Before Derrick Rose, we had Baron

[PP34Deuce]

Honestly, I grew up watching Derrick Rose (I'm in Chicago) but I came across some highlights of a young Baron Davis......

Is it safe to say, Baron Davis was just as explosive from college to first 4 years in the league?

Baron was the same type of PG. Could be a floor general but also was just a great scoring PG. Derrick Rose has a slightly higher peak, but Baron was talented, freakish, and should have been HOF bound.

[Kblaze8855]

Ive got an hour or so of young Baron in Charlotte footage but its all shitty quality and I try not to use that anymore but yea....it does annoy me at times nobody remembering his nasty he was. Inconsistent to be fair...but he was spectacular. He was more of a playmaker than people remember too. He didnt always take so many shitty shots....not that they would be considered shitty today. He had modern shot selection at times but in a league that played insane defense. Bad combo. If a guy like Lillard tried to play the way he does now in 2003 he would shoot 38% too.

[aj1987]

Ive got an hour or so of young Baron in Charlotte footage but its all shitty quality and I try not to use that anymore but yea....it does annoy me at times nobody remembering his nasty he was. Inconsistent to be fair...but he was spectacular. He was more of a playmaker than people remember too. He didnt always take so many shitty shots....not that they would be considered shitty today. He had modern shot selection at times but in a league that played insane defense. Bad combo. If a guy like Lillard tried to play the way he does now in 2003 he would shoot 38% too.
:biggums: :biggums: :biggums: :biggums:

Dude was shooting like shit even AFTER the rule changes. Dude shot like 39% in '06. Shot a career low 37% in '09 as well. Pre rule change, he had a TS% of 49.8%. Post rule change, he had a TS% of 50.4% TS.

He's not even close to Lillard as a player.

[MrFonzworth]

:biggums: :biggums: :biggums: :biggums:

Dude was shooting like shit even AFTER the rule changes. Dude shot like 39% in '06. Shot a career low 37% in '09 as well. Pre rule change, he had a TS% of 49.8%. Post rule change, he had a TS% of 50.4% TS.

He's not even close to Lillard as a player.
Didnt you start watching basketball in 2010?

[LoneyROY7]

Ive got an hour or so of young Baron in Charlotte footage but its all shitty quality and I try not to use that anymore but yea....it does annoy me at times nobody remembering his nasty he was. Inconsistent to be fair...but he was spectacular. He was more of a playmaker than people remember too. He didnt always take so many shitty shots....not that they would be considered shitty today. He had modern shot selection at times but in a league that played insane defense. Bad combo. If a guy like Lillard tried to play the way he does now in 2003 he would shoot 38% too.

This f*cking guy just tried to equate Baron Davis and Damian Lillard's shooting ability. ISH is in great hands y'all.

:roll: :roll: :roll:

[aj1987]

Didnt you start watching basketball in 2010?
You have me confused with ArbitraryWater.

[coin24]

BDiddy was a stud, shame he went out with that savage knee injury in the end..
Had some explosive dunks earlier in his career:applause:

[MochaUdoka]

https://66.media.tumblr.com/c9ce787370b90a385df453cd695f5bb9/tumblr_ncx92hiLLi1rdqggno2_400.gif
https://media.giphy.com/media/UrEMFCKZeKtvcpiZq8/giphy.gif
We believe!

[ArbitraryWater]

You have me confused with ArbitraryWater.

:oldlol:

[imdaman99]

BDavis was the biggest reason they upset the Mavericks in the 1st round (8 beats a 1). Mavs just had no answer for him, I think they got Kidd after that series because they realized they needed a PG that could defend and not depend on some kid like Devin Harris just because he was a high draft pick.

[GOBB]

Baron was doing all of this in college. Loved when he dunked on KG in the nba

[Kblaze8855]

This f*cking guy just tried to equate Baron Davis and Damian Lillard's shooting ability. ISH is in great hands y'all.

:roll: :roll: :roll:


Shooting ability and the percentages you shoot are not the same thing. You simply will not shoot or have the same numbers versus teams allowed to play better defense in a league full of teams that try to limit positions and stretch out shot clocks so your stars have less opportunities.

You simply cannot look at the ease of guard play this year versus 99 to 2005 which was Hornets Baron and not see the difference.

