Artest to Lakers?

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

the one problem I foresee with the Cavs is that this might force LeBron to get a perimeter game, and thats just what every team needs, him having more weapons in his arsenal

In order for LeBron to get a better outside game he's going to have to retool his jump shot. He's got some pretty ugly form with it right now, which is why he's so inconsistent.

If he does add a jumper, more power to him, all the greats have to do it at some point to extend their career. I don't think he'll do it this year though. He'll find a way to work around Shaq taking up space, but I don't know if the Cavs will be better because of it.
 
kobe is gonna get pissed at artests stupid shots lol
 
Legit question Rizzle...do you (or L*ker fans in general) consider Bynum a "great scorer"? Or is it just K*be and Gasol that you're counting? I wouldn't put Odom or Fisher in that category, myself.
 
In order for LeBron to get a better outside game he's going to have to retool his jump shot. He's got some pretty ugly form with it right now, which is why he's so inconsistent.

If he does add a jumper, more power to him, all the greats have to do it at some point to extend their career. I don't think he'll do it this year though. He'll find a way to work around Shaq taking up space, but I don't know if the Cavs will be better because of it.
LeBron shot 34% from deep this past year, Kobe shot 35%. Do you share similar concerns about Bryant needing to retool the ugly form on his J to be able to to work around space eating Bynum?

Considering what they gave up and how well he played last year, Shaq's addition to the Cavs is a pretty big deal. For motivation, on top of coming to a legit contender and having his little ring race with Kobe, he's in a contract year...

STOMP
 
Last edited:
I am hoping the people saying Artest will deep six the Laker's chances this year are correct.

I just don't believe it myself. Artest in a 3 year, 18 million deal is a steal. It's actually the kind of deal Portland should make with a small forward.

Further, Artest will behave for a year or two. If he doesn't, Jackson will just bench his ass and have done with it. If that happens, they are only paying out 6 million a year. Ariza wanted more for longer.

I don't really see a downside to this deal from the Laker's standpoint. Every team has to take risks to get a title. I see this risk paying off for LA in a big way.


And it really, really pisses me off.
 
Listen, if you want to believe that Phil Jackson can't handle Ron Artest, then keep living in your fantasy world. I have 2 words for you: Dennis Rodman.

If Phil Jackson can keep him playing hard and not tearing the team up, I think Ron Artest will actually be simple for him to keep in line. He has the strong leadership up front with Kobe and Pau. Ron can just be a 3rd fiddle guy, which is what he actually loves to do.
 
Listen, if you want to believe that Phil Jackson can't handle Ron Artest, then keep living in your fantasy world. I have 2 words for you: Dennis Rodman.

If Phil Jackson can keep him playing hard and not tearing the team up, I think Ron Artest will actually be simple for him to keep in line. He has the strong leadership up front with Kobe and Pau. Ron can just be a 3rd fiddle guy, which is what he actually loves to do.

And I have 2 words for you: Michael Jordan.

Phil didn't keep Rodman in line, Jordan did.

The question is whether Kobe can do the same.
 
Legit question Rizzle...do you (or L*ker fans in general) consider Bynum a "great scorer"? Or is it just K*be and Gasol that you're counting? I wouldn't put Odom or Fisher in that category, myself.

Bynum has shown great strides until Memphis and Februarys come around (both injuries against MEM, both in Feb).

I think Bynum CAN be a great scorer but with all the firepower the Lakers now have he wont be as needed for scoring. Im not sure what to think about how much of an impact Bynum will have on the offensive end. He will have several 30+ppg this year, but there are so many damn options hs scoring wont be that high, just his FG% :ghoti:
 
And I have 2 words for you: Michael Jordan.

Phil didn't keep Rodman in line, Jordan did.

The question is whether Kobe can do the same.


Serious, Phil just collected his paycheck :crazy:

(yes Jordan did his part, but it wasnt everything)
 
you guys can be pissed all you want but this move seems like the Karl Malone move to me......

artest is older and already on the down turn of his career.....

they got rid of the young up and coming stud (maybe kobe felt threatened....)...

this just makes their window shorter....

plus artest has been a good boy for his contract...now he can do whatever he wants.....

you have to ask when will he punch kobe...phil...bynumb or JACK nickelson?

his is a tr00 gangsta that hates fakes...kobe....
 
