Battier went 1-9 and 0-6 from 3PT in a loss against Charlotte this season... pathetic stat line, but you have to consider his entire body of work. Ariza excels as a 4th or 5th option -- how do you explain his season in '06/'07: 14.3 points and 7 rebounds/36 minutes, 16.2 PER, 56.7 true shooting %. Or, his breakout campaign during the Lakers playoff run to a world title: 11.3 PPG, 4.2 RPG, 2.3 APG, 49.7 FG%, 47.6 3PT%, while consistently locking down the opposing team's featured wing... don't forget, he shot 42% from 3PT in the series v. the Magic.
Well, for one thing, Ariza attempted a total of 7 threes during that 06/07 season in 57 games. He was taking 6 threes per game last year and 4 per game this year. As for his playoff run with the Lakers, that's easy to explain: he was playing for a big payday.
It was obvious to some of us that moving Ariza in favor of Lee was a smart basketball decision but even I didn't think it would be this smart.
Lee was a bad signing CLEARLY to cut costs! Ariza provided better IQ, ball handling, and high efficient scoring.
Jordan Hill has his minutes affected according to how he plays. How come the same standards are not being applied to Bud? Im sick and tried of wathcing him play 25 MPG. Trash!
New Orleans thought they were getting 2010 version of Bruce Bowen(defensive specialist that takes shots as the last option), but they got a chucker with above average defense, SF version of Alston.
Me either. While thought it was mainly a money saving move and a move to get Martin a backup (I didn't think JT was ready), I did question trading a starter for a backup. Overall I was giving it a C- but today I'd give it an A. Most signing mistakes cost you to unload. DM turned his mistake into an asset (sorry Jeff) that will be hard to part with.
The thing is that Ariza probably shouldn't even be a starter. He was only a part-time starter for the Lakers. So it was really trading a backup quality player who played starter minutes for a backup.
Well, fans always overrate "starters" just for starting. Remember the Alston/Lowry trade? Even those who hated on Alston during his entire career here were weary of the trade. Simply because it was a "starter on a good team for a backup on a bad team" trade. Ironically enough, the exact same scenario repeated itself and people once again had the same reaction.
Ariza reminds me of former Jazz players that got traded and floundered about 10 years ago. Guys like Eisley that were good roleplayers and excelled in the playoffs for the Jazz. Other teams tried to expand their roles as 6th men or starters and they got exposed. The difference was that these other players had a few good seasons, while Ariza had one good season in a contract year.
What should have stood out more to people was that the Lakers let their starting SF walk AFTER winning a Championship.
and they got a guy who shoots just as bad. guess that position for the lakers isn't that crucial offensively.
I believe there was a fuss about it. Ariza wanted more than what the Lakers were offering, which was slightly above the MLE level, told the Lakers he had our MLE offer as a back-up but the Lakers didn't bite so he walked. We actually offered a SnT with Ron for Ariza to keep the MLE intact but the Lakers wanted none of it.