You can’t look at a few years after that and not see the difference.

Lillard has shot 44% just twice in his career. Shooting in the upper 30s in a league with less Fastbreak opportunities and more physical defense isnt a stretch. Saying a guy would shoot worse in a league that had teams holding contenders to 56 points in the playoffs is not out of line. We had games where teams had 36 points entering the fourth quarter. A team with Shaq and Kobe on it scored like 65 points.

The difference between that and 150 point playoff games like we just saw is not talent. It’s the league deciding how to call games and shape the style of play.

Damian’s shooting falling from his 43% career numbers now into the 38-39 range if he tried to play like he does now is hardly an insult. For one....he wouldn’t play like he does now...so it’s a bit of a moot point. But he would not have had the spacing to even attempt it. And obviously given the more open lanes of today and Barons monstrous athletic ability and handles and the additional running? A layup up here and there change your shooting percentages drastically.

This isn’t just a question of how good either of them was at basketball. One is in a league that caters to small gourds and the other caught the tail end of a league that catered to big man. Anyone who saw Baron play knows he would flourish in this 50 screens open lanes stretch five style.

He would not have to be better to appear better like Damian wouldn’t have to be worse to shoot worse in his time.

[Haymaker]

Before Baron there was this guy called Robert Pack. Google him too.

[PP34Deuce]

Before Baron there was this guy called Robert Pack. Google him too.


I remember Robert Pack. He def wasn't the scorer Derrick or Baron was but he was a similar passer with better consistency defending.

Who was before Robert Pack?

[PP34Deuce]

Ive got an hour or so of young Baron in Charlotte footage but its all shitty quality and I try not to use that anymore but yea....it does annoy me at times nobody remembering his nasty he was. Inconsistent to be fair...but he was spectacular. He was more of a playmaker than people remember too. He didnt always take so many shitty shots....not that they would be considered shitty today. He had modern shot selection at times but in a league that played insane defense. Bad combo. If a guy like Lillard tried to play the way he does now in 2003 he would shoot 38% too.


Baron was truly a scoring PG. Dude had gamebreaking athletic ability just like Rose.

[LoneyROY7]

Shooting ability and the percentages you shoot are not the same thing. You simply will not shoot or have the same numbers versus teams allowed to play better defense in a league full of teams that try to limit positions and stretch out shot clocks so your stars have less opportunities.

You simply cannot look at the ease of guard play this year versus 99 to 2005 which was Hornets Baron and not see the difference.

You can’t look at a few years after that and not see the difference.

Lillard has shot 44% just twice in his career. Shooting in the upper 30s in a league with less Fastbreak opportunities and more physical defense isnt a stretch. Saying a guy would shoot worse in a league that had teams holding contenders to 56 points in the playoffs is not out of line. We had games where teams had 36 points entering the fourth quarter. A team with Shaq and Kobe on it scored like 65 points.

The difference between that and 150 point playoff games like we just saw is not talent. It’s the league deciding how to call games and shape the style of play.

Damian’s shooting falling from his 43% career numbers now into the 38-39 range if he tried to play like he does now is hardly an insult. For one....he wouldn’t play like he does now...so it’s a bit of a moot point. But he would not have had the spacing to even attempt it. And obviously given the more open lanes of today and Barons monstrous athletic ability and handles and the additional running? A layup up here and there change your shooting percentages drastically.

This isn’t just a question of how good either of them was at basketball. One is in a league that caters to small gourds and the other caught the tail end of a league that catered to big man. Anyone who saw Baron play knows he would flourish in this 50 screens open lanes stretch five style.

He would not have to be better to appear better like Damian wouldn’t have to be worse to shoot worse in his time.

Classic kblaze...a whole lotta paragraphs amounting to a whole lotta nothing. :oldlol: :oldlol:

Baron Davis never demonstrated even a remotely close level of jump shooting prowess in comparison to Lillard. Not in range, consistency, or spurtability.

Lillard has shooting range Davis could only dream about and an ability to hit from deep consistently that Baron never displayed at any point through out this career. Baron’s percentages as a jump shooter will be low, regardless of era, because he was not a good shooter. It’s fairly simple.

