[David Aldridge] NBA TV: Houston trying to trade for Ron Artest

I still have trouble wrapping my mind around posters reluctancy to give up Battier and brooks for a elite player.

I like shane, but artest does everything better than him by two. Artest is a better scorer and defender and that's not even debatable. Artest is consistently going to give u 15 to 17 ppg and play great defense. He's a tough guy and great competitor. Here posters are fretting over 2 utility guys. U can go find a backup pg. Watson,West are availible. Make the trade and move on.

 

Iverson and Brooks are the exact same height. What possibly made you think Iverson was 3 inches taller? They are both NBA 6-footers, just under 6 feet w/out shoes.

 

I'd have no problem giving up Battier since Artest does just about everything Battier does (other than 3pt shooting and shot-blocking) and does it better.

Having said that, I don't think the Artest trade is happening at this point. Rumors are floating around that the Rockets are now interested in Kurt Thomas.

 

this is the same team who wouldn't include Rodrick Rhodes to get Damon Stoudamire

 

A couple points:

1. You guys that say Shane/Artest can't gaurd point guard have very short memories. Go back and watch us play Utah and Golden State......this year, for starters. You'll find Shane checking both DWill and BDiddy.

2. Our trade pieces are James (I don't think he's tradable), Francis, Snyder, Hayes (hate to lose him but if we dealt for Artest, he's obsolete, he should be included in the trade), Luther, and future draft picks. I personally do not think that Brooks and Landry are on the table in any deals.

3. It's a buyer's market right now. There are more guys available than places to go, Artest, Mike Miller, Andre Miller, Szczerbiak, Vince Carter. LA, PHX, and Dallas are out of the market, they've got their guys, and Utah is probably out of the market too at this point, unless they could find a one-sided deal for AK-47 (the only guy that would make sense for them would be Artest, problem is Sac doesn't want to take back Kirilenko's deal). It's basically us and Denver, possibly Indiana, looking to upgrade. And it's Memphis, Sacramento, New Jersey, New York, Milwaukee, and others looking to dump salary.


Knowing the above and combining that knowledge with how Les has historically ran his business, I seriously doubt we are going to overextend ourselves and jump into luxury tax territory. I think we are holding out for an upgrade.......but it's gonna be on our terms both player wise and salary cap wise. In light of that, any deal bringing a major talent to us is going to require a change in business philosophy for Les. It is very difficult to see that happening, unless Les is convinced that a deal brings us a title. Knowing that a deal for Artest becomes verify difficult right there. Iti s going to be very difficult to make the argument to Les that acquiring Artest would make us overwhelming favorites to win the title. There's simply too much competition in the West. At best, you could make an argument that Artest gives us equal footing to win the title along with about 6 other teams, SA, Detroit, PHX, Dallas, LA, and Utah. Secondly, in light of the fact that it is a buyer's market right now, Morey ain't gonna give up any talent he doesn't have to. If.........Denver makes a move for either Artest or Miller.....or Vince Carter, then all of a sudden two of either Sacramento, Memphis, New Jersey, gets that much more antsy to make a deal go down. With that in mind, at least one more player is likely to be traded for peanuts. That is to say, maybe one young player, expirings, and draft picks. If we want to get a player that we feel puts over the top and are willing to pay the lux tax, then some combination of Snyder, Francis, Luther, Hayes, along with a draft pick should be able to net us either Artest or Mike Miller. And if we throw in James and another pick, we should be able to step up to get Carter or possibly Wally S and Delonte W if Seattle is really wanting to chop salary off for next season.


Summing it all up. I think it's a buyer's market and we can get a great piece if Les is willing to step into luxury tax and feels like we can win it all. It will all come down to whether Les wants to pay the tax because I believe a deal is there to be made based on the talent pool that is available.


Hypothetically if we added Artest without giving up Battier, Brooks, or Landry, here's your minutes.

Yao-30
McGrady-30
Artest-30
Battier-30
Scola-25-30
Landry 20-30
Bonzi 25-30
Rafer 20-30
Brooks 20-30

There's a very stiff 9 man rotation, keeping everybody fresh and always having offense and defense out there. May be just a little bit short on 3 point shooting but I doubt it. Our 3 point shots will be even more open, just a matter of banging them down.

Take out Artest and add Mike Miller, same minute distribution, just more offense and less defense, and our 3 point shooting becomes a strength.

 

You are ignoring a relevant detail. We'd only have Artest for half a season, while we'd be losing the multi-year services of Battier and Brooks. If we were just trading their expiring contracts for Artest's, then it would make a lot more sense.

 

there is also the small matter of artests contract situation versus shane's longer reasonable deal, artest being a headcase versus shane being a good guy, shane being the defensive captain of your team, and the potential to royally screw up a season that's finally going right.

the basketball part of basketball is important but so are the interpersonal and contractual aspects.

is ron artest at $15M a year (or whatever it was he wanted) THAT much better than shane at $7M a year? do you want three players taking up your entire cap? will he fit with the team? would he resign here anyway? these are important questions before going out and signing artest.

