I like Artest. In one game last year T-Mac and Artest went on a scoring duel head to head. Rockets won but that was a fun game to watch. Artest brings so much in terms of defense and scoring that I think we would average over 100 ppg. We would also be better defensively because we would have two guys who would be defensive stoppers in Battier and Artest.
Bipolar Ron is not a good player for this squad. He's going to play the 4 spot, right. It still doesn't solve the fact that our point guard can't shoot or finish at the rim. We're one point guard away from competing.
i think more than that. the PF position is still horrible and there is no true sg (i think tmac works best at sf).
Ok, who would you rather have? Steven Jackson who was firing a gun in the air at Strip Club. Also a major instigator of the fight at the Palace or Ron Artest who was in a domestic disturbance dispute with his live in girlfriend/wife. The nonfeeding of the dog was not his fault by the way. That dog was sick and was losing weight and he had paid someone to take care of it. Suspended for a year for the fight at the Palace.
no, that would be rafer (running floaters = diarrhea) and battier (inability to score on his own = constipation). head could be constipation too.
Pick your poison...I'd do it, but that's just me... Hell, I just want someone that can ball and get us past the first round...
My take on this is that Stephen Jackson helped the Warriors immensely. Without him, I doubt they would even have made the playoffs. So why not take a chance on Artest?
Sounds an awful lot like picking up Bonzi last year... looks like a great price, but it's really a one-year rental of a headcase who may end up providing little to nothing. I'd still do it, though, because similar to the Bonzi pick-up, it has a potential reward greater than the risk we're taking.
Does Artest really only have one year left on his contract? If that's the case it makes it less attractive, BUT I think we still do it. We don't really give up much - Snyder who is good and we got him cheap, but no huge loss; V-Span an unproven quantity who is a malcontent anyway; a first round pick which is certainly unproven and we haven't had a lot of luck with our first round picks in a while, and of course Sura who we will "give up" either way. Low risk high reward, I'd do that trade real quick
Anytime you can get an All-Star for a bunch of of bench warming scrubs you do it. It's not like Snyder/Span/Sura provided any real value at all last year. With Artest, I believe we could've stopped Boozer from scoring at will on us.
Does anyone know the soonest this deal can be made (i.e. when trades can start happening) so I can sleep better at night? Also, I do NOT like the idea of Artest at the 4. In spot minutes sure, but he is a three and he is most efficient as a three. I know that he may be our best option at the 4 spot because we have no one, but I think Artest would be best suited to play the 3 with Hayes still strarting and Battier coming off the bench as a 6th man (until we find a replacement 4).
I think 1st of July is when they can start talking to free agents/ verbally agreeing to deals but actually signing is a few weeks later.
Try to think it another way: Artest is probably wonna shot 9 times out of 10 if he had the ball... He can surely play defense but he wants to be the offense focus as well, that is why he can not get along with JO and later, Bibby.
If the Tim Duncan & the Spurs couldn't do it, what makes you think that Ron Artest can? Yeah, he's a great defender, but not typically of power forwards. Taking out his worst game from each series 9everyone allowed one bad game)... Against the Rockets, Boozer averaged 26.8ppg, 54% shooting, 10.8 rpg Against the Spurs, Boozer averaged 24.5ppg, 56% shooting, 12 rpg Of course, I'm not saying Artest wouldn't be an improvement defensively for the team as a whole, I just don't necessarily think he solves the PF issue. Picking him up would be a great move, as it makes us a better team overall, primarily with more offensive weapons, secondarily with better overall and perimeter team defense, and indirectly through giving us a deeper bench, more "spunk", better rebounding, improved ballhandling, passing, etc, etc. We would have beaten Utah with Artest in much the same way the Spurs did it. Not by completing stopping Boozer, or Williams (who dominated the Spurs considerably more-son than he did the Rockets), but by having a much improved supporting cast. You think Okur played bad against the Rockets. He shot 28% against the Spurs, grabbed less 5 boards a game, scored 7.2 ppg - he went from bad to ridiculous. AK47? His overall stats (ppg, rpb) went up, but his shooting dropped 0.5% and his 3 point shooting, at 50% vs. us in the 1st round, drops to 33% against the Spurs. Matt Harpring? He killed us. Against the Spurs, performance drops. Derek Fisher? Same story. All the meanwhile, the Spurs average 10 more ppg against the Jazz then we did, even though they let the Jazz score more per game. Anyway, back to the original point. Artest will help...a LOT. Against PF's, who knows though.
The Rockets need to get more athletic and find reliable veteran jump shooters. But of course they will settle on the unrelaible non scoring threat defensive forward. Come on people you don't need Artest..
I have to disagree because he can shut down Dirk, Marion/Diaw, Gasol, and whoever GS has at the 4, of the playoff teams. Only Boozer and Duncan are big enough to dominate him, and even then, he can atleast make them work on the other end, something our other alternatives at the spot won't be able to do. Ultimately, I think Ron Artest at the '4' would go the furthest in improving this team's versatility.
