Sactown Royalty: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:

Around SBN: Minor League Logos Better than the Thunder Logo Bar-right-arrows

Artest will remain a King for now

Tiny by coolcatreportdotcom on

I've changed my mind since offering up a previous FanPost on Artest and the state of the Kings a few days ago.

My opinion now: Ron won't be traded during the summer and will start the season with the team, naturally in the starting lineup.

I know, I know, that's going to stall the development of John Salmons. Such a shame. But it will make the Kings a better team. And naturally it will continue to make this place a more entertaining spot as the moaning and groaning continues for at least another seven months.

I think the teams that have shown some interest will, in the end, just decide to rent him for half a season. Less chance of an "incident," a shorter period for Ron to focus on the "the ring," etc.

The only other option is if Petrie gets desperate or just want to end the uncertainty and dumps Ron for expirings and picks as some have suggested. I just don't see that happening.

No, I think Ron will start the season with the team. That's where it will get interesting. If the Kings play decent ball, and they appear to have a deep enough roster to do just that, even if the usual injury bug strikes, there will be some pressure to hang onto Ron until the end of the season.

Or, calamity of all calamities, they may even decide his rehabilitation is complete and that he belongs in a Kings uni for another 4-5 years. I know, shudder the thought for some of you Ron "dislikers."

Geoff Petrie is on vacation, and I think he's done for the summer unless someone gives him exactly what he wants.

(This is a FanPost from a member of the Sactown Royalty community. The views expressed come from the member, and not Sactown Royalty staff.)

0 recs | Comment 132 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

By the way

I’ll be back in 9-10 hours and probably won’t be able to respond until then or later tonight. Hopefully that’s OK with the local PP officer.

by coolcatreportdotcom on Jul 25, 2008 7:14 AM PDT   0 recs

ahhh, maannnn

I thought this was quoting an article, or Artest, or Petrie or the Maloofs. We’ve got enough varying opinions coming from sources, this doesn’t mean much.
Your trying to phrase the argument in whether Artest will be on the roster come season time. If Petrie doesn’t recieve an offer he likes, he will be. If he’s on the roster, he’ll start.

Mikki Moore in the skills challenge! - LPA

by iashwash on Jul 25, 2008 7:19 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Playing Time
My rough guesses early in the season:
  • C: Miller 28-30; Hawes 15-17. Miller will probably play more like 35 minutes after the five-game “vacation.
  • PF: Moore 20, Thompson 20, Shelden 8. Again, Moore probably will play more than this guess, at least early on.
  • SF: Artest 35, Salmons 13. Artest will log some games with 40-plus minutes.
  • SG: Martin 35, Douby 13. Douby’s last hurrah?
  • PG: Beno 25, Cisco 20, Brown or Singletary 5. Probably a knock on Beno, but they have to get Cisco on the floor. Cisco might actually take some of Salmons’ minutes.

Riding a lot of pine: everyone else.

by coolcatreportdotcom on Jul 25, 2008 7:22 AM PDT   0 recs

?

Are you saying Cisco would be playing all twenty at the point?
Otherwise, spot on.

Mikki Moore in the skills challenge! - LPA

by iashwash on Jul 25, 2008 7:30 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

crap

maybe I should explain some more – in Cisco taking some of Salmons minutes, would that be minutes at the point, or at the wing, or both?

Definitely Douby’s last hurrah, sadly.

Mikki Moore in the skills challenge! - LPA

by iashwash on Jul 25, 2008 7:32 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Cisco

Probably actually plays 26-30 minutes a game and plays some SG and SG as well as PG.

Bobby Brown is really going to have to wow Theus to earn some solid burn. Singletary will be playing 35 a night also—just doing it in Reno.

by coolcatreportdotcom on Jul 25, 2008 11:22 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

?

“Cisco might actually take some of Salmons minutes” why not douby instead of salmons, Cisco can play the 2…my eyes just glaze whenever doubys out there and if we know its his last hurrah, why shouldnt we give him 48 minutes…on the bench.

"everything was beautiful and nothing hurt"

by richmond02 on Jul 26, 2008 3:37 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Douby

He might surprise folks. It seems like the point guard experiment is over and they are going to have him be a role playing spot-up outside bomber. Kind of like Vujacic’s role for the Lakers.10-15 minutes a game, maybe a little more if he’s got the stroke going.

by coolcatreportdotcom on Jul 26, 2008 4:42 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

If Artest is dealt for nothing

Again, I don’t think this is likely, at least this summer. February is another matter, because a lot can happen in seven months, good and bad.

But, hey, anything is possible, so here goes:

  • C: Miller 28-30; Hawes 15-17. Miller will probably play more like 35 minutes after the five-game "vacation.” NO CHANGE
  • PF: Moore 20, Thompson 20, Shelden 8. Again, Moore probably will play more than this guess, at least early on. NO CHANGE
  • SF: Salmons 24, Cisco 24. SALMONS PICKS UP ABOUT 10 MINUTES, CISCO 24. Or Salmons might pick up a few more minutes and play 28 minutes a game. He played more than 40 minutes in several games last year.
  • SG: Martin 35, Douby 13. Douby’s last hurrah? NO CHANGE
    PG: Beno 30, Cisco 8-10, Brown 8-10, Singletary 35 (in Reno). BENO +5, CISCO -10 to -12, BROWN +3-5.

NET CHANGES IF ARTEST IS TRADED FOR NADA: Salmons +10-11 minutes, Cisco +12-14 minutes, Beno +5, Brown +3-5.

Bottom line: Cisco would probably be a big beneficiary of an Artest for nothing deal.

In blowouts or if the team is eliminated from playoff competition, you’d see the non-starters get more minutes, and naturally they will also get more court time when there are injuries. That’s why I don’t worry much about having too many good players and not enough minutes to go around.

The team can try to win, and it will still get the kids some PT at the same time.

In my opinion this would be a much weaker team than with Artest, and so there would probably be even be more time for the “future” at the end of the season.

by coolcatreportdotcom on Jul 26, 2008 5:07 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

I haven't seen anyone advocating trading Artest for nothing

Nor have I seen anyone advocating that the Kings not try to win more games this season than last.

The difference of opinion is whether or not Artest makes this team better in the long run.

Petrie obviously doesn’t think he does, or he would have given Artest hope for an extension on his contract.

So the question becomes, do you trade an unhappy player who isn’t part of your long-range plans now, or do you keep him on your roster until the deadline?

I know he’s talented and passionate. But if he’s going to be traded by the deadline or walk at the end of the season, why even keep him that long? Why build your offense around a guy who isn’t going to be here?

TickTickTickTickTickTick

by LeaguePassAddict on Jul 26, 2008 5:19 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Short Run vs. Long Run

If I get you right, you’re saying any pieces that aren’t going to be here for the long run shouldn’t be around for the short run. Or something like that.

It might be more realistic to acknowledge it isn’t a straight line from here to the “long run,” and there will be personnel changes along the way. A lot of the timing on those changes will be tied to the contract lengths and talents of those individuals as well as the progress of the team (or lack thereof), injuries and a myriad of other factors including what’s offered in exchange for those players at specific times.

Re: trading Artest for nothing, I think there are several folks here who have advocated trading Artest for expirings and picks or combinations of lesser players, etc. While the Kings will naturally be trying to win the games no matter what lineup they field, it’s likely they will win fewer because the talent and experience level would be lower.

I think you are stretching on Petrie. He’s exploring all options, that’s for sure, and one of those could end up being, well, you know.

Naturally the timing of any trade is going to depend with the quality of what’s coming back.

Overall, I think you are piecing some together some unconnected dots that are not clearly established (although they may be to you) and trying to get to an “obvious” conclusion. I wish it were that easy, but sometimes it’s just not.

by coolcatreportdotcom on Jul 26, 2008 6:10 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

You didn't really answer my question, though
I think you are stretching on Petrie

Artest came out of a meeting with Petrie and his agent and immediately started talking to the media about how he should have opted out, and that he wasn’t in the team’s long term plans. How am I stretching here?

And since then, Artest has asked to be traded. Granted, we have him under contract and that request doesn’t have to be honored, but given his volatile nature, it would seem prudent to trade him to a team where he will feel wanted, rather than have him in a Kings uniform either vocally unhappy or trying to prove his value by dominating the ball at the expense of his team.

There is value in trading for cap flexibility, roster spots, and picks. Personally, I would prefer to get cap room (by attaching Thomas to a deal) and a proven but not aged starter at either the 3 or 4.

But my question to you is, do you believe that Ron Artest is going to be here beyond the end of the coming season? Because, to me, that would be the only reason you don’t get the best deal you can for him now.

TickTickTickTickTickTick

by LeaguePassAddict on Jul 26, 2008 6:44 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

I Don't Know
I think I have discussed this before, so this may just come off as a repeat:
  • Petrie is listening to deals now, but I think he’s gotta high stocker price and a deal might not get done by the start of the season.
  • Once the season starts, anything can happen. The team could play very well and that can change the whole dynamic of this situation.
  • Naturally, if he is still around, he will probably generate a lot of interest before the trading deadline.
  • If he’s still around after the deadline and the Kings are playing well and it’s Happy Time in Sactown, well, hell, I just don’t know what will happen.

I think it’s safe to say an extension is probably not going to happen, but only time will tell.

So, is Ron Artest going to be here beyond the end of the coming season? God only knows, and he’s not telling.

by coolcatreportdotcom on Jul 26, 2008 11:37 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

?

Are you saying Cisco would be playing all twenty at the point?
Otherwise, spot on.

Mikki Moore in the skills challenge! - LPA

by iashwash on Jul 25, 2008 7:30 AM PDT   0 recs

??

Not sure what happened here.

Mikki Moore in the skills challenge! - LPA

by iashwash on Jul 25, 2008 7:30 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Geez dude

Get control of yourself. Do you have dreams about riding up on a white horse and slaying all of us Artest “haters”?

Kevin Pritchard has Chuck Norris tied up in the trunk of his car.

by otis29 on Jul 25, 2008 8:48 AM PDT   0 recs

Whatever

Basically you’ve made a post that let’s you say, “I called it," either way. It’s clear that GP wants to deal Artest. He’s not holding off to see if Ron works out well. He’s not having second thoughts. He just hasn’t received the offer he’s looking for yet. If he doesn’t get a valid offer, he will continue to hold out—as most people here expect. But if he does make a trade, you can come back and say, “Petrie got desperate, just as I predicted.”

If Ron is still with the Kings when the season starts it will be a setback, plain and simple. Doesn’t matter whether they win more games or less with