# Iverson wants Webber in the Game



## Sliccat (Oct 16, 2004)

> Iverson doesn't think Webber should be on the bench when the game is on the line.
> 
> "Not too much has changed from last year, from being a 20-and-10 guy," Iverson said, referring to Webber's scoring and rebounding averages from last season and for his career.
> 
> "He still has a lot in him and - no disrespect to Mo Cheeks because I've got to go with everything he does, but I think Chris definitely gives us a chance to win. It's just important for us to keep on encouraging him, and that's that."


http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/sports/16055450.htm


----------



## Sliccat (Oct 16, 2004)

Irresponsible for him to do. He's not doing anything but disrupting Cheeks' control over the team. Not only that, but he's downing the players who have been playing instead of Chris.


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

this team is a mess


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

BEEZ said:


> this team is a mess


You expected otherwise with Billy King as GM?


----------



## DieSlow69 (Apr 18, 2005)

god damn man....this is getting on my nerves....I think they are playing better without Webb. Damn A.I I wish you woulda shut up and let cheeks do what he's doing


----------



## ballistixxx (Jan 24, 2006)

you must understand that AI had no choice. he can't hate on Chris and he can't hate on Mo so he just said that they were both good


----------



## CocaineisaHelluvaDrug (Aug 24, 2006)

How many of you actually thought you was getting prime time webber to start with??

When the sixers signed chris webber he was coming off an injury that most players dont EVER recover from and all of a sudden he`s sposed to be setting the world on fire,i think 20 +10 for a guy that is playing one leg is more than acceptable and the overreaction to his play is appalling

Simple fact is Billy King sucks and always has done,Mo Cheeks is not a good coach,the draft picks have been busts every single one of them,Dalambert is just plain soft and useless,kyle korver could`nt guard a poster of the guy he`s sposed to be covering and igoudala has no jump shot 

Blame BK and MC for the sixers woes and stop expecting webber to be something that he patently was`nt EVER going to be when we signed him


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

www.starbury.com said:


> How many of you actually thought you was getting prime time webber to start with??
> 
> When the sixers signed chris webber he was coming off an injury that most players dont EVER recover from and all of a sudden he`s sposed to be setting the world on fire,i think 20 +10 for a guy that is playing one leg is more than acceptable and the overreaction to his play is appalling
> 
> ...


 Once again no one here is expecting anything of Webber if you have read this forum, you arent a Sixers fan and its one thing to post negatives which is something I do, which is allowed and its another to bait and thats what you are doing. This is your last warning


----------



## SirCharles34 (Nov 16, 2004)

_``You know he feels like he could help us if he was out there on the basketball court,'' teammate Allen Iverson said, "but it's out of his control and it's something he'll have to fight through. I'll be there to support him and give him as much positive energy as I can._ 

There's nothing wrong with what AI said. He's just trying to support his team mate. Besides, it was AI who convinced Webber to come to Philly. If Cheeks is a good coach, he'll recognize that and stick to his guns on not playing Webber in the 4th qt.


----------



## Sliccat (Oct 16, 2004)

SirCharles34 said:


> _``You know he feels like he could help us if he was out there on the basketball court,'' teammate Allen Iverson said, "but it's out of his control and it's something he'll have to fight through. I'll be there to support him and give him as much positive energy as I can._
> 
> There's nothing wrong with what AI said. He's just trying to support his team mate. Besides, it was AI who convinced Webber to come to Philly. If Cheeks is a good coach, he'll recognize that and stick to his guns on not playing Webber in the 4th qt.


There's nothing wrong with that quote, but when you want one player to play bad enough that you're making statements to the press about it, I think it's an insult to your other teamates.


----------



## Mr. Hobbes (Jul 1, 2005)

This isn't ridiculous. When you lose, you want change.


----------



## Your Answer (Jul 13, 2005)

Sliccat said:


> There's nothing wrong with that quote, but when you want one player to play bad enough that you're making statements to the press about it, I think it's an insult to your other teamates.


I HIGHLY doubt that AI wants webber to play that bad that he went out and found this media outlet and make a specifc point to say this. Im sure he was just asked this question, prolly after the loss to LAC, and this was his response. I dont have any problem with him saying that and would of kinda expected him to say that. Hes the captain of the team and Webber is still part of the team he prolly said the only thing he could of to keep Webber from to developing to a full out cancer. Could you imagine if he would of said Cheeks was doing the right thing what Webber would of turned into. I think your looking it as Iverson went out and made it a point to say this, I think you got to look at it more as this was a question asked him and his response, and what else he could of really said without hurting this team anymore then it is right now with the given situation.


----------



## DieSlow69 (Apr 18, 2005)

Route I-76 said:


> I HIGHLY doubt that AI wants webber to play that bad that he went out and found this media outlet and make a specifc point to say this. Im sure he was just asked this question, prolly after the loss to LAC, and this was his response. I dont have any problem with him saying that and would of kinda expected him to say that. Hes the captain of the team and Webber is still part of the team he prolly said the only thing he could of to keep Webber from to developing to a full out cancer. Could you imagine if he would of said Cheeks was doing the right thing what Webber would of turned into. I think your looking it as Iverson went out and made it a point to say this, I think you got to look at it more as this was a question asked him and his response, and what else he could of really said without hurting this team anymore then it is right now with the given situation.



I can dig that. I guess he didnt have a choice if someone fired the question at him. I just hope Cheeks leaves his azz on the bench in the 4th lol


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

The culture of this team sure has changed.


----------



## jpk (May 4, 2005)

The culture has changed since when? The Eastern Conference champion Pat Croce days?


----------



## Griddy (Oct 16, 2006)

so much for Webber not havin defense?

Yet Elton dominates in Webbers absence. as well as bum *** Rasheed Wallace.

Who's to blame now? Webber?


----------



## DieSlow69 (Apr 18, 2005)

Griddy said:


> so much for Webber not havin defense?
> 
> Yet Elton dominates in Webbers absence. as well as bum *** Rasheed Wallace.
> 
> Who's to blame now? Webber?



This game has nothing to do with Webber playing defense. THE FACT IS ...WEBBER IS A ZHITTY DEFENDER!!! . I know you love the guy but he can't move and he barely gets up and down the court. I dont know what I'm going to do when A.I. cant get up and down the court, but I'm not gonna close my eyes and totaly believe its not happening. Face it WEBBERS DONE!!! WHY YOU THINK NO ONE ELSE WANTS HIM(besides his big azz contract). Don't think I'm just hating on webber because I was one of the ones on these boards and in real life braggin about us getting Webber. But after seeing that he cant move or defend. Man I would give webber up in a sec. If we didnt have to continue to pay for his contract I would waive him. Bottom line he is nothing more than a role player now. He deserves 26 min and thats it. Just my opinion

P.S. As I was saying in the Sixer vs Detroit game thread this team looks terrible without A.I. The offense is horrid which is giving detroit easy lay-ups and more offensive opportunities. Detroit's throwing up bricks to. They just got on in the 4th and ran away from us. But the first 3 quaters was an ugly game and we were still in it.


----------



## Your Answer (Jul 13, 2005)

Griddy said:


> so much for Webber not havin defense?
> 
> Yet Elton dominates in Webbers absence. as well as bum *** Rasheed Wallace.
> 
> Who's to blame now? Webber?



ME ME ME Ill blame him, Like either one of those guys wouldnt of done the same thing to webber on the court come on lol your even kidding yourself. Heres the key why we lost to detroit ALLEN FN IVERSON didnt play. We only lost by 10 thats tells me we should of won if he played.

Also i wanna comment on the box score, I saw it said Webber DNP-lower back stiffness....when in reality it should say.....


Webber DNP-I wanna pout on the bench like a 2 year ol girl sickness

The funny thing is its actually helping us unlike he prolly expected.

Yes we lost our last two games, but LAC we should of won nothing webber would of done to change that, and we lost to detroit bc Allen didnt play


----------



## Griddy (Oct 16, 2006)

Route I-76 said:


> ME ME ME Ill blame him, Like either one of those guys wouldnt of done the same thing to webber on the court come on lol your even kidding yourself. Heres the key why we lost to detroit ALLEN FN IVERSON didnt play. We only lost by 10 thats tells me we should of won if he played.
> 
> Also i wanna comment on the box score, I saw it said Webber DNP-lower back stiffness....when in reality it should say.....
> 
> ...


Lol @ this non sense.
A lost is a ****in' lost.
stop with the excuses.

That's like me sayin'. Oh in that case since we only lost by under 10 points in the Pacers, Nuggets, and Raptors games that you can't "count" those. 

every team is SUPPOSED to win. No matter the record. A game is a game and you play it for the VICTORY.

cuz if u look at like that PACERS, SUNS, NUGGETS were SUPPOSED to win right?

being that they are considered "better" teams bc of previous records in the past seasons right?

I hate the way people find excuses to blame Webber. Just face the ****in' facts. This team is in a quagmire as a whole. Dalembert is confused. Iguodala needs to score more. We really need a new PG. Ollie is OKAY but come on. The bench needs another spark player. Webber is NOT the reason for it all.
Yes, he's been playin bad, but If you watch the games, like I do youwould clearly see that he doesn't even get the ball enough to become a problem.
So wtf.


----------



## Jizzy (Aug 24, 2005)

So we have Webber who's disgruntled and wants more minutes but is at the cost of the team when he plays. Then the coach limits his minutes and despite the poor record, the team seems more cohesive. Then we have AI who is saying we need Webber out there so we have a 'chance to win'. Bulletin for AI, you haven't won with Webber playing. Keep him out. This is more of AI's and Webb's relationship then on court play, me thinks.

Then you have Iggy who's offense is nowhere to be found. Sammy, who's on and off. Green turning into a chucker. Kevin Ollie playing extended minutes. And Mo Cheeks as a coach. Mess indeed.


----------



## Your Answer (Jul 13, 2005)

Griddy said:


> Lol @ this non sense.
> A lost is a ****in' lost.
> stop with the excuses.
> 
> ...


My point was not say we should of won games here and there My point was Webber could not of helped us in any of those games as a matter of fact we prolly would of done worse. You made the post like Webber was so good that he would of shut down Brand and Sheed when in reality he would of prolly given up even more points. If you think it is more detrimental to this team to miss webber from a game then it is Iverson you are out of your damn mind and im wasting my time talking to u


----------



## jpk (May 4, 2005)

Griddy kinda has a point that Webber probably could help by giving him some time in the 4th. A guaranteed benching isn't really helping anyone, the team or the player. We have NOT looked great in the fourth quarter and I think it's more to do with Mo Cheeks style (unable to adjust) than with Webber. Last year the team also stunk in the 4th, so I lay the total suckiness in the 4th quarter more on Cheeks than Webber. Webber is still a decent rebounder and at least can create some semblance of an offense. 

But his defense is horrendous, he's glued to the hardwood. He's a decent 1:1 post defender still, but his team defense is non-existent right now.


----------



## Griddy (Oct 16, 2006)

jpk said:


> Griddy kinda has a point that Webber probably could help by giving him some time in the 4th. A guaranteed benching isn't really helping anyone, the team or the player. We have NOT looked great in the fourth quarter and I think it's more to do with Mo Cheeks style (unable to adjust) than with Webber. Last year the team also stunk in the 4th, so I lay the total suckiness in the 4th quarter more on Cheeks than Webber. Webber is still a decent rebounder and at least can create some semblance of an offense.
> 
> But his defense is horrendous, he's glued to the hardwood. He's a decent 1:1 post defender still, but his team defense is non-existent right now.



i would NEVER sit here and try to say Webber's defense is superb or near where id like it to be. 
BUT i will say the team as a whole defense sux. and it terrible when webber is blamed for everything.

i mean just look at dalembert. YES, he gets blocks but his AWARENESS is TERRIBLE on the court. the paint is ALWAYS available with him in the game bc of his dumb decisions. Hes like that non basketball playin tall guy u pick to take up space and block shots at the playground. i mean he does contribute and all but his defensive decisions. 

look at his stats since Webber was out. how can people say it's webber fault? people never look at the other ****. this is what im sayin'. its' amazin


----------



## CocaineisaHelluvaDrug (Aug 24, 2006)

Griddy said:


> i would NEVER sit here and try to say Webber's defense is superb or near where id like it to be.
> BUT i will say the team as a whole defense sux. and it terrible when webber is blamed for everything.
> 
> i mean just look at dalembert. YES, he gets blocks but his AWARENESS is TERRIBLE on the court. the paint is ALWAYS available with him in the game bc of his dumb decisions. Hes like that non basketball playin tall guy u pick to take up space and block shots at the playground. i mean he does contribute and all but his defensive decisions.
> ...



REPPED


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

Griddy said:


> i mean just look at dalembert. YES, he gets blocks but his AWARENESS is TERRIBLE on the court. the paint is ALWAYS available with him in the game bc of his dumb decisions. Hes like that non basketball playin tall guy u pick to take up space and block shots at the playground. i mean he does contribute and all but his defensive decisions.


The paint is available because no one on the perimeter moves their feet to stop penetration. It's like they expect Dalembert to make up for their defensive lapse and he's not that kind of player and he never will be.


----------



## Sliccat (Oct 16, 2004)

DieSlow69 said:


> This game has nothing to do with Webber playing defense. THE FACT IS ...WEBBER IS A ZHITTY DEFENDER!!! . I know you love the guy but he can't move and he barely gets up and down the court. I dont know what I'm going to do when A.I. cant get up and down the court, but I'm not gonna close my eyes and totaly believe its not happening. Face it WEBBERS DONE!!! WHY YOU THINK NO ONE ELSE WANTS HIM(besides his big azz contract). Don't think I'm just hating on webber because I was one of the ones on these boards and in real life braggin about us getting Webber. But after seeing that he cant move or defend. Man I would give webber up in a sec. If we didnt have to continue to pay for his contract I would waive him. Bottom line he is nothing more than a role player now. He deserves 26 min and thats it. Just my opinion
> 
> P.S. As I was saying in the Sixer vs Detroit game thread this team looks terrible without A.I. The offense is horrid which is giving detroit easy lay-ups and more offensive opportunities. Detroit's throwing up bricks to. They just got on in the 4th and ran away from us. But the first 3 quaters was an ugly game and we were still in it.


I think he's saying that if the defense doesn't get any better without webber in the game, and it does get better offensively, then its worth it to have him in the game, which is a valid point. Honestly, Webber is a bad defender, but if he's our best, there's really no reason to play him less. He's being made a scapegoat for this team's struggles, and it's not fair to him.


----------



## jpk (May 4, 2005)

Sliccat - Yeah, I think that is a valid argument.


----------



## DieSlow69 (Apr 18, 2005)

jpk said:


> Sliccat - Yeah, I think that is a valid argument.


Yeah its a valid argument in Sliccats defense but Griddy is not thinking in the same logic. He seems to think Webber does no wrong and is not the reason at times Dalembert and the whole team for that matter has to make stupid decisions on defense. Webber is terrible and has been terrible offensively and defensively so far. He isnt doing zhit on offense so far, so to say to leave him in for his offensive threat and to hell with the defense dont make no sense to me. Most of his jumpers are flat and dude is only getting 10 pts a game tops. I'm not blaming everything on Webber but he is who I'm screaming at every single game so far this season. and I have watched every game I not saying this from a standpoint that I'm not watching every game. I watch the entire game and would be in here posting but its usually no one here(but that's besides the point). Bottom line to me Sliccat your saying I'm blaming Webber for everything but Griddy won't even say anything negative or say the obvisous about Webber.


----------



## Griddy (Oct 16, 2006)

DieSlow69 said:


> Yeah its a valid argument in Sliccats defense but Griddy is not thinking in the same logic. He seems to think Webber does no wrong and is not the reason at times Dalembert and the whole team for that matter has to make stupid decisions on defense. Webber is terrible and has been terrible offensively and defensively so far. He isnt doing zhit on offense so far, so to say to leave him in for his offensive threat and to hell with the defense dont make no sense to me. Most of his jumpers are flat and dude is only getting 10 pts a game tops. I'm not blaming everything on Webber but he is who I'm screaming at every single game so far this season. and I have watched every game I not saying this from a standpoint that I'm not watching every game. I watch the entire game and would be in here posting but its usually no one here(but that's besides the point). Bottom line to me Sliccat your saying I'm blaming Webber for everything but Griddy won't even say anything negative or say the obvisous about Webber.



WHEN DID I EVER say Webber does no wrong?
I think it's obvious that Webber has a strong lack of defense. 
I'm talkin about Dalemberts decision makin'.
Why do you think that he always ends up with 5/6 fouls? bc he doesnt think. Yes, the block looks good on the stat sheet... but when ur just playin defense just to block and not to contain and make it difficult for the offense by just simply contestin' the shots, it can become a problem. a real shot block knows when u can make a play on the ball and when u can, and Dalembert is the type to go to block EVERYTHING which ultimately leads into a foul and him being on the bench.

He also double teams guards at the perimeter which often leaves the pain open. Watch the games.
I mean With Webber out and 

elton scorin' 33 points, 14 rebounds in a game that DALEMBERT only has 14 poins 3 REBOUNDS 6 FOULS says somethin right?

or another where
Bogut scores 14 points and grabs 9 rebounds in a game that DALEMBERT only scores 2 POINTS grabs 2 REBOUNDS and totals 6 FOULS/

or against the Bulls in a winnin effort.... DALEMBERT ONLY has 6 points and 6 rebounds.

So YEA, it's Webbers fault right?

and as I type...HALFTIME of the Cavs/Sixers game.

DALEMBERT has 0 POINTS, 2 REBOUNDS....

I mean those are actual statistics. right here in front of you.
go to sixers.com if u don't believe me.

I'm just sayin' Dalembert's awareness defensively is a problem. I watch everygame, I see it.
The block look wonderful on the stat sheet but when u watchin the games u can see what im talkin bout. I'm no sayin Dalembert is the reason for the losses, the team's play as a whole has been a problem. But speakin' specifically on Dalembert, that's how i feel.

END of game - Dalembert 6pts, 8 rebounds
Big Z - 18 pts, 15 rebounds


----------



## Sixerfanforlife (Jun 23, 2005)

On a side note, I think Iguodala has another double-double.


----------



## Sliccat (Oct 16, 2004)

DieSlow69 said:


> Yeah its a valid argument in Sliccats defense but Griddy is not thinking in the same logic. He seems to think Webber does no wrong and is not the reason at times Dalembert and the whole team for that matter has to make stupid decisions on defense. Webber is terrible and has been terrible offensively and defensively so far. He isnt doing zhit on offense so far, so to say to leave him in for his offensive threat and to hell with the defense dont make no sense to me. Most of his jumpers are flat and dude is only getting 10 pts a game tops. I'm not blaming everything on Webber but he is who I'm screaming at every single game so far this season. and I have watched every game I not saying this from a standpoint that I'm not watching every game. I watch the entire game and would be in here posting but its usually no one here(but that's besides the point). Bottom line to me Sliccat your saying I'm blaming Webber for everything but Griddy won't even say anything negative or say the obvisous about Webber.


I understand that Webber has been a disappointment so far this year. But it's not his scoring presence that makes him value it's (as Griddy said) his awareness on the offensive and defensive end.

Don't get me wrong here. Cheeks has been playing Webber exactly as much as he should be. But we need to accept that Webber is what he is, and isn't going to change. He's a power foward with limited scoring or defensive ability, but a very good passer, facilitator, and defensive rotator. Until we have better big men than him, and we don't, there's really no reason to be mad at anybody but Billy King. And even then, only if you didn't support the trade originally. Chris Webber is an aging power foward on a broken knee. There just isn't so much we can reasonably expect from him.


----------



## Griddy (Oct 16, 2006)

LMAO @ Dalemberts bum *** once again.


----------



## jpk (May 4, 2005)

If you've been watching Dalembert since he came into the league you'd see he's actually gotten better. Last year and the year before he couldn't even catch the basketball. It's like he had two left feet for hands. He is improving, just slowly.

So back to the issue, it seems to me that Webber has been out a lot of games for a bad back. Me thinks that Cheeks has put him on the DL to get rid of him. Anyone else think the bad back is bogus?


----------



## DieSlow69 (Apr 18, 2005)

jpk said:


> If you've been watching Dalembert since he came into the league you'd see he's actually gotten better. Last year and the year before he couldn't even catch the basketball. It's like he had two left feet for hands. He is improving, just slowly.
> 
> So back to the issue, it seems to me that Webber has been out a lot of games for a bad back. Me thinks that Cheeks has put him on the DL to get rid of him. Anyone else think the bad back is bogus?



I think its bogus and I can't wait until I get online and I read "WEBBERS TRADED FROM PHILLY":yay: :clap2: :yay: :clap2: :yay: :clap2: :yay:


----------



## DieSlow69 (Apr 18, 2005)

Sliccat said:


> I understand that Webber has been a disappointment so far this year. But it's not his scoring presence that makes him value it's (as Griddy said) his awareness on the offensive and defensive end.
> 
> Don't get me wrong here. Cheeks has been playing Webber exactly as much as he should be. But we need to accept that Webber is what he is, and isn't going to change. He's a power foward with limited scoring or defensive ability, but a very good passer, facilitator, and defensive rotator. Until we have better big men than him, and we don't, there's really no reason to be mad at anybody but Billy King. And even then, only if you didn't support the trade originally. Chris Webber is an aging power foward on a broken knee. There just isn't so much we can reasonably expect from him.



Yeah Sliccat I can dig that. I thought you were trying to say Cheeks needs to use him more. I guess I got my expectations up to high when we traded for Webber and I thought FINALY!!!!!! A.I. has some help that would make us legit....I guess I'm just realizing why Sacramento got rid of the him and I can see with my expectations why I really can't stand the dude now!!!!! He was great back when I use to watch him...Now he just flat out sucks to me!! yeah I know he's a very good passer and facilitator. But his jump shot that he use to make is flat because he can't bend his knee. His hook shot under the goal is flat and my grandma can move up and down the floor better than duke. I just cant get with that


----------

