Why does everyone believe Ron Artest has good defense (now)?

Agreed, Rons defense is over-rated at this point of his career, he's not as fast as he used to be, its so obvious Battier defense is better than him. but Ron still is very aggressive which can sometimes be a bad thing as he commits needless fouls. anyway, i wish Ron all the best, wish he joined some other team rather than the hated Lakers but i believe Ariza still have plenty of room for improvement.

 

my claim is backed up with DPOY, multiple first and second team all defenses including a second team all defense just this past season


your claim is completely baseless, you're pulling "Artest isn't a good defender" literally out of your uneducated ass...you're just a reactionary fan posting on a message board ROFL

this lame calls my claim baseless when Artest was 2nd team All Defense as recently as LAST year

becoming a little slower does NOT mean Artest is no longer a good defender...there might be 2 other players in all of basketball that are better perimeter defenders

as backed up by him being second team all defense...literally meaning there are maybe 1 or 2 people that play where he plays and can be considered overall as good a defender as he is

and he and shane could easily make a case for being first team all defense over Kobe

 

add to that Artest was guarding the other team's SHOOTING guard and it's even more favorable

Artest > this cabbage idiot

 

Artest is a damn good defender. Only problem is, every time he got burn, and Battier switch to his man. Somehow, Battier always subdue the guy. Hence the perception that Artest is no longer as good as he once was.

There got to be a reason why RA kept Artest on Roy the whole series when he have a Battier on the floor at the same time.

 

This is pretty amusing that the extent of your argument essentially boils down to citing reputational accolades. By that same logic, John Stockton was one of the best defenders of his generation.

If you're not even going to make an attempt at offering any substantive evidence to support your claim, I'm not going to waste my time with this.

 

How exactly do these stats work regarding net production? Artest was classified as the SG for most of the season whenever he played with Battier. So if we're playing the Lakers (with Kobe at SG obviously), would they compare Artest to Kobe to get their net production, even if Battier was the one guarding him most of the time?

 

substantive evidence IS recognition for elite defense in this league you moron

you provide no substantive evidence apart from

"Artest isn't a good defender anymore because I think i watched some games where he didn't play good defense"

your argument is garbage

 

aside from the fact that 1) Easy's post was in support of the claim AGAINST artest and 2) battier guarded the other team's shooting guard...yeah, i'm not sure where you were going with that...

 

i don't even know what this means. i don't really have the patience to engage you if you aren't even willing to articulate a coherent thought.

 

Artest and Battier saw time guarding SG's, but primarily it was Ron...the only real memorable exception ALL season being Kobe

Artest harassed Roy for the one series we managed to win and you're already discounting his defensive abilities...while he was rightfully named to the second team All NBA


the SG is a position with a typically more scoring adept player getting more reps...which introduces the offensive dexterity variable into the statistic...which would actually make Ron's defensive efficiency look even better.

 

pointing to recognition from the NBA is substantive evidence

what you're "providing" is the furthest thing from it

the fact that you have it completely backwards is disgusting at best

 

pray tell how the statement that we won is in any way probative of your claim?

by this same sophistry, courtney lee and pietrus are great defenders merely because the magic beat the cavs, (despite lebron's jaw dropping statistics).

you're just using hollow rhetoric at this point.

 

that's fine. if the accolades are your primary proof, then you are also committed to the claim that john stockton was one of the premiere defensive guards of the 90's. if you admit the "truth" of that statement, then your opinion on artest is fine, otherwise your entire argument is logically inconsistent.

 

Artest was intentionally guarding their best scorer. He worked very hard. We won the series. Roy got his, but he would have gotten his worse on basically everybody on earth that could plausibly be across from him.

Courtney Lee and Pietrus ARE both good defenders....

certainly no Artest...but very good regardless

seriously you have provided nothing apart from distancing yourself from the popular opinion amongst what 30 coaches?

ROFL gtfo

 

if you're not just being willfully obtuse and are seriously oblivious to the popular opinion of just how great a joke the defensive team awards are, then i honestly can't help you.

 

because they're voted on by a panel of actual NBA coaches and not toolboxes like you on internet forums?

ahhhhhhhhahahahah

breathe hahahaa

 

Umm, ok.

That's great, really.

Uh huh.

Based on what. You really do love circular reasoning don't you.

 

here's a hint: your ad hominem insults aren't in any way lending credence to your laughable argumentation.

was john stockton one of the best defensive guards of the 90's? answer that question.

 

Yes.


NBA coaches > You.

you have no argument you lost hard a long time ago

 

because Artest is an elite defender as judged by his peers, coaches, and NBA executives his entire career

Roy will score on anybody you put in front of him he's an excellent scorer...some people slightly less becasue they happen to be elite defenders...