Is it me or has Webber lost some of his athletism. He has also gained some weight. I know he has had some ankle problems but the weight has steadily increased. I am having doubts about him. I like Webber. I would rather have him than Mo but I am very worried about his ability to take us to the next level. He is definetely not an Olajuwon in his prime. I dont know if we could afford to make another mistake considering we still have Cato's contract. I would love to work a deal for Garnet. I know it will take alot but I do not think Minnesota will be able to win anytime soon. It might be an option. ------------------ Fuggetabout it
He had that bad ankle sprain earlier in the year, its tough to work out with an ankle sprain. The weight is a temporary thing. And don't compare Webber to Cato. Webber is an MVP candidate, Cato is trade-bait. ------------------ Founder and President of the Houston Homers Club(HHC) - Are you a homer? Join now! The Rockets will be NBA champions. Believe.
I did not compare him to Cato. I compared him to Olajuwon in the prime of his career. It might be hard to workout but dieting has nothing to do with his ankle. ------------------ Fuggetabout it
It seemed you compared signing Webber as a mistake akin to the Cato contract. If that was not your intention then I apologize for misinterpreting it. As far as Olajuwon, if you want to compare modern day players to Olajuwon in his prime, I am sorry to say, most if not all will be found lacking. Olajuwon was one of a kind. ------------------ Founder and President of the Houston Homers Club(HHC) - Are you a homer? Join now! The Rockets will be NBA champions. Believe. [This message has been edited by Puedlfor (edited April 26, 2001).]
I agree with you. Olajuwon is one of kind. I also appreciate Webber's game. However, an ankle injury is no excuse. ------------------ Fuggetabout it
My problem with Webber is that he is settling for that jumper WAY too much when he has shown he can dominate inside. He doesnt need the ball out at the top of the key. He needs the ball in the post because he gets shot-happy when he has the ball from 18 feet. What the Rockets need is a post up player that can take it strong to the hoop. Heck if we wanted a jump-shooting PF, why not just sign Mo Taylor? Hes a better shooter than C-Webb anyway. ------------------ Don't EVER underestimate the Heart of a CHAMPION!
Webber's settling for the jumper and lumbering up the court because of his sore ankles and the Chunky-Butt Syndrome he acquired sitting out the injuries. If there were permanent damage we didn't know about, I'd say skip him. But he should recover fine, and fit in with the Rockets very well. (That last part may be wishful thinking, but hey...) I think Chris did take it down low more often in Game 2. ------------------
Honestly, I see more similarities in the potential to sign Webber this offseason to the time we acquired Pippen than with Cato's contract. Pippen was a big name, superstar free agent demanding the league maximum. Webber is the same way. I really hope we don't get another Pippen situation on our hands. ------------------ Founding Father of the Refs Suck Club
Garnet is not an option. Webber may be a little gimpy right now, but he is still producing. I've seen him do incredible things even while injured. Webber is no Pippen. Webber has fire. Webber dominates games by his lonesome most of the time. Mr. Jordan's coattails rarely did that. ------------------ snap crackle pop
Question: When was the last\first time Webber shot a turnaround? All I've ever seen him shoot is a step back jumper, a la Malone. I'm not trying to criticize him, and obviously from watching Malone play for the past 80-90 years, a post player can have a long, productive career without a pure back-to-the-basket game. IMO, Webber has three moves\shots: 1. Jumper 2. Spin move along the baseline 3. An unpleasant-looking, yet effective, jump hook ------------------
you have his offensive game down pat Live. I particularly like the hook. He doesn't do a turnaround often, and I don't think he really needs too imo. ------------------ snap crackle pop
Garnett is probably not an option...but man that would be great. I would take him over Webber any day. ------------------
I would take Duncan over both, it is to bad that the Spurs are going to keep winning as long as he is there, they have no incentive to trade him. ------------------ "Of course, thats just my opinion, I could be wrong" -- Dennis Miller
Oh yeah, if Duncan were ever available, he'd be the first person I'd want to build my team around. He's excellent. Garnett's a great player ... he can dominate the game, or quietly come close to a triple double. But aside from the fact that he'd never leave Minnesota, even if he wanted to, no one could afford his contract. ------------------ Founding Father of the Refs Suck Club
what is the fascination with tim duncan??? i mean, yes, he is a great player, but i find it IMPOSSIBLE to ascertain his greatness without considering the fact that he is paired with a 7 foot Hall of Famer who still is a legitimate threat on offense AND defense (especially). how can you make a statement like "he's the best" or "i'd start my team around him above all others" when you cannot speak to what kind of player he is without a 7 foot Hall of Fame offensive and defensive juggernaut next to him? tim has great fundamentals, don't get me wrong. i like the guy. but i'd take KG over him. i'd take CWebb over him, too. why? because i KNOW what they can do without a certain Hall of Fame intimidator next to them. do you realize that tim takes - usually - the weaker of the two post players that the spurs face? even if he doesn't take the weaker of the two, he does NOT have to expend a great amount of energy on defense. hell, he has an allstar 7footer behind him!! let's not overrate tim, please. i mean how good would c webb or garnett be on the spurs in place of tim? it'd be unreal. this reminds me so much of emmitt smith v. barry sanders. emmitt (tim) has benefitted immensely from a supporting cast to cover and create for him. barry never quite had that advantage. to this day, i'd say barry's hands down better. to this day, i say that KG and CWebb are hands down better.