Listen, if you want to believe that Phil Jackson can't handle Ron Artest, then keep living in your fantasy world. I have 2 words for you: Dennis Rodman.

If Phil Jackson can keep him playing hard and not tearing the team up, I think Ron Artest will actually be simple for him to keep in line. He has the strong leadership up front with Kobe and Pau. Ron can just be a 3rd fiddle guy, which is what he actually loves to do.
when has ron artest ever proven he can be a 3rd fiddle guy? last season with the rockets when he was the 3rd option, he was absolutely terrible(though tmac was far less than 100%). it wasn't until tmac shut it down and artest became the 2nd option(who sometimes forced himself in front of yao to take more shots) that he really had any positive impact.

phil jackson isn't a god. he can't turn a player into something he's not.

ron artest isn't going to have off the court problems. he probably isn't going to go crazy in the locker room or on the court. he's just going to be ron artest. and ron artest is a guy who needs a certain amount of shots to be happy, has poor shot selection, makes questionable(at best) decisions on the court, gets locked into one on one and trash talking battles with players far superior to him, and just in general thinks he is much better than he really is and deserve more touches than he actually does. after 10 years in the nba, all those things aren't just going to magically change.
 
ron artest isn't going to have off the court problems. he probably isn't going to go crazy in the locker room or on the court. he's just going to be ron artest. and ron artest is a guy who needs a certain amount of shots to be happy, has poor shot selection, makes questionable(at best) decisions on the court, gets locked into one on one and trash talking battles with players far superior to him, and just in general thinks he is much better than he really is and deserve more touches than he actually does. after 10 years in the nba, all those things aren't just going to magically change.

Kevin Pelton of Basketball Prospectus also agrees:

The success of the Los Angeles Lakers’ signing of Ron Artest, first reported in a major coup by CBSSportsline.com’s Ken Berger, all comes down to possessions. As in, will Artest be willing and able to use fewer of them? Artest was essentially dealt for incumbent small forward Trevor Ariza, which may be formalized if Ariza ends up signing with the Rockets to replace Artest. Last year, Ariza used 16.7 percent of the Lakers’ possessions while on the floor. Artest used 24.7 percent of Houston’s possessions, and has been over 23 percent every year since 2002-03.

If Artest plays to his tendencies, it’s hard to see where those possessions would come from, especially when he is on the floor alongside the high-possession Bryant. I’m of the belief that possession usage is in many ways as much a skill as anything else, not something that can be largely dictated by coaches. Using a ton of possessions is in Artest’s DNA just as much as physical defense or crazy quotes.

This would be OK if Artest was more efficient with said possessions, but his 51.2 percent True Shooting is well below average (and below Ariza’s 54.4 percent mark from last season, which he upped in the playoffs when he improbably developed into a lights-out three-point shooter). The Lakers are trading more efficient possessions from Ariza and other players for less efficient ones.

Artest is a good passer when motivated, but that willingness has long been in question. The worst thing that can happen in the triangle is for the ball to stop in one place. That’s justified for Bryant, but not for Artest. Optimistically, Bryant and Phil Jackson will be able to keep Artest’s worst tendencies in check, but pessimistically he could work against much of what the Lakers are trying to do on offense.

http://www.basketballprospectus.com/unfiltered/?p=273
 
Artest is clearly a better defender Minstrel, and his offense should be slightly more efficient here. 54 TS% for the low amount of shots Ariza took is comparable to Artest's production.
 
Last edited:
Artest is clearly a better defender Minstrel

He was a clearly better defender in his prime. I definitely think he's not the same caliber of defender he was in Indiana. He's still a quite good defender, but not clearly better than Ariza.

and his offense should be slightly more efficient here. 54 TS% for the low amount of shots Ariza took

The whole point, though, is that Artest is not necessarily willing to take fewer shots. He's always felt he should be a featured offensive player. After actually being one in Houston (after McGrady was out of the picture due to injury), I doubt he's less interested in that. If he forces shots at the expense of shot opportunities for Kobe, Gasol and Bynum, then he's going to adversely affect the offense in place of Ariza, not help.
 
