Ron says stuff about not opting out

Right after the deadline, he said Ron needed to play well for the next two months and the team would probably resign him to an extension. Now he's changed to "don't opt out, play well next year and maybe we will resign you." Interesting.

that there are a lot of teams that could use him that are under the cap and have the money. Where? In Europe?

By my unofficial count I come up with Charlotte, Chicago, Memphis and Philly as the only four teams that could pay him more than $7.4 million next year. Memphis wouldn't want him at this point and Chicago might have to tie up a lot of their available space in extending Ben Gordon and Luol Deng. That leaves Philly (still recovering from the petulant Alan Iverson) and swingman rich Charlotte (G-Dub and J-Rich).

If Ron does not opt out I believe it is for one reason and one reason only: His agent has determined that 2009-10 will be a better market year for his free agent to be.

Let's officially and permanently lay the Ron Artest to New York rumors to rest.

I think there is a strong chance Artest may opt out, even with the knowledge that he'll only get the MLE. So let me explain.

First off, we all know Ron Artest is a talented player. However, is he the kind of player whom you build around? Francisco Garcia has talent, hell so does Quincy Douby, neither would be in the L if they weren't, but that being said he fancies himself as a franchise player and does Ron Artest's BASKETBALL TALENT equate to being a franchise player? I say no. Again, let me explain. (If I don't pontificate I wouldn't be me right?)

Artest is a strong big type of player. He's agile, and has some skills. He can handle the ball fairly well, a'la Anthony Mason, and he's an incredible one-on-one defender when motivated. He's freakishly strong. He has solid low post ability due to that strength. He's able to defend 4 positions almost nearly as well. He has a decent shooting stroke.

So what are the negatives? His shot gets blocked alot. He's a poor FT percentage shooter, which is puzzling considering the amount of outside shots he takes, and can make, with regularity. He is something of a loner with his own agenda. He doesn't always respond to coaching well. He doesn't always play in games, despite consistently playing through injuries when he "wants" to. He occasionally makes mistakes off the court. If you ignore the several incidents with his wife, and there have been several, there was also the Circuit City moment, the public asking of time off from being tired from promoting a rap album, and of course a favorite of mine, seeking innocence from poor care from a person whom HE hired to care for his dog.

So my question is this: Does Ron Artest equate to a franchise player? No, and for several reasons. He doesn't make players better around him. For instance on a team with little shot blocking, and atrocious rebounding, he helps the team in neither area. In a team lacking an overall physical presence, the team isn't following his lead in being a "physical" player. Well, mostly. If Artest's individual abilities aren't helping the players around them perform at a higher level, then why keep him? Why use an excuse such as the fans would want higher value for him?

Most people around here know my opinion of him. As a basketball talent I think he's a poor fit for the scheme and the surrounding talent that will be here for the near future (Speed, Shawes at the very least). I think his personal antics become a distraction for the Head Coach, at the moment Reggie Theus of course, that have a trickle down effect when in relation to the pre/in/post game management of other players. Worse, his personal background, and his antics since becoming a millionaire, have not shown that to be stable. He's proven to aay what HE thinks everyone wants to here, and become adept at that, hell he rivals Chris Webber at trying to please everyone, but like Chris, he has remained such a confusing figure to manage, and understand, that he's become a true enigma. If you can't integrate him basketball wise, and I only think that's 1 element of the issue Reggie is currently having, then the other part is certainly keeping his personality from taking over the team.

So, that remains the actual question of the day doesn't it? Shall he stay or shall he go......

There are 2 school of thoughts from where I stand. I will do my best to be thorough in my efforts.

Ron WON'T opt out: He won't opt out because he thinks he can get more money in summer of 09 than the upcoming scorcher. He thinks that if he plays well, without any distractions, in a place that, quote:

Oh, yeah, this sounds like a guy who really understands what's going on around him. The problem with this approach is what happens in 2009? Whose a free agent for instance? Well, let's start banging out that list shall we? Or, maybe not. That's for a later moment. How about this wonderful doozy: Wait a minute now. This was the same guy who questioned the coaching staff's desire to win a few weeks ago, after his bout of "South Beach Flu", and now wants to be in a place where he can win? My head is spinning here. What I see is a guy whose desperately trying to win a ring, and get his money while doing so. That's what he wants. Can it happen? No, it won't. Teams are afraid of committing to him. For the Mid Level? No, probably not. But I doubt he would ever get a longer than 3 year deal from anybody. That won't please him. Artest has shown that no matter what, and I mean no matter what, reality isn't important in Ron-Ron's world. He may not opt out because while he isn't totally oblivious, he may understand that the teams with cap space (Memphis, Philadelphia) will not be in the market for him. And that's only this off-season. There isn't a market out there for Artest that doesn't include a sign & trade. He may understand that, and see opting out as a risk. That's the biggest reason I can see him NOT opting out. Here's that list of 2008 , and in some cases, slash 09 Free Agents via Stop Mike Lupica:

That's not a long list, and when you look at it, most of those guys are like Artest in that they have player opt outs. What about Brand? It's unlikely, however, if he really wants to leave the Clipps he can get a team to do a sign & trade if he's healthy again. That is possible. That's equally true of Gilbert Arenas. What about Artest? Not a chance. I doubt Antawn Jamison's availability will create a stir either.

Ron deciding to opt out: This is just as easily argued in my opinion. Because it's unlikely, and if you read the 2nd quote carefully, you'll notice Ron wants to WIN. That's all good in theory, but with Ron there are things at stake. His agent, who seems totally a crackpot in my opinion, has stayed mostly silent lately. I find that curious. Ron loves to talk, and has said that they most "likely" won't opt out. Most likely means nothing to Ron. The question is what Ron wants at this point. There is a slight chance some team will be desperate to get him and make a move in 2009. There is a greater chance that the only real money he'll ever get is the Mid Level from any team moving forward. If that's the case then, leaving 7 & 1/2 mil on the table isn't such a big risk over the long haul. Particularly with the help of changing his reputation by becoming a more coachable, team player. Teams think highly of his talent, and are wary of his package. But for the right price? Hell, Isiah Rider got multiple chances in this league. And Artest is not anywhere near as bad as Rider was. He's bad, but some of the circumstances surrounding Ron were not entirely his fault (Socks, Detroit brawl), and I'm sure plenty of teams who've done their homework understand that. The bigger issue though is do the Kings want to pay Ron.

If the Kings want to pay Ron they're going to have to pay him. Ron can say every day he's happy in Sacramento all he wants, but who really believes it? We all know this is not a playoff team next season, unless 5 teams realistically falter next season over a long stretch. That's alot to ask for to get in the playoffs. Do the Kings want to tie up money that puts them ever closer to the luxury tax just to lock up a player who hasn't played more than 70 games in a Kings uni? Chris Webber Ron Artest is not. Artest doesn't put butts in the seats, and he isn't appealing to AT LEAST some of the fan base. He's likeable, and he isn't appealing. That says alot about Ron's sell-ability. Worse Kevin Martin DOES have that type of POTENTIAL sell-ability at some point. How can the Kings sell high on Ron? They can't, and that's the issue here. Petrie wouldn't sell him for cap room, and a draft pick, but he's willing to let him walk? That makes little sense. However, Ron not opting out puts this team in a position to be creative in what contracts they sign, and probably buy out, during the next off-season. Ron, while talented, isn't worth an extra 5 million in salary commitment's is it?

The bottom line is simple. Whether Ron opts out, and he may given the lack of winning with the Kings the way he says he wants to achieve, and he may not if his bottom line motivation is more money. If the Kings play chicken with the rest of the league on value for Artest they'll lose. Petrie not only lost that play, but he lost it in the worst fashion. Unlike Bibby, whose larger contract and diminishing production looming, Artest is essentially the same player he was in Indiana at his peak. The talent in Sac isn't as good as, like Jermaine O'Neal, or Tinsley for instance, but it's good, and it's good enough to contend for the playoffs. So my question is simple. If you aren't winning in the next few seasons, and at some point more looming financial decisions will be impacted by re-signing Artest to big money, and the financial impact of keeping Artest this season will put the Kings near luxury tax if they re-sign Beno along with the draft pick, then what does keeping Artest accomplish?

If Artest, whose presence hurts the team from the Salmons/Garcia perspective if only from a complete evaluation standpoint, then why keep him? If Artest hurts you financially why keep him? If Artest isn't adding anything to your team basketball skills wise, which is the strongest argument I can see in keeping him, why keep him? If you're Artest, and you're seeing the lack of teams interest financially, do you think you're going to see better interest down the road? What's the point? The quagmire that is Artest will always surround him. The greater question is why the Kings haven't chose to sever this tie already, and I'm not buying that the fans wouldn't want it that way. The only plausible explanation is that Petrie's ego couldn't take not trading Artest, and Artest's ego won't let him do the smart thing (opt out--take a short mid level contract on a team with a shot to win a ring--and be satisfied with that's where his contract is given his personal in-stability). The Kings are now stuck, and the only person to blame is Petrie. It's not even convenient to blame the Maloof's, as much as I'd like to (ha-ha-ha), but they can't be entirely blamed for this situation. I think the only clear thing from all this is obvious. Artest won't get paid, unless the Kings decide to pay him. It's also equally clear that Artest's market isn't as high as the Kings want it to be. So where do you go? How do you handle it?  That answer will be upcoming over the next 320 days or so.