Baron Davis is NOT a Quitter!!!

Discuss anything related to Golden State Warriors basketball here

Moderators: Mr. Crackerz, JREED, Guybrush, 32


Rookie
Posts: 36
» Wed Feb 07, 2007 3:30 pm
I admit my Baron Davis is a Quitter post was a little dramatic. I still believe everything I said has truth to it, especially concerning his past.

But lets say Im WRONG, and Baron Davis is NOT a quitter.

So if Baron is not a quitter, then he is chronically injured. He has missed a majority of the season for THE LAST FIVE YEARS. Can we really build a team around a player that is not going to be around for a majority of the season? I dont think that would be wise.

So Baron trade value is pretty low, injury prone plus big contract usually does that. Im not even really saying we should trade him, but we have to build the team around a different philosophy if we gonna be contenders.

Maybe that is going away from Baron being the Be All and End All of our Offense? Maybe that means moving him to SG? Maybe that means limiting his minutes to 30 max a night like Grant Hill? Maybe that means trading him to a team who thinks hes gonna be healthy a whole season.

So if Baron Davis is not a quitter, than he is way too injury prone to build a championship contending team around.

PS. I agree Baron is one of the best PG's in the game. His skills are undeniable. Hes a phenom superstar. He should be an All-Star, but the same can be said for Tracy McGrady and a few years back about Grant Hill.

All Star
Posts: 2261
» Wed Feb 07, 2007 4:24 pm
Baron has been a iron horse this year & only missed 6 Fuk'n games :bday:
User avatar

Franchise Player
Posts: 9163
» Wed Feb 07, 2007 5:42 pm
Not only that but Baron's been playing through some injuries so far this season. His wrists are sore as hell but he continued on. But I understand, your just one Baron fan frustrated with the continuous seasons of injury. I'll admit, if I was a huge Baron fan, I'd like to live and see the day he plays all 82 games.

All Star
Posts: 2856
» Wed Feb 07, 2007 5:42 pm
montastic wrote:...So if Baron Davis is not a quitter, than he is way too injury prone to build a championship contending team around.


Throughout his career, Davis has been injury prone; however, what are the Warriors's other options for poing guard? The team now has an adequate backup in Cabbage and we may see Nelson limit Davis's minutes (somewhat like a baseball manager measuring a pitcher's pitch count).

Neither Mullin nor Nelson are here to "...to build a championship contending team;" but rather are here to just get the team into the playoffs. Mullin's master plan was to build the team (with Montgomery as the coach) around Dunleavy, Murphy and Foyle with Davis and Richardson as the fill in pieces. Unfortunately, as we have all seen, Mullin's plan had no chance to work. By bringing in Nelson and trading for more athletic players, Mullin has now built an athletic and entertaining team that, at best, will make the last seed in the playoffs and get eliminated in the first round.

Rookie
Posts: 36
» Wed Feb 07, 2007 6:16 pm
O.G. Broe wrote:Baron has been a iron horse this year & only missed 6 Fuk'n games :bday:


Baron Davis compared to an Iron Horse? Ha thats like saying OG Broe is the Worlds Strongest man this week.
User avatar

Hall of Famer
Posts: 18315
» Thu Feb 08, 2007 5:03 am
You know, I've been saying since the beginning of the season that we needed a decent backup for Baron... he plays too many minutes. I'd like to keep him to 30-35 min max.

All Star
Posts: 2956
» Thu Feb 08, 2007 8:08 am
Baron is OK he just doesn't trust his team mates enough. he feels he has to do it all himself, and he's right. Until J-Rich comes back Baron has know reliable shooters. plus the best rebounders on the Warriors are Biedrins and the guards. Harrington and Jackson do not make this team any better. Plus Nelson run and gun philosphy is weak. He does not have enough shooters to play that style.

Rookie
Posts: 36
» Fri Feb 09, 2007 12:22 am
uptempo wrote: By bringing in Nelson and trading for more athletic players, Mullin has now built an athletic and entertaining team that, at best, will make the last seed in the playoffs and get eliminated in the first round.


Ouch, hope your wrong, but with Harrington our only legit option at PF looks like your right.

I think our team could get out the first round with one simple trade that nets us a defending/rebounding PF with a decent O. game. But then we gotta figure out which one to bench between Monta, Baron, JRich and Harrington. And id have no problem benching Monta this year, but I cant see us benching him next year.
User avatar

Moderator
Posts: 13751
» Fri Feb 09, 2007 9:56 am
uptempo wrote:Mullin's master plan was to build the team (with Montgomery as the coach) around Dunleavy, Murphy and Foyle with Davis and Richardson as the fill in pieces.

There's no possible way you can be serious right now.

Davis and Richardson as "fill-in pieces" to Mike Dunleavy...?

There are so many counters to this statement, by way of quotes, actions, or even common logic, that I'm not gonna bother answering it. I can't imagine what it's like to think Chris Mullin's grand scheme revolved around Mike Montgomery and Mike Dunleavy. It's just not logical and it doesn't add up with Mullin's actions as a VP.

