RealGM

Set the hornets up for years...

We did it again.

Actually watching Paul gets on my nerves with his flopping and *nice guy" routine...I'm glad he's not on the W's..I'd rather lose with Gilbert than win with a Paul or a Davis.

What trade? Where? WTF are you talking about. Paul is god.

Sid the Squid wrote:Actually watching Paul gets on my nerves with his flopping and *nice guy" routine

I can't stand the guy for just that reason. He hasn't changed since he punched Hodge in the nuts.

Sid the Squid wrote:Set the hornets up for years...

We did it again.

You need to check your facts better.

When the trade was made the Hornets were 15-52. That had them in line for the second worst record in the NBA. After the Baron trade they ended up having...guess what...the second worst record in the NBA.

So the number of ping pong balls that they received would not have been altered and they still would have been in position to draft Chris Paul, regardless of whether they kept Baron or not.

The next season they did not sign any FAs with the money freed up by trading Baron. But in 2006 they used the space to sign one of the most overpaid FAs on the market, Peja Stojakovic, to a 65M deal.

So in essence the Baron Davis trade netted them the FA money to sign a gimpy Peja Stojakovic for five years. Not exactly a great return on investment for an AS guard.

LF, if you werent so set on mindlessly ripping the team that you are supposedly loyal to, then you would be able to find facts like this pretty easily.

Baron was sitting out that season... The Hornets eventually figured out it was better to sit on Baron and trade him to a desperate team amidst their now forced tankjob.

If anything, Baron led the charge for the tank...the Hornets were just smart enough to play along, and now have CP3 for their efforts. If we're smart, we'll be sitting pretty going into the 09 draft. If we're not (and I'd bet my bottom dollar we're in this group), we'll be drafting in the tens-teens in nearly the exact same situation.

The Winners? Cohan. Rowell. Nellie (5.1m). An extended by the Warriors Baron.

The Losers? "We Believe".

What about Atlanta? They needed a PG, Paul was available - and Billy Knights drafts Marvin Williams

Atlanta's move allowed Paul to become a Hornet

Deron's an excellent silver medal in that case

There is no chance that we get a top pick in the 09 draft. Sorry to disappoint you, but you dont go from 48 wins to 20 wins without a catastrophe taking place. Time to let that fantasy go.

In 2001, the Rockets crashed from 45 to 28 wins... Yao Ming was the result.

Bulls dropped from 62 to 13* (strike season) and wound up with Elton Brand.

Lakers dropped from 56 to 34, and wound up with Andrew Bynum.

Hornets dropped from 41 to 18 and got Chris Paul.

Spurs dropped from 59 to 20 and got TD.

In each team's case, there has been steady management... in the successful team's cases, steady GOOD management. Those are 5 franchise cornerstones drafted by teams who "tanked" for whatever reasons. There's very little doubt that the shrewdness to tank coincides with who they took with that pick.


It's not infallible, obviously, but it sure as hell beats sitting on our thumbs and waiting for one to drop from the sky, especially with Nellie treating any natural PF/Cs like lepers... but for example:

Memphis dropped from 49 to 22 and got Mike Conley

So unless we're worried that Mullin is the next Chris Wallace, why not find out where our players are w/o Baron? He's not going to help us long term.

Its a crap shoot to tank and then hope for things to work out via the draft. Look at all the teams that tanked and were supposed to be hot poop after winning the draft lotto, but instead had luck work against them.

Boston in the Tim Duncan year
Denver in the LeBron year
Milwaukee with Bogut
Charlotte every season

Look where these teams are now (not including Boston, who mired in squalor for far too long before reaching this point <and still may be knocked out by Atlanta tonight!>).

A normal franchise will not attempt to go from 48 wins to 20 wins, especially when they have so many talented guys on the team that would not allow that to happen. Monta, Biedrins, and Brandan alone could will this team to more than 20 wins. I mean, we play the Eastern Conference teams 30 times a year for goodness sakes.

The rational approach to next year is to just play it to win. We did it 48 times last year despite having no bench and not getting contributions from our rookies (whoever you want to find responsible for that). Our young players stand to gain a lot more by learning how to win than by being on a team trying to lose.

If you compromised a positive, winning attitude, traded all of our star veterans, and fired our coach just to HOPE that the guy we drafted would turn out to be a difference maker...thats just not reality nor is it a recipe for success.

Regarding Baron...I think most people would agree that if there is a good deal for him...something which capitalizes on his EC and his high level of play...then we should be open to moving him. But to take back guys that not only produce less but also have long term contracts, that is just unsound management.

Anyways, its a stone cold lock that our team is not going to tank next year. I know it makes for dull RealGM chit chat, but its simply a fact that cannot be reasonably disputed.

Any calls to tank are dumb.

Baron cost us some draft position in part as Dunleavy, Fisher, Murphy, and of course Richardson played at a very high level with him leading the charge for the final 28 of 05. He was a good get considering what that cap room would have netted in the two offseasons after we got him.

