Pre March 5, 2007: Arenas or Baron?

[GQ Hot Dog]

I understand your response.

If you are saying Arenas is the better player, which I believe you did, that settles it for me. You should change your vote to reflect that but I will understand if you choose not to.

That's very civil and balanced of you. I swing between being frustrated as all get out and having a ton of respect for you.

You're basically right. Arenas is a better shooter than Baron and at this point in their careers probably a little better finisher although we all know that Baron is a very good finisher around the bucket. They are both very strong, physical guards and both are very good ball-handlers. Baron is a little better defensively but both take a lot of chances and get caught for it. But Baron is a better pure PG/floor general than Arenas and call me old fashioned but I put a lot of importance in that. Probably more importance than Nellie would, I'm guessing Nellie would rather have Arenas.

[Subaculta]

Without "Other," Baron's homer defenders run for the hills.

no, without "other" you've made it a choice of whether you'd like to overpay for Arenas (who will never be the best player on a championship team), or overpay for Baron (who will play out his next contract much like this past one... only difference is he'll have a harder time bouncing back from injuries when he's in his 30's).

I'll take neither of them and save the money for a true difference maker.

[Chris Cohan]

I don't think there's any question that, under a real life scenario, the Warriors would choose to build around Arenas and Ellis instead of Baron and Ellis or Baron and Arenas - Baron would not sign on for less than Arenas but he will never be worth more and he's not a great fit next to Ellis in truth. They've made it work here and there but Baron can't play off the ball at all and played defense for only about half the season. This and more will show up as serious limitations this year as Ellis asserts himself and improves while Baron plays out his big money final year.

I'm not a fan of paying anyone max money and, good as Arenas is, he has serious flaws I don't like and I would not want the team handcuffed all over again unless it's to a 20/10 power forward with a letter from David Stern guaranteeing championships.

There is considerable ambivalence toward Baron Davis due to the inconsistency and selfishness he has exhibited, though he was a savvy star pickup for a star-starved franchize that totally ate it up and put lots of extra money into management's pocke. And Chris Mullin, by all accounts, is a player-level executive who has his own way of staying close to players and enjoying the company of big personalities. Baron is certainly that, even if he's a bit of an absentee team presence here and there.

But there are new stars on the rise, Arenas has more star power than Baron, and the on court product is seriously considered superior with a more reliable, consistent, and self-motivating player like Arenas in tow.

I think these questions are to be expected right now, since Arenas and Davis are closely related in terms of current contract negotiations, and the only scenario under which Baron wins is if you fully expect him to move on as total cash savings at the end of the season and do not support and major max money financial commitments right now, period. I have to be honest, under those conditions I agree with others and choose the one year Baron.

But if Arenas comes back as strong as I suspect he will, I might very well change my opinion if his on court game is matured to the top 10 or 15 player level he's capable of.

We'll see.

[mistatwo mayn]

Baron then and now....

Not a big fan of Arenas' game.