He was a clearly better defender in his prime. I definitely think he's not the same caliber of defender he was in Indiana. He's still a quite good defender, but not clearly better than Ariza.



The whole point, though, is that Artest is not necessarily willing to take fewer shots. He's always felt he should be a featured offensive player. After actually being one in Houston (after McGrady was out of the picture due to injury), I doubt he's less interested in that. If he forces shots at the expense of shot opportunities for Kobe, Gasol and Bynum, then he's going to adversely affect the offense in place of Ariza, not help.

Ariza is a good team defender, he's mediocre otherwise. I don't see how Artest isn't clearly better to be honest. LA needed a defender for bulky SF types to extend Bryant's career. If they signed Ariza to more or waited longer, they could have lost LO.

Artest could take the same shots and be more efficient. He didn't play with a team this good, and he'll be the fourth option teams plan for.
 
Last edited:
Ariza is a good team defender, he's mediocre otherwise. I don't see how Artest isn't clearly better to be honest. LA needed a defender for bulky SF types to extend Bryant's career. If they signed Ariza to more or waited longer, they could have lost LO.

I'm not arguing that they should have signed Ariza for more money or waited. I'm simply saying that I don't think it's clear that this move makes LA significantly better on defense. I agree that Artest is better against stronger opponents. I think he's lost some quickness, though, so he's not as good against quick wings as Ariza is.

Artest could take the same shots and be more efficient. He didn't play with a team this good, and he'll be the fourth option teams plan for.

It's really not a question of whether Artest will be more efficient than he was. It's whether LA will be more or less efficient as a team than last year. If Artest is taking the same percentage of shots as he did before, it'll be more than Ariza took, which means shots are going to be taken from other players. Since LA rationally weighted the offense toward their most efficient options, most of those shots were taken by Kobe, Gasol and Odom. Fewer shots for them and more shots for Artest is not a good development for the LA offense.

If it helps LA retain Odom (because Artest cost less than Ariza), then it's a good move, because Odom is quite important to LA's success. But I don't think Artest, himself, represents a major upgrade over Ariza.
 
I'm not arguing that they should have signed Ariza for more money or waited. I'm simply saying that I don't think it's clear that this move makes LA significantly better on defense. I agree that Artest is better against stronger opponents. I think he's lost some quickness, though, so he's not as good against quick wings as Ariza is.

Yes Bryant and Roy tearing him up probably gives you doubt about Ron, but Trevor's defensive strengths are redundant on the Lakers. He also is clearly not the defender Artest is even against more favorable matchups. We stole him from Cleveland too which is a plus. :]

It's really not a question of whether Artest will be more efficient than he was. It's whether LA will be more or less efficient as a team than last year. If Artest is taking the same percentage of shots as he did before, it'll be more than Ariza took, which means shots are going to be taken from other players. Since LA rationally weighted the offense toward their most efficient options, most of those shots were taken by Kobe, Gasol and Odom. Fewer shots for them and more shots for Artest is not a good development for the LA offense.

If it helps LA retain Odom (because Artest cost less than Ariza), then it's a good move, because Odom is quite important to LA's success. But I don't think Artest, himself, represents a major upgrade over Ariza.

I'll concur that Artest has to be controlled offensively somewhat, but I don't think he'll be as awful as some are saying. He just can't handle being the #1, #2 option on offense. He should fit in more comfortably into this role, and he's proven he can be more efficient.
 
He also is clearly not the defender Artest is even against more favorable matchups.

We'll have to agree to disagree. ;)

I'll concur that Artest has to be controlled offensively somewhat, but I don't think he'll be as awful as some are saying. He just can't handle being the #1, #2 option on offense.

He can't handle it, but he wants that role. I don't think he'll be "awful," just that his offensive gifts aren't that high-level, but his over-confidence in his own abilities are quite likely to lead him to take shots outside the system and hurt the Lakers' efficiency a bit.
 