 

You are right. I totally forgot about that. The Rockets are in a win now mode. The Battier trade shows that. Luckily, all three of the '07 rookies panned out, but I think Brooks has the least upside of them. And please people (not you Beck), don't compare him to CP3. The only thing AB has in common with him is height.

I would like to add that I'm in favor of trading AB only if Battier is not included in the deal.

 

If we can get artest and for him to sign long term deal...we could be the western conference's Boston Celtics....ha!

 

This isn't a rotisserie fantasy league trade. There actual drawbacks of trading your rotation players for a headcase that can leave after the season is over.

It's like what Lebron said, you can have all the superstars on a team (I'm counting Artest as a superstar), but you have to have the right type of players around them.

Roderick Rhodes, meh. Now that I would have had no problem trading, I didn't see anything special in him like I do with Brooks and Landry. I thought that deal was Elie for Stoudemire anyways.

 

As long as we have a backup point guard. This works all day for me. I value AB's ability to handle the ball. Because we've seen what happens to the is team without a ball handler when Rafer's on the bench. Luther Head at the Point anyone? I doubt it

 

Bottom Line: Trust Morey and RA

In a very short amount of time, Morey has proved himself to be smarter than every 5th grader plus just about every board member as well.

And RA has shown us that he can adapt, he knows how to coach on the fly, his system WORKS, and that the players will buy into it. It's been fun to watch this year (08), once the guys understood what they are doing.

Maybe Brooks will be something special in this league, maybe he won't. But it seems clear that Morey and Adelman believe that he can be, so that's pretty much good enough for me.

As for Artest, yeah, he's a bear, and *IF* you could have a guy with Artest's body and skills and determination, but remove his tiny little brain and put in someone's like Battier's or Hayes', then we'd really have something.

But Artest, as ferocious as he is, has never done anything in the playoffs to lead anyone to believe that he would be 'that final piece' that could put a team over the top. In fact, a case could be made that having Artest would make opposing coaches' jobs easier - everyone knows that at the end of a close game, Artest is going to try to take every shot himself - and while he did have some success against us the other night, they still lost, and when you know that one guy is going to try to beat you by himself, you can probably overcome that. That thought definitely does not fill me with warm fuzzies.

In addition to that, would Artest then need a half-a-season to get acclimated into the team's system? Little late for that at this point.

Ultimately, the Rockets are dealing with any scenario from a position of strength: we are winning now, on a roll, and absolutely NOBODY would want to see us in the playoffs. That's without making any moves at all. So while we may be in a position of trying to 'tweak' the roster a bit, get rid of the few pieces of dead wood we still have lying around, we are not in desperation mode, and we certainly don't need to overpay.

Now if Morey finds a deal for Artest, then I will hope, along with everybody else, that it works out for the best, in our favor.

But I still have a bad taste in my mouth from Randy Johnson and Beltran - we gave up too much for what we ultimately got, in both cases, and were left holding an empty bag in the end. (Yes, I know the team ultimately continued to have success after those deals were over, but imagine if we had kept the players we gave up in those deals)

So hopefully Morey will not make his first big blunder in the next 24 hours or so, and we can all take a deep breath and focus on the playoffs..

(Question for everyone: If DM had been in charge of the draft instead of CD and JVG, would Morey have done the Battier deal? Or kept Gay? I doubt he has every said so publicly one way or the other, just wondering what people think)

 

Here's an update:

http://www.sacbee.com/static/weblogs/sports/kings/archives/010679.html

 

I like aaron brooks, but I'd ship him in a hot minute for Ron Ron.......

 

Aaron Brooks is nice but Ron Artest is nicer. I think Darryl Morey said in an interview a few weeks ago it is best to deal when the team is winning as opposed to losing. If all it will take is Brooks plus contract filler to get it done I do that everytime I have a chance.

 

Luther or bust. I would not part with Brooks, Scola, or Landry in any deal. They represent too much value for their salary. Luther, Hayes, Francis, Snyder, plus a draft pick for Artest is all. We'll give Sac our first and second and they can send back their second if they want to. I'd even be willing to give Sac two future firsts if we can get a commitment from Artest to re-sign here for $40 mill over 4 years. But no to Brooks, Landry, and Scola on that deal.

 

one problem to trade batter..... THE CHINESE SPONSOR.. Don't forget it

 

Addition of Artest would give us a legit chance to win it all this year.

I see Kings demanding Battier, exprings, and Brooks for Artest. Brooks might turn out to be good, but he doesnt make us a championship contender this year. I hate to lose Battier, really hate it, but I would still pull the trigger, mainly because Artest is a denfensive monster as well. He is an upgraded Battier.

If Artest opts out, which I dont see happening if we win this year, it's still all good. Next year free agent pool is strong, with our winning record we can easily attract good free agents, and might even persuade them to take less money for the win.

So, morey, pull the trigger.

 

There is no problem. Les invested in Anta. Peak is Anta's competitor

 

Maybe Artest can get a huge record deal in China. He could easily become a rap superstar in China!