Was getting Artest worth it?

You're not looking at the bigger picture DD. Our players got valuable playoff experience, especially from taking the Lakers to game 7. We now have a taste of playoff success and it will only help the development of our players. Especially Aaron Brooks.

 

how many times are you going to post about this? moving on....

i'd do it all over again and again and again...

 

Great point, but it was the first round, dude!!!

 

I'll have to agree with everyone who's going against DD because frankly, their arguments are perfectly logical. How hard is it to grasp the fact that we traded a bunch of scrubs for a proven veteran that brought us out of the second round? We still got some pretty decent picks in the end (budinger etc), and we even got a promising young talent that is Ariza. We didn't get Artest for nothing, if we did actually trade him before the deadline or offseason we probably wouldn't have gotten much back either. I thought what happened during and after Artest's time in Houston has been great.

 

Agree with most of the list but Scola? What the hell are you talking about. He is single handily the most consecutive player we have. Great boards, get points, team player. And where the hell is Loren Woods, Vasileios Spanoulis, Jake Tsakalidis, or hell in Scott Padgett. At least some of these players made the team a little better.

 

I think bringing Ron here when we did for what we gave up was the right move.

We were looking to add a solid option outside of Tracy and Yao, more D, another man to work in the paint, and protect Yao. Depending how it all worked out there was a good possibility of resigning him.

As to what actually happened, well we all know what happened.

Tracy was a non factor.
Ron was likeable nut job, who shot a ton of 3's.
Yao is hurt again.

 

I'd lean towards saying it wasn't worth it.

Seeing Ron in Rockets Red made me realize how criminally overrated he is... He is NOT the reason we made it to the second round. Hell, he's one of the reasons we didn't get past the Fakers, IMO. He played like absolute ASS offensively in that series, and it's not like he did anything special on defense or on the glass.

 

Totally worth it. Yes at times Ron didn't run the offense, took bad shots, is not as effective as he once was on the defensive side of the ball, but did bring an attitude and a toughness. He was a huge part of why we got as far as we did. Is it Ron's fault that Yao and Tracy were both injured? it was well worth it to bring him in as a third option, to bad we didn't get to see this team healthy and Ron actually be that third option

 

This is ridiculous. The Rockets made a risk of trading two LATE first rounders for a shot at to win the title. Isn't this what every team should be doing? Low risk, high reward. It didn't pan out, move on and you recover by getting a guy like Ariza. I would still make that trade again. Donte Greenes are easier to be had.

 

Yes because it was a low risk high reward type move. and with the pieces we gave up why not make the move. aArtest caliber player for basically no 1 shoot u jump all over that deal

 

But, how do we know the Rockets didn't have their eye on Ariza all along? What do we know what the market was for Artest and for what he was asking. Was it worth the Rockets' trouble? To many variables, we don't know.

 

So that is two roster spaces for the next two/three years. Who do you cut? It also effects 2010 cap space.

 

The poll results have changed 5% in the past few days. Silly revisionist Clutchfans.

 

Sorry but I see us getting Ariza because of this fact.

 

Once tracy went down, artest shouldve been traded. Ron and hayes probably couldve netted the rox jefferson and maybe elson. Or try to get another player who is signed for a few more yrs who is younger. Its all in or move on. 2nd rd doesn't do it for me.

 

You keep saying this as if you know there were offers for him. Doesn't the fact that none of the other major expiring contracts (Sczerbiak, Lafrentz) were dealt tell you something? There wasn't a market for them unless you were willing to tack on young talent in the deal (a la Courtney Lee this summer). It's likely Daryl Morey didn't see any offset gain in swapping out Landry/Brooks (our only two young pieces of note) for whomever in a trade.

And why in the hell would Sacramento have traded us John Salmons to get back Ron Artest?

 

The Nets' whole motivation for the Jefferson trade was the partially guaranteed contracts they got back in the deal. They would have had no interest in Ron Artest and Chuck Hayes unless you were maybe willing to throw in Carl Landry. Even then, its debatable.