Check out what the very knowledgeable poster, tsherkin, mentioned on the Warriors board.
I have a question:
What in God's creation is it that has made people forget that a running team can have a molasses-slow big man and still succeed?
When you're running, you're not looking to get all 5 guys back to the other end before the other team does, you're looking for 2-on-1s, 3-on-2s, the occasional 4-on-x...
If Webber proves to be LITERALLY INCAPABLE of running, he will still be a valuable addition to the team as long as he evidences the ability to grab a defensive rebound and fire a quick outlet pass to Monta, Baron or whomever so that they can go blazing up the court full-tilt.
Yes, it's HELPFUL if the big has mobility enough to run but most teams who avoid/shun slower bigs because they want to run are stupid.
And in the halfcourt, Webber's high post presence will be advantageous. If nothing else, hope that he rubs off on Biedrins a bit and that he can hit the defensive glass and throw nice outlet passes... and that'll be enough.
I have to ask you this:
How mobile do you think Kareem Abdul-Jabbar was in L.A. when he passed 38? Not very, at least not ITO end-to-end speed. And yet he was still a functional and effective player in a reduced role. What about Bill Walton's gimp-ass feet in Portland?
I could go on but this preoccupation with Webber's ability to run the court is ridiculous; you'll have 4 other guys who can run and the whole point is to catch the opposition napping by getting behind the defense, so whether Webber can run or not is irrelevant, leave that to the greyhounds, it's a historically effective tactic.
I think this will work out fine for Golden State; it is, IMO, one of the wiser moves they've made in Mullin's administration. Good for you guys taking a chance, I hope it works out.
Yes, someone gets it!