All Star
Posts: 1216
» Fri Feb 09, 2007 10:40 am
uptempo wrote:Mullin's master plan was to build the team (with Montgomery as the coach) around Davis and Richardson with Dunleavy Murphy and Foyle as the fill in pieces. Unfortunately, as we have all seen, Mullin's plan had no chance to work. By bringing in Nelson and trading for more athletic players, Mullin has now built an athletic and entertaining team that, at best, will make the last seed in the playoffs and get eliminated in the first round.


***fixed***

See 32, this wasn't so hard to fix. :mrgreen:
User avatar

All Star
Posts: 3040
» Fri Feb 09, 2007 11:14 am
In all of this, there is one idea by montastic that they briefly tried and went away from. The idea of playing Baron at the 2 and Monta at the 1. I remember it being pretty damn effective when they tried it, but perhaps Baron was unhappy with the ball out of his hands. It enabled him to freelance and post up and had the effect of better ball movement. I know Monta is a turnover machine, but he is improving (looked damn good against Indy prior to the knee bruise) and there are not a lot of 2s who can stop Baron...maybe playing Baron and cabbage together that way would be an occasional change-up worth exploring as well...Minny, Clips, Ws and Kings are all going to be fighting for 8th (cannot believe that Denver won't pull away for 7th once AI and Melo are healthy together), and of those 4 teams, the ws are the deepest.

Starting Lineup
Posts: 964
» Sat Feb 10, 2007 12:01 am
coltraning wrote:In all of this, there is one idea by montastic that they briefly tried and went away from. The idea of playing Baron at the 2 and Monta at the 1. I remember it being pretty damn effective when they tried it, but perhaps Baron was unhappy with the ball out of his hands. It enabled him to freelance and post up and had the effect of better ball movement.....


Yes i think the main opposition to playing Monta @ the 1 was his huge TO problem at the begining of the year. But Ive always said he can play through that, and really thats the only way hes gonna get better at the PG, is actually playing vs. NBA players in an NBA game.

Putting Baron keeps him from pounding the rock, plus it allows us to get an Offense that can be consistent with or wthout BD.
User avatar

Hall of Famer
Posts: 18315
» Sat Feb 10, 2007 1:50 am
Money wrote:
coltraning wrote:In all of this, there is one idea by montastic that they briefly tried and went away from. The idea of playing Baron at the 2 and Monta at the 1. I remember it being pretty damn effective when they tried it, but perhaps Baron was unhappy with the ball out of his hands. It enabled him to freelance and post up and had the effect of better ball movement.....


Yes i think the main opposition to playing Monta @ the 1 was his huge TO problem at the begining of the year. But Ive always said he can play through that, and really thats the only way hes gonna get better at the PG, is actually playing vs. NBA players in an NBA game.

Putting Baron keeps him from pounding the rock, plus it allows us to get an Offense that can be consistent with or wthout BD.


I don't think it matters much. Baron will demand the rock in any spot. It would just mean that other will bring it up, but the offense would stay pretty much the same.

Starting Lineup
Posts: 913
» Sat Feb 10, 2007 9:35 am
Sarunas has showed some toughness in yesterdays game, and with BD out indefinitely has shown us enough improvement that we can wait to address the backup PG position in the off-season. Sorry guys, with J-Rich on the shelf and Nellie using a three- four guard lineup Ellis is our shooting guard. I am mostly expecting a dissapointing finish from Baron, because he has carried the team thus far, is injury prone and has not played many minutes or games or even meaningful games in quite a while. No knock on BD but Nellie really needs to reduce his minutes and develop Sarunas as our go to backup PG(15-20) min per game. Ironically, in the Nellie's iso offense, the team plays better without BD even though BD has more offensive skills than his teammates.

All Star
Posts: 2856
» Sat Feb 10, 2007 10:12 am
dareedle wrote:Sarunas has showed some toughness in yesterdays game, and with BD out indefinitely has shown us enough improvement that we can wait to address the backup PG position in the off-season. Sorry guys, with J-Rich on the shelf and Nellie using a three- four guard lineup Ellis is our shooting guard. I am mostly expecting a dissapointing finish from Baron, because he has carried the team thus far, is injury prone and has not played many minutes or games or even meaningful games in quite a while. No knock on BD but Nellie really needs to reduce his minutes and develop Sarunas as our go to backup PG(15-20) min per game. Ironically, in the Nellie's iso offense, the team plays better without BD even though BD has more offensive skills than his teammates.


You make some good points here; however, how do you explain the Nets home game where Baron got the defensive rebound, pounded the ball upcourt and then hit Monta with a perfect pass for a game winning shot? That sure looked like a great display of leadership, unselfishness, and judgement by Baron playing at the point and Monta at the 2.

I do agree that Baron's minutes need to be rationed by Nelson; kind-of-like a baseball manager measuring a pitcher's pitch count, only instead of pitches, Nelson can measure minutes.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests