NBA Amnesty Clause: Chicago Bulls Should Pursue Baron Davis If Cavaliers Cut Him
Davis, 32, could be an amnesty casualty for the Cavaliers, as was speculated in this ESPN article. Cleveland is looking to trim some payroll and Davis is due $27 million over the next two seasons.
While it's a long shot to say that the Bulls would land Davis, his abilities should persuade the Chicago to heavily pursue him.
The 6'3" Davis is a point guard by nature, but he could slide over to the No. 2 position and play alongside point guard Derrick Rose to form a top backcourt.
The Bulls' trio of Keith Bogans, Kyle Korver and Ronnie Brewer are all nice role players, but none of them have proved to be top athletes at the two-guard position. Bogans is a good defender, but his six points per game scoring average will not open the floor for Rose.
Davis is a solid, consistent scorer whose career average is 16.5 points per game with 7.3 assists. He is a career 41 percent shooter and is at 32.1 percent from three-point land. He does force some shots, but there would be less pressure on him to score as he would be the Bulls' third option behind Rose and Deng.
Should the Chicago Bulls pursue Baron Davis if the Cleveland Cavaliers amnesty him?
Davis is a good slasher who will drive to the hoop. He is also a good ball handler and would give Rose room to play off the ball more to create more isolation opportunities.
Defense is important for Bulls coach Tom Thibodeau, and Davis can play well defensively when he is motivated. He is a good shot blocker and stealer who has the size to check shooting guards.
However, Davis has been known to play uninspired defense; opposing guards have high scoring averages on him. If Thibodeau can straighten Davis out, he would be a valuable defensive asset.
While shooting guard is not Davis' natural position, he would be a good signing for the Bulls. That is, if Chicago can outbid teams like the Lakers and Heat, who would love to have Davis on their team.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?