LA needs Baron

Ugh. I read this article yesterday when it was first released, the headline said "Bay Area doesn't deserve Baron", I guess they changed it since then but the contents of the article are the same. This article makes me want to throw up. This asshole thinks the Lakers are just entitled to him because hes from LA? The Lakers could have had him a few years ago but they didn't want to beat out the Warriors offer of Speedy Claxton and Dale Davis. Kobe said that Kupchak's excuse was that Baron was a cancer, chucker, coach killer, overpaid, and his career was over due to injuries and now he expects Baron to come after Kupchak completely wrote Baron off a few years back.

He completely disregards the fact that they passed up on him when N.O. was GIVING him away. And how the hell do Bay Area fans not deserve Baron? They've actually had to endure decades of horrible teams and stayed loyal the whole way. Its this entitled point of view that makes small market, perennially crappy teams' fans hate LAL, its fans, its players, its management, its beat writers.

I'm sure this guy was crapping on Baron before last season too. Now hes all over his jock and proposes that LAL "should get this guy" yet offers no explanation as to how they would do it, not to mention that hes probably not even a good fit in the triangle and he and Kobe would take away from each other's games since they both need to dominate the ball.

Oh and a lot of people don't know this but theres another team in LA called the Clippers. I'd say they have a much better chance to land Baron than the Lakers do, but I also don't see Baron leaving GS unless Monta Ellis proves to be a full time PG in the next couple years.

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Baron...No way we are getting him without giving up Kobe...</div>

Fixed that for you.

 

GSW Beat Writer and former LA Times writer Tim Kawakami's response to this article:

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">There was a very well-written, unusually starry-eyed story published in the sports section of my old paper, the LA Times, on Sunday, though it probably should?ve run in the letters/public-relations/real estate section.

I guess the point of it was that Baron Davis is from LA, does movies, talks to Magic Johnson, smiles at the LA Times, and therefore is violating the Will of God and perhaps Jack Nicholson because he?s not currently starring for the Lakers (or the Clippers).

(Or maybe the LA Times has a basketball team now and wants to trade for Davis straight up?)

You know the argument: All very good basketball players who do movies and hang out with Kate Hudson and consider themselves proteges of Magic Johnson must be Lakers or their careers don?t really count.

But wait: Magic was from Michigan. Does that mean he should?ve played for the Pistons? And Jerry West was from West Virginia! Egads! Whole premise ruined! Please ignore this, LAT!

Side note: Why don?t LA writers ever lay claim to Brian Scalabrine?s NBA career?

There was some extraordinarily goofy stuff in there, too, about the Bay Area not deserving someone of such obvious LA vim and vigor, but I?ll give the columnist (I don?t know him, by the way?he?s new) some artistic license on that gushy point.

Did we deserve Terrell Owens, however? Bonds? I?ll move on?

I guess it?s not the columnist?s fault it came off like a high school thesis project which happened to be published in 1 million newspapers. Funny when that happens.

All I know is our own Warriors fan blogger Adam Lauridsen is much too sharp to ever have written anything like this?he?s actually much too sharp to have written several dumb things that I myself have typed out, but that?s another point.

49er fan blogger Vince Chhabria, by the way, is scary sharp and I don?t even want to get into it any more because he?s so good I?m only repeating the obvious when I praise VC and often when I?m typing about the 49ers I?m merely repeating VC.

So, back to the beloved LAT and the Baron story?

I can?t be too tough on my old paper?heck, the New York tabloids have been trying to seize by imminent (Buzz Ryan caught this)eminent domain every NBA star who happens to have any imaginable Big Apple tie for years and years, and sometimes the ties are actually imaginary.

But I have some friends who are major Warriors fans, and they did not like reading that story. They thought it read like Baron doing a mind-control thing on the writer, trying to stoke up support for a move to the Lakers (or Clippers) ASAP.

Hey, Baron?s a very persuasive guy. Maybe he was doing some subliminal contract work there, who knows?

I think Baron would eventually like to end up in LA, but only at the right time and right place, and if he can get the right price in Oakland and he has a chance to win, he?s staying, period, end of story.

I wouldn?t take this particular story too seriously for four unrelenting reasons:

1?The writer clearly had no idea about NBA salary cap rules, which, you know, sort of stand as a barrier to good players jumping to big teams for no reason other than writers in those cities want them to play there.

NBA rules. LA Times column by a guy I don?t know. Yep, sometimes the NBA salary cap wins out.

Fair game. He made me read it. For that, the LA Times wins.

2?Under previously mentioned NBA cap rules, if Baron wants to bolt to LA in the next season or two without the Warriors? cooperation (and believe me, the Warriors would not cooperate), he?ll have to do it at a gargantuan cut rate, and Baron isn?t a cut-rate dummy.

Basically, an $11M pay cut to move there as a free agent, assuming both the Lakers and Clippers stay over the cap, and that?s a good bet. Baron taking a $11M pay cut is NOT a good bet.

3?If Baron is planning to re-emigrate to LA, he doesn?t have to plant a story in the LAT, he can just opt-out next summer, take the mid-level exception of about $5.5 million (yeah, right), and be welcomed at Staples Center like a kid at Brangelina?s house.

He doesn?t need a story?Baron?s play does his advertising, and coming off that Warriors playoff run, that?s mega-ratings.

