Jason Whitlock goes off on Chris Webber again. Basic argument? That if Webber would've just stayed in the low-post and did the low-post thing he'd be the best power forward ever. Whitlock has some history with Webber, having covered him for the Ann Arbor News some 13 years ago.
I have some history with Webber too, having known him indirectly since he was in the eighth grade. And I was at Michigan during the Fab Five years....before the Fab Five years...and AFTER the Fab Five years. Whitlock's piece bears reading not just for the mistakes of analysis he makes about Webber. Let's be clear, Whitlock is no Ralph Wiley. But I think it says a lot about the three modern meanings of discipline, and the role they have to play in black male lives.
A passage:
Chris Webber had the potential to become the best power forward the game has ever seen. He could've been as reliable in the low post as Kevin McHale, as consistent and relentless as The Mailman, as immovable as Wes Unseld. He could've been a terrific last line of defense.Instead, C-Webb focused on redefining the position. C-Webb wanted to do a little bit of everything -- shoot the 3, lead the break, dish the ball behind his back and avoid the daily bump and grind of typical low-post play.
This exact same argument was made about another Detroit product 7-10 years ago--Derrick Coleman. Coleman was the first modern day power forward ("4") to have a handle and court vision good enough to theoretically run point ("1"), and range good enough to take three point shots from outside the key. The argument was that he was too undisciplined to move straight to the post and STAY THERE. He was also thought of as being too ghetto as well. Coleman and Webber, both brought up playing summer ball at St. Cecelia's against everyone from Isiah to Magic to Ice even, were basketball visionaries. Straight up. "C-Webb focused on REDEFINING THE POSITION."
Then the stats:
C-Webb is no flop. In 12 seasons, he's averaged 22 points, 10 rebounds and 4.5 assists. When he's been healthy, he's been an NBA All-Star. In 2000-01, he made a strong run at league MVP.
There aren't that many players PERIOD who will have stat lines like that over the course of ONE year much less twelve. The stats lie sometimes. I don't think they're lying now. Whitlock notes that he's moved three times (technically four counting the draft to Orlando). This is true...but with both moves the team trading him suffered more than he did (Golden State has NEVER recovered...Washington only recovered THIS year).
But for Whitlock this critical context doesn't matter half as much as Webber's desire to "keep it real."
Webber wanted desperately then to be Jalen Rose, a player with half of Webber's potential and polish. Webber loved the fact that Rose was from Detroit's mean streets. Webber's parents, a factory worker and a school teacher, had placed him in a pricey, predominantly-white private high school.Webber rebelled by idolizing Rose. It was as if Webber was embarrassed that he'd come from a solid two-parent home. Rose was never a bad guy. He was just "city" and cool.
From sports columnist to couch potato psychoanalysis. Doesn't skip a beat. What exactly is he basing this on? Rose came from the best basketball program in the state of Michigan. If playing ball is WHAT YOU DO, wouldn't YOU prefer to come from a ball playing program rather than a prep school?
Discipline. A branch of knowledge or teaching.
Discipline. Controlled behavior resulting from disciplinary training; self-control.
Discipline. Punishment intended to correct or train.
Basically, Whitlock wishes to discipline Webber for extending a discipline while not exemplifying discipline.
I think many black men and women in the professions find themselves having more skills than the boxes they are placed in. Cobb is a tech guy. Writes code for a living if I recall. But he's also a poet, a helluva writer, and a musician. One of my best friends is a trained physiologist, but knows egyptian history and spirituality better than any professional in that field that I have encountered. I just hung out last night with a couple of my boys from undergrad. One is an MD/MBA who also makes music. The other is a consultant with the government who is an international DJ and a producer.
The Eurocentric word for this is "Renaissance Men." I'd just call them Robesonians. At some point in their careers they had to make a choice. Either be REALLY good at ONE thing....or try to be good in number of different things. The first thing can place them at the top of a very narrow field during a thin slice of time. That second thing? Good question. They won't be valorized within the discipline (if that matters to them) because they don't work within its confines. And the new discipline won't congeal until after they're gone...so no props there either. But if they exert enough discipline to become good in a range of things, they are then able to escape discipline from people who wouldn't know their ass if it were handed to them. The verdict is still out on whether Webber will get a ring, much less make it to the NBA Hall of Fame. But I know there are at least a few 6'9+ ball players (KG anyone? Sheed?) who owe their ability to be who they are to people like Chris who paved the way.
For those of us on the Robeson path, perhaps this is all we can ask for....while little men with aspirations to narrow greatness snipe from the sidelines.
Posted by at March 5, 2005 09:25 AM | TrackBackI feel you on the Webber piece, but I also agree with Whitlock's assessment of Webber's game...it's why I bet on Kentucky against Michigan in the Final Four - a game the Cats were winning until Dale Brown ran into the end of the scorer's table in the 2nd half...Mashburn was absolutely destroying Webber and Howard in the box and out to the edge. Howard and Rose were the fundamental heart and soul of the team - they scored in the box, scored late, stopped runs and grounded the offense when Jimmy King started getting happy or when Webber fell in love with his jumper.
It was precisely his unwillingness to dominate the paint that allowed Christian Laettner to establish a legacy and convince America that he could actually play. Webber should have disabused the world of this notion long before Laettner was forced to ride pine for the Atlanta Hawks. What could be more telling this?
After all these years, he still does have a single low-post move. In this sense, he is so wholly unlike Derrick Coleman that it defies description. Coleman had and has a bevy of low-post moves, outside moves, handle, and everything else...never figured him out - maybe the game was too easy for him...I remember him averaging 35 and 13 in a PLAYOFF series against Cleveland when they had Nance, Daugherty and Hot Rod Williams. Coleman was the last cat in the world they wanted to see. Webber has never had a playoff series like that...no big man in the league has ever been overly concerned about his game and most of all, he does not want the ball late in games. The Lakers could always beat the Kings because Webber was not a threat to score in the 4th quarter. His stat line is definitely tight...I believe he is one of only four or five guys to average 23 and 11 for a career. Amazing...but that is a function of the times in which he plays and his skill level.
I don't begrudge his efforts to "redefine the game," but I would argue that Whitlock's assessment here is also wrong. I don't believe he was committed to trying to redefine the game. He never played for a team that needed him to play up top or on the perimeter. When he was in Washington, Rod Strickland hardly needed his assistance. The same is true today of Bibby. So, his efforts are wholly differentiable from Garnett who frees up Cassell and Hudson to work off the ball since they don't pass as effectively as Bibby, Jackson or other Kings guards.
As for the psychological claptrap, it is likely as you stated - the meager fumblings of a lesser man...I will say that Webber and Coleman share a deep knowledge of African history and our present condition that in many respects would suggest a detachment from the trivial pursuits of NBA greatness.
Finally, Robeson was exceptional at everything he did. He was not merely good or even very good. He was transcendent in as an athlete, scholar, orator, actor, activist and leader. Webber cannot correctly be viewed in this light. In fact, it may be argued that a renaissance man is merely an accomplished dabbler in many things...Robesonian should remain a seldom used accolade for our very best - like our mutual friend, the physiologist.
One Love. J.
Posted by: Temple3 at March 8, 2005 04:57 PMYou're right on a great many things. Webber doesn't have a single post move. He doesn't even raise his hands on defense...when he COULD jump. But his skills are undeniable. I have to think more about this, and am reading LETTERS TO A YOUNG MUSICIAN to get the more conservative opinion on discipline and craft from Wynton.
(And yeah, Coleman got jobbed...though part of those wounds were self-inflicted.)
What is the difference between someone who aspires to be like Robeson (our physics friend, our physiologist friend) and someone who is just good at a number of different things and doesn't care to be excellent at any one of them? Is it will? Position? Status? How would you train yourself to become Robeson if you aren't "like that?" If you aren't like that should you just settle and drop the other things?
All questions I'm thinking about "out loud" as it were. Like I told you before off line, we aren't getting any younger.
Posted by: Lester Spence at March 9, 2005 05:08 PM
It was odd that Michigan's best player, the player with the most intellect, deferred to Rose's overpowering personality.
Spence, this line from Kansas City's sports sniper - strikes me as warranting far more intensive scrutiny. Matter of fact, I'd argue that it's the quintessence of everything he had to say.
This coming from a brother who HATES basketball, football, (all that professional team sports represent) and the extravagant circus maximus distractus for a people who can ill afford such distractions.
ah well, back to cleaning my rifles...,
Posted by: cnulan at March 5, 2005 12:59 PM