-17-2009, 09:17 PM
If the shaq and kobe tandem never existed, I could see Webber with a couple of rings. That kings team was an amazing one.

It had a combination of everything. Great 3pt shooting (peja and bibby), great defending (christie), one of the best low post duo at the time (C-Web and Vlade) and their bench was stellar (Cleaves, bobby jackson, hedo turkoglu).

I honestly think that 2001-02 was their year but only one game stood between them and a championship.

Cleaves? LOL I would definently mention guys like Scott Pollard, Jim Jackson, Keon Clark, Anthony Peeler, Darius Songaila, hell even Lawrence Funderburke before I mention Mateen Cleaves.

DerekRE_3
02-17-2009, 09:26 PM
Cleaves? LOL I would definently mention guys like Scott Pollard, Jim Jackson, Keon Clark, Anthony Peeler, Darius Songaila, hell even Lawrence Funderburke before I mention Mateen Cleaves.

I was going to say that...but writing a response to Cleaves didn't seem worth my time. Don't forget Gerald Wallace was on that team.

Hawkeye15
02-17-2009, 09:35 PM
great hands, great passing ability. Terrible defender. He was a top PF easy. I would have to put the following guys ahead though
Duncan
KG
Malone
Barkley
McHale

for starters. THere are a couple more I am sure, but these few are for sure better

MJ-BULLS
02-17-2009, 09:37 PM
chris webber was a good pf but he wasnt that good to be even a top 15 all time

Sixerlover
02-17-2009, 09:37 PM
Somewhere in the top 20 in terms of talent, Career accolades places him a little lower. More of a tribute to Shaq / Kobe then a knock on him, but it's the truth.

BlondeBomber41
02-17-2009, 09:52 PM
I was going to say that...but writing a response to Cleaves didn't seem worth my time. Don't forget Gerald Wallace was on that team.

Yeah I left him off my little list because he didnt do much of anything as a King.

Boy was Sacramento dumb to leave him unprotected in the expansion draft though.

DerekRE_3
02-17-2009, 09:58 PM
Yeah I left him off my little list because he didnt do much of anything as a King.

Boy was Sacramento dumb to leave him unprotected in the expansion draft though.

Well he wouldn't nearly as good if he didn't go to Charlotte. It was there that he finally got playing time.

fishfan79
02-17-2009, 10:30 PM
Let me call time out and get back to you :)

mrblisterdundee
02-17-2009, 10:30 PM
In terms of pure talent, Chris Webber is one of the best power forwards ever. When healthy, he could do more for a team than Kevin Garnett. He did need a better point guard than Jason.
If Orlando had kept him with Shaquille, they would have dominated all comers.

Hawkeye15
02-17-2009, 11:04 PM
everyone talks about talent, pure talent this, pure talent that. If that is the case, Rasheed Wallace is with anyone. Talent doesnt do it all. You need drive, intensity, and to stay healthy

Kyle N.
02-17-2009, 11:09 PM
everyone talks about talent, pure talent this, pure talent that. If that is the case, Rasheed Wallace is with anyone. Talent doesnt do it all. You need drive, intensity, and to stay healthy

He had drive and intensity. As far as being healthy, nobody asks to blow out their knee, but whatever.