[Kblaze8855]

Which part of that has anything to do with it if he would shoot worse from the field in a league that catered to defenses? He’s A small high volume scoring guard. It will be incredibly difficult to play the way he does 20 years ago and shoot the same percentages he shoots now. That’s just the way it is.

What you think about the matchup between them as players or who is the better shooter has little to do with that. You don’t always have better shooting numbers than people who can’t shoot as well and the reasons should be obvious.

Your shooting percentage is not the same as your talent. The circumstances play a role. After years of talking all your shit before the playoffs and then watching James Harden shoot worse when it counts I figured you would know that by now. If only they had a big series next week so you would vanish for a month after.....

[DaHeezy]

I remember Robert Pack. He def wasn't the scorer Derrick or Baron was but he was a similar passer with better consistency defending.

Who was before Robert Pack?

Lol, hell no. The only comparison is hops. Pack isn't on the same level as players. You might as well have said Spud Webb.

If anything the original fearless bouncy scoring PG was Kevin Johnson

[LoneyROY7]

Which part of that has anything to do with it if he would shoot worse from the field in a league that catered to defenses? He’s A small high volume scoring guard. It will be incredibly difficult to play the way he does 20 years ago and shoot the same percentages he shoots now. That’s just the way it is.

What you think about the matchup between them as players or who is the better shooter has little to do with that. You don’t always have better shooting numbers than people who can’t shoot as well and the reasons should be obvious.

Your shooting percentage is not the same as your talent. The circumstances play a role. After years of talking all your shit before the playoffs and then watching James Harden shoot worse when it counts I figured you would know that by now. If only they had a big series next week so you would vanish for a month after.....

Baron had bad shot selection in the early 2000s. Baron would have bad shot selection in 2019. You know why? Because he wasn’t a good jump shooter and yet chose to take many long jumpers and 3-pointers.

Has Westbrook been shooting a high percentage in today’s NBA? I mean he must be because of all the spacing, right? Oh wait, he hasn’t been, because he’s not a good jump shooter and yet chooses to continue shooting them.

Like said, it’s fairly simple. I can’t have you continuing to masquerade long winded paragraphs as actual basketball iq.

[PP34Deuce]

Lol, hell no. The only comparison is hops. Pack isn't on the same level as players. You might as well have said Spud Webb.

If anything the original fearless bouncy scoring PG was Kevin Johnson

Kevin Johnson was a beast. I actually can't think of anyone similar to him in the league now. If Dame passed more, he'd prob be very similar.

Pack could play defense and distribute the ball.

[jayfan]

Honestly, I grew up watching Derrick Rose (I'm in Chicago) but I came across some highlights of a young Baron Davis......

Is it safe to say, Baron Davis was just as explosive from college to first 4 years in the league?

Baron was the same type of PG. Could be a floor general but also was just a great scoring PG. Derrick Rose has a slightly higher peak, but Baron was talented, freakish, and should have been HOF bound.

Yes, very safe to say. Probably more explosive. He was completely off the charts.


.

[DaHeezy]

Kevin Johnson was a beast. I actually can't think of anyone similar to him in the league now. If Dame passed more, he'd prob be very similar.

Pack could play defense and distribute the ball.

Pack had a cool bounce in his hops. He got up extremely quick. But he seemed more of a novelty to me then a legit scoring guard. Mark Jackson (Rauf), Bobby Jackson, Dee Brown, John Starks....all better scorers.

[Bosnian Sajo]

I 100% agree with the argument that it is difficult to compare a "good shooting percentage" from 99-05 to today's game...I agree with that point that kblaze made.

I agree that Baron Davis was super fun to watch and a baller, idc who you rooter for (sans Dallas), EVERYONE was a Warriors fan in 2007 lol.


But I can't agree with people arguing that he was better than Damian Lillard. Bro, Dame is that dude. You don't have to like him, but you have to respect his game. No matter who is on the team, he steps up and takes matters into his own hands when necessary. It's a damn shame they got swept in the conference finals. I didn't expect him to beat the warriors, but at least 2 wins would have done wonders for his reputation.

[Kblaze8855]

But I can't agree with people arguing that he was better than Damian Lillard. Bro, Dame is that dude.

Find the people arguing it for me. What I said was:


He didnt always take so many shitty shots....not that they would be considered shitty today. He had modern shot selection at times but in a league that played insane defense. Bad combo. If a guy like Lillard tried to play the way he does now in 2003 he would shoot 38% too.