I'll concur that Artest has to be controlled offensively somewhat, but I don't think he'll be as awful as some are saying. He just can't handle being the #1, #2 option on offense. He should fit in more comfortably into this role, and he's proven he can be more efficient.
where are you getting the idea that artest will fit in more comfortably in a lesser offensive role? is there any evidence from artest's basketball career that this would be the case?
 
So you see, ladies and gentlemen...

Upgrading, on a single-player scale, from a pretty good defender to a great defender automatically vaults you into '96 Bulls territory and ensures you a ring for the coming season.
 
where are you getting the idea that artest will fit in more comfortably in a lesser offensive role? is there any evidence from artest's basketball career that this would be the case?

Sacramento? He played with Bibby, Miller, and Martin on the perimeter and was more efficient. In Houston he thought he had to carry Houston after T-Mac went down and did worse. He's better off here, he won't see the same kind of defenses.

Minstrel said:
We'll have to agree to disagree.

I'll let you move on then if you feel we won't get anywhere. ;)

Anyway, Ariza has missed 110 games in the three years before his contract year. That troubles me a little bit sir, I think this might actually be the less risky move. God bless Trevor though good luck to him. :]
 
Serious, Phil just collected his paycheck :crazy:

(yes Jordan did his part, but it wasnt everything)

Jordan did quite a bit in the locker room. But hey, believe if you want that Phil is god. Give me two of the top five players in basketball and let's see how I do.
 
So you see, ladies and gentlemen...

Upgrading, on a single-player scale, from a pretty good defender to a great defender automatically vaults you into '96 Bulls territory and ensures you a ring for the coming season.

Well we won 65 games already, 81 total and a title... Oh wow LA really sucks, not even close to that level with an upgrade or two.
 
Last edited:
I'll let you move on then if you feel we won't get anywhere. ;)

Simply noting that we hold divergent opinions on that score and neither of us is making a new point. ;) You think Artest is clearly better on defense, today, than Ariza. I don't. Repeating those positions back and forth can be summed up as "We disagree and haven't convinced the other."

Anyway, Ariza has missed 110 games in the three years before his contract year. That troubles me a little bit sir, I think this might actually be the less risky move.

That's reasonable, though most of Ariza's missed time came in 2007-08 and he showed no ill effects of it last season. Artest has missed a lot of time, too, over the past 4 seasons and will be on the wrong side of 30 next season. So which player is the greater injury risk is hard to say.
 
Simply noting that we hold divergent opinions on that score and neither of us is making a new point. ;) You think Artest is clearly better on defense, today, than Ariza. I don't. Repeating those positions back and forth can be summed up as "We disagree and haven't convinced the other."



That's reasonable, though most of Ariza's missed time came in 2007-08 and he showed no ill effects of it last season. Artest has missed a lot of time, too, over the past 4 seasons and will be on the wrong side of 30 next season. So which player is the greater injury risk is hard to say.

It is cool man. :smiley-peace:

What bothers me though is that Ron at least gets starter's minutes. You'd figure Trev could handle the load with the spare energy guy off the bench type of playing time. I do wish him well, he just needs a new agent. :]
 
When have Phil Jackson teams had more than two options on offense? I guess Tony Kukoc might have counted as option 3, but not really. Look at what happened to the careers of these "inspired" acquisitions to Jackson teams:

Glenn Rice
Mitch Richmond
Karl Malone
Gary Payton
JR Rider (believe it or not, Rider still had a little bit of a career before he came to the Lakers).

Jackson's system is two great players and a bunch of role players. If you're a versatile third player under Jackson, you become a role player or you sit. Ron Harper is actually another example: Jackson sat him in favor of Pete Myers until Harper completely altered his game.

This is going to be fun!
 
or gets you the karl malone lakers....

Yeah. That team sucked.

They only won 56 games (six more than the year before) and LOST in the NBA Finals.

What a disgraceful performance on their part!

Ed O.
 
Yeah. That team sucked.

They only won 56 games (six more than the year before) and LOST in the NBA Finals.

What a disgraceful performance on their part!

And part of that was due to Karl Malone getting hurt in the WCF. Had he not been hurt, it may well have resulted in a championship.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top