He didn't "cost us" Paul or Williams any more than Richardson and Dunleavy suddenly seeing reason to trust the management did (oops) and he's been very important as a franchise piece by getting fans to buy into the team despite some bad signing mistakes, drafting incompetence (standard NBA rates, but still some obvous misses), and the like, and he helped DON NELSON get the Warriors in the NBA relevance conversation all year this year until he threw in the towel.

For the final 28.

It's just time to cash in on that return when the return is at its best. He will only decline from here as he turns the page on his 20's with a bad body and only sporadic conditioning/effort. His disappointment at what a cap-educated league making a clear shift to owner-centricity and youth corps will give him should not influence this locker room.

Period.

And this team can win without him if built and developed properly. Ditching him now is not even remotely relatable to a tank. Stupid to even suggest it. At worst, the team can play .500 ball without him and with a full young roster and a committed developmental coach.

But Mullin has no guts or authority for that move so brace yourselves.

ROWELL wrote:And this team can win without him if built and developed properly. Ditching him now is not even remotely relatable to a tank. Stupid to even suggest it. At worst, the team can play .500 ball without him and with a full young roster and a committed developmental coach..

THANK YOU.

What would be the worst case scenario if we traded Baron?

- We win only 20-30 games, not even close to playoffs.

- We win only 30-40 games, close to playoffs but not in.

- We win 40-50 games, and fight for the 8th seed.

The best part: No matter what, in each scenario we know exactly what type of player we have... no more guesswork on if Monta's a full time PG, if Andris can be an offensive player, if Wright can really impact the game for longer than 6 minute stretches... hell, you should be completely on board if you're a Beli fan...

But won't happen with Nellie here on his last hurrah so you can pretty much forget that one.

I'm a relentless optimist... I'm still holding out hope that maybe Nellie retires or he plays that unpredictable Nellie card and makes the trade himself..

510Reggae wrote:I'm a relentless optimist... I'm still holding out hope that maybe Nellie retires or he plays that unpredictable Nellie card and makes the trade himself..

I'm afraid that most likely (as someone suggested) we're in for a drama queen flame out midseason (this will allow him to get max money out of the deal), and by then the damage will have already been done, or at least that is what I'm afraid of.

Although optimism is good, I'm at this point what you might call cautiously optimistic (meaning I don't trust Mulson as far as I can throw them ).

510Reggae wrote:
THANK YOU.

What would be the worst case scenario if we traded Baron?

- We win only 20-30 games, not even close to playoffs.

- We win only 30-40 games, close to playoffs but not in.

- We win 40-50 games, and fight for the 8th seed

I promise that if we traded Baron for scraps that we would not win enough games to make the playoffs but then not be bad enough to get a top 5 pick.

Most likely we would be in our usual 32-38 win territory with a draft pick around 11 or 12, drafting a guy that would probably turn into a marginal starter in 2-3 years.

Perhaps getting rid of our team leader would help our young players achieve more individually...but do you think that these guys would rather get big stats and lose or sacrifice their own numbers and win next year? Ill bet you that these guys know that their day will come in the not too distant future and want to be part of something successful now.

In fact, look at what Monta achieved last year being next to Baron and Stephen (the wretched monsters). Who is to say that Brandan cant progress next season, too? Who is to say that if Andris got more plays run for him in a traditional offense next year that he would know what to do with them?

Its nice to think of all the sunny possibilities that COULD come about by making a drastic change. But the guaranteed negatives do not surpass these possibilities.

And by the way, remember that it is a business and not a video game. The money from our team getting the 8 seed or something close to it next year is going to pay for the extensions of Monta and Andris. If our team is going to take the next step we have to have butts in the seats and corporate sponsors. Same ole Warriors sub-mediocrity doesnt exactly rake in the cash.



[/url]

turk3d wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



I'm afraid that most likely (as someone suggested) we're in for a drama queen flame out midseason (this will allow him to get max money out of the deal), and by then the damage will have already been done, or at least that is what I'm afraid of.

Although optimism is good, I'm at this point what you might call cautiously optimistic (meaning I don't trust Mulson as far as I can throw them ).

How does having a "drama queen flame out midseason" help Baron get a max contract?

Things like this tend to drop a players value, in case you didnt realize.

St.Nick wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



How does having a "drama queen flame out midseason" help Baron get a max contract?

Things like this tend to drop a players value, in case you didnt realize.

Not referring to Baron here Nick, it's Nellie. Baron's going to give it his best for us next year (if he returns), as it will be even more than just a contract year, he'll be playing for his proverbial NBA life (that's if he comes back of course and we don't extend him which I doubt we will). My apologies if it wasn't clear who I was referring to.

Nick, I think you're on board with the right Baron Davis trade if it comes along. I'm not sure much of interest is actually going to be available anytime before the February trading deadline but I'm also not excited about dealing with Baron for that time if we're moving him then, either. I'd prefer to give the youth the full run to get it together.

As for the team's success without Baron Davis, I point to how poorly we played in the big games down the stretch. Keeping Baronn Davis or extending him while also retaining the true consistent causes of success, Ellis and Biedirns, means we are still signing vet minimums to flesh out the roster and may even be bringing back Barnes and/or Pietrus.

Seen that act, thanks, and Nelson seems to have had his fill, too.