Considering that in the year I referenced where Baron shot 38%(was actually 395% I thought he shot worse that year he was getting MVP talk early..03/04) AI shot 39, Tmac 41, Paul Pierce .402, and Vince Carter 41....

Its hardly remarkable that a shoot first combo guard who would be out of his element would also shoot poorly from the field. Kobe shot .438 that year and he had Shaq. Stackhouse 40, 41, and 40 for 3 years. Early 2000s a volume scorer got harassed into shooting about 43% no matter how talented he was and a lot of guys guys dipped a little below that despite not taking a high volume of threes. We made fun of Vince for becoming a soft jump shooter when the threes he took in 04? 27 bigmen took more this season. Lillard took over 800 threes counting the playoffs. The 04 Utah Jazz took 786.

The guys who shoot on the lower end of the 40s like Damian, Westbrook, and Kemba would be the guys shooting in the upper 30s like Baron and AI if they had to play teams that gave up 84-94 ppg and held opponents to low 40s shooting. The few less chances to run would be enough to knock the shooting down by itself.


Its like the 80s now....only we have guys taking threes to keep everyone from shooting 48-55%. And the guys like Giannis who dont take threes are shooting in the upper 50s.....

You dont just average the numbers your talent makes you capable of. You average the numbers the situation allows. All these guys would have to make some serious adjustments dropped into the early 2000s. The guys from those days?

They would have to run more pick and rolls but none of them would have trouble with it.

[Bosnian Sajo]

Find the people arguing it for me. What I said was:



Considering that in the year I referenced where Baron shot 38%(was actually 395% I thought he shot worse that year he was getting MVP talk early..03/04) AI shot 39, Tmac 41, Paul Pierce .402, and Vince Carter 41....

Its hardly remarkable that a shoot first combo guard who would be out of his element would also shoot poorly from the field. Kobe shot .438 that year and he had Shaq. Stackhouse 40, 41, and 40 for 3 years. Early 2000s a volume scorer got harassed into shooting about 43% no matter how talented he was and a lot of guys guys dipped a little below that despite not taking a high volume of threes. We made fun of Vince for becoming a soft jump shooter when the threes he took in 04? 27 bigmen took more this season. Lillard took over 800 threes counting the playoffs. The 04 Utah Jazz took 786.

The guys who shoot on the lower end of the 40s like Damian, Westbrook, and Kemba would be the guys shooting in the upper 30s like Baron and AI if they had to play teams that gave up 84-94 ppg and held opponents to low 40s shooting. The few less chances to run would be enough to knock the shooting down by itself.


Its like the 80s now....only we have guys taking threes to keep everyone from shooting 48-55%. And the guys like Giannis who dont take threes are shooting in the upper 50s.....

You dont just average the numbers your talent makes you capable of. You average the numbers the situation allows. All these guys would have to make some serious adjustments dropped into the early 2000s. The guys from those days?

They would have to run more pick and rolls but none of them would have trouble with it.

I don't know why you're listing that for me, I already told you I 100% agree that it is difficult to compare FG% back then to now.

As for the Lillard ordeal, I mistook your long posts for arguments pro Davis over Lillard. My b.

[NBAGOAT]

it doesnt matter if dame shoots like 39%. Unless you're assuming he has early 00's shot selection with all the long two's, he's going far more efficient than baron because 40% of his shots are from 3.

Even so he'll be better. he's just better than a career 32% 3 pt shooter in any era. 35% ish seems like a decent over/under number in the early 00s. He's better than baron's 36% from 16ft+ too. He's quite good with the long 2's even though he's not known for it like kyrie and doesnt take too many(45%+ the past 3 years). 40% seems like a good over/under in the early 00's.

think tougher defenses affects him less than others too since he takes a lot of contested 3's and 3's 3-4 feet beyond the line. People over adjust for shooting percentages too much sometimes. he's at the very least a far better nick van exel.

[Bosnian Sajo]

it doesnt matter if dame shoots like 39%. Unless you're assuming he has early 00's shot selection with all the long two's, he's going far more efficient than baron because 40% of his shots are from 3.