How much more activity does one need? Hell he is in the NBA. He is getting older(I know he is mid to late twenties) and his metabolism is slowing down just like 99% of the people out there. Dieting does not mean eat salads or starve; it means recognize weight is an issue and cut back. ------------------ Fuggetabout it
man, if I didn't know any better, I'd say verse is heypartner. Every time I read verse's player analysis, I find myself in perfect agreement, except for Kenny Thomas breakdown allow me to summarize his posts in one sentence to add emphasis: Duncan is a Center having the luxury of playing against Power Forwards. If we had Duncan, who wouldn't say that we have the center position covered, now let's go get one of the plethora of power forwards out there....oooh look, we already have two. How many teams would place Duncan next to one of those slug centers that are clogging the league, rather than getting a much more easy to find Power Forward to place at his side? Maybe they would, now that he is so commonly recognized as a PF, but on draft day, was Rick Pitino planning on using this 7 footer as a PF or C????
verse...what Tim Duncan are you refering to? Certainly not the one on San Antonio. Robinsons days as one of the NBA's elite were gone before Duncan played his first game as an NBA player. And offensive juggernaut? David Robinson? Not over the last couple of years. David Robinson has always been a soft player, even in his mvp days. Take away Robinson and the Spurs might not win a championship but they still win 50 games. Take away Duncan and the Spurs are lottery bound. David Robinson could not win a championship with Rodman and Rodman was a better defensive player than Robinson. Now suddenly Robinson is the deffensive juggernaut that makes the spurs the championship team that they are? Duncan won every contest against Shaq, C-Webb, Malone, Garnett and Wallace on his way to a championship a couple of years ago now it looks like the spurs will get their second championship in three years...mainly because of Duncan. I don't mean to trivialize Robinsons contributions to the Spurs or Tim Duncan, 14pts a game 8.5 rebounds a game and 2.5 blocks a game are very good but he is no longer and has not been an elite player since Duncan arived. And it is fine to argue that Webber or Garnett are better, but to imply that he is not in their class by saying he is overated is just wrong. Duncan combines the best combination of finesse and power in his game than any big man since Dream was in his prime. Tim Duncan IMHO is the best big man in the game today. But I do regognize the ability of both Garnett, Webber and Shaq. Now please don't get me started on Emmitt Smith and Barry Sanders! ------------------ [This message has been edited by crash5179 (edited April 27, 2001).]
I agree that on any other team Duncan would probably be a center but he is not on any other team and he does not play the 5 spot he plays the 4. As a result he is with out a doubt one of if not the best 4 in the game. If only Sampson had been as dominant a PF as Duncan, but he is a perfect example of how a player can put up great numbers and still be soft ala David Robinson. When Robinson is gone maybe the spurs will move Duncan to the 5 spot but for now he is a 4 and it is unfair to downplay his contrabution for that reason. ------------------
crash5179, what tim and dave have is a mutually beneficial relationship. tim is a MUCH better player because he has dave to draw attention away from him. and dave is a MUCH better player because he has tim to draw attention away from him. i mean, how hard is it to beat san antonio when you cannot double team EITHER of their 7 foot centers with a big man? you HAVE to double with a smaller man, which is downright useless, especially against a skilled big man - and the spurs have TWO. most teams don't even have ONE. thus, tim and dave play against a lot of single or inept coverage, because i don't consider a 6'5" or 6'2" doubling guard even a factor. hey, i'm not taking anything away from them. i'm just saying that tim is more "charmed" than alyssa milano.