Of course, if Davis gets hurt (which has been known to happen), the advertising rates go way down and no LA story can resuscitate that.

In fact, the Lakers could?ve traded for Baron in February 2005, and Baron thought they were going to trade for him, but Laker GM Mitch Kupchak thought he was too injury prone for such a major financial investment.

Chris Mullin thought otherwise. There?s still $34M left of investment, plus whatever extra Baron persuades/jams down the Warriors? throat in the form of an extension.

Time will still tell on the whole value of BD. If he wants to maximize his money, and believe me, folks, he does, he has to stay with the Warriors, extend his deal with the Warriors, or convince the Warriors to trade him to the Lakers (or Clippers).

4?I repeat: For Baron to go to the Lakers (or Clippers) at a salary commensurate to his value, he will need to be traded under NBA cap rules.

(Both teams are over the cap. Unless they can get way under by the time Baron is a free agent, neither team can sign him to anything more than the mid-level exception. The only way to maintain Baron?s current salary or give him a raise is if he is traded or signed-and-traded in exchange for salaries within 25% of his salary. Which the Warriors probably would never do. Cut and paste.)

Problem: The Warriors, as they?re proving with Matt Barnes and Mickael Pietrus, don?t mind hardballing teams when it comes to their own properties.

Why make a mediocre deal when there?s no reason to make anything but a perfect deal? Trade Baron? Why? To make sure he?s paid when he?s in LA? Yeah, sounds great!

Problem 2: The Lakers (or the Clippers) have zero to trade the Warriors, hardball or no hardball.

OK, the Lakers down the road might have a pretty good young point guard in Javaris Crittenton?but hey wait, if Crittenton is any good, why would the Lakers want Baron for way more money and with way screwier legs?

Oh, the Lakers have that guy who used to wear No. 8 and now wears No. 24, but I think he?s such a great LA born and bred guy that they could never let him go?wait, Kobe Bryant was raised in Italy, moved to Philadelphia? so he shouldn?t be a Laker, maybe? PREMISE BUSTER! Sorry.

Problem 3: Davis might only have two or three peak years left in him, and that?s being optimistic.

I?m a Baron Davis Guy. You know that.

He?s one of the six or seven most dominant players in the NBA, when he?s healthy, and I?ve said that from the start of his UCLA career to his time in Charlotte, New Orleans, when he was struggling here? I?ve always said that.

I said when he wrestled with Mike Montgomery that it was a no-brainer, you had to dump Montgomery. I?m a Baron guy.

But I also have never been naive about his weaknesses: He gets hurt. A lot. He can be stubborn. A lot. He will probably not age gracefully. He?s an incandescent player? but would you want to be paying him $20M a year into his 30s?

-He has had one great year in his last? um? three seasons.

-He has continuous leg and back problems.

-He?s 28.

-The LAT columnist points out Steve Nash and Jason Kidd as lead guards who have flourished into their 30s and probably will keep going strong, and that?s a very good point.

But neither Nash nor Kidd had major knee/back problems in their teens and mid-20s (though Nash had a back flare-up a couple years ago), which can be a killer for any position that demands speed and explosion, and? point guard, hello!

-John Stockton was wonderful into his late-30s and Magic could?ve been, but Isiah Thomas was done at 33, Tim Hardaway was a shell of himself after 32, Gary Payton had his last great season at 33, and Kevin Johnson was through as a dominator before he hit 32.

By the way, none of those guys, except Hardaway, had Davis? early-career injuries woes.

I don?t really compare Baron straight across the board to any of those guys, because he?s bigger and stronger. Still? Penny Hardaway is taller, skinnier, had injury problems (but much less fire), and he was for the most part done at 27.

-Baron knows he?s at peak value?cresting high after being so valueless a few years ago that the Warriors were able to get him for literally almost nothing.

He knows he might not have another season like the last one?he had the perfect coach (OK, if Nellie blows out of town, that could hasten Baron?s departure, obviously), a perfect confluence of teammates and opponents and health (from mid-February on), and who knows when that will all come together again? If it ever does?

That?s why Davis needs the extension talk to burble now, at his peak. That?s why the Warriors have no immediate burden to do it right away, when he?s at his peak.

Now Davis can cause trouble, and that would shake the Wariors up more than any other possible problem.

But that would also sink his value across the league?which, as I have typed often, isn?t that high even now because of his escapades in New Orleans, which some people happily choose to bypass.

Need I point out (I guess I do): The Warriors in part traded away Jason Richardson and his remaining $50M+ in order to give them some salary space to, if they chose, extend Baron for a few more years.

I know Richardson has told people that Baron is part of the reason why the GSWs traded him and Jason sees that Baron wasn?t overly broken up by the trade off.

I can guess that?s one reason Baron isn?t weeping over losing his backcourt mate?if J-Rich is gone, there?s more for Baron down the road.

These are NBA realities. The LAT usually knows all about the NBA realities. I learned about them and wrote about them when I worked there with the all-timers: Mark Heisler, J.A. Adande, Bill Plaschke, Scott Howard-Cooper, Mike Bresnahan, Tim Brown?

This particular story wasn?t written by any of them. It?s well written. And forgettable, at the same time.</div>

Source