Even so he'll be better. he's just better than a career 32% 3 pt shooter in any era. 35% ish seems like a decent over/under number in the early 00s. He's better than baron's 36% from 16ft+ too. He's quite good with the long 2's even though he's not known for it like kyrie and doesnt take too many(45%+ the past 3 years). 40% seems like a good over/under in the early 00's.

think tougher defenses affects him less than others too since he takes a lot of contested 3's and 3's 3-4 feet beyond the line. People over adjust for shooting percentages too much sometimes. he's at the very least a far better nick van exel.


That's a good point.

But Baron was also a big three point shooter. In 2003-2004, he averaged 8.7 three point attempts per game, matching Lillard's peak 3pt att for a single season.

[Kblaze8855]

it doesnt matter if dame shoots like 39%. Unless you're assuming he has early 00's shot selection with all the long two's, he's going far more efficient than baron because 40% of his shots are from 3.

Even so he'll be better. he's just better than a career 32% 3 pt shooter in any era. 35% ish seems like a decent over/under number in the early 00s. He's better than baron's 36% from 16ft+ too. He's quite good with the long 2's even though he's not known for it like kyrie and doesnt take too many(45%+ the past 3 years). 40% seems like a good over/under in the early 00's.

think tougher defenses affects him less than others too since he takes a lot of contested 3's and 3's 3-4 feet beyond the line. People over adjust for shooting percentages too much sometimes. he's at the very least a far better nick van exel.


What I assume is that he simply would not play the way he plays now which is why I say it it

[NBAGOAT]

That's a good point.

But Baron was also a big three point shooter. In 2003-2004, he averaged 8.7 three point attempts per game, matching Lillard's peak 3pt att for a single season.

that's true i forgot about that year. it's just dame's better inside the arc too even adjusted for era and i dont think era is enough to make dame a comparable 3 pt shooter(especially with his crazy shot selection). It's not too different from saying eh curry plays in the easiest era for shooters so really he's not even better than ray allen as a shooter. It's just not true for most people eye test wise or even with era adjusted stats which do exist.

Our eyes tend to overestimate how much numbers change from year to year. On the flip side, a 1-2% jump is actually very significant and something fans will lazily round off.

I'll default to two points that I think are pretty irrefutable. First accounting for era, dame is above average and baron is below average efficiency wise. Doesnt mean there isnt more context to waft through but that's the default. Second ft percentage is one of the best indicators of how good you are as a shooter since defenses doesnt affect it at all. Dame shoots 89% from the line, baron shoots 71%...

[NBAGOAT]

[QUOTE=Kblaze8855]What I assume is that he simply would not play the way he plays now which is why I say it it

[Kblaze8855]

Well now we would be heading down a path where we have to figure out what we mean by efficient and what numbers we are choosing to apply. That he would shoot worse from the field in that league seems agreed on. The rest would require a much more fleshed out hypothetical.

[NBAGOAT]

Well now we would be heading down a path where we have to figure out what we mean by efficient and what numbers we are choosing to apply. That he would shoot worse from the field in that league seems agreed on. The rest would require a much more fleshed out hypothetical.

ik you dont like the number but ts%. It's the best default number to go to. If you think foul drawing really varies from era to era or dont like considering it, then I think efg% is pretty flawless.

[tpols]

[QUOTE=LoneyROY7]Baron had bad shot selection in the early 2000s. Baron would have bad shot selection in 2019. [B][COLOR="Red"]You know why? Because he wasn

[Real14]

Baron Davis in 01, 02, 03 and 07 was unbelievable.

[LoneyROY7]

wouldnt that change with it being much easier to get to the basket nowadays?

why would he have to settle?

B-diddy was a far better athlete than dame, even if he couldnt shoot like him.

Russell Westbrook. A far better athlete than both and still takes bad jumpers.

Davis never displayed good shot selection at any point in his career, therefore there's nothing to demonstrate that would change.

Edit: In fact, one could argue Davis' shot selection would be even worse in today's nba, considering he was already jacking almost 9 threes a game in 2003 when that wasn't encouraged at all during that time.

[PistonsFan#21]

Baron Davis was an athletic beast no doubt but he still wasn't as athletic as prime D-Rose. B-Diddy was definitely stronger but just a notch below when it comes to speed, vert and explosion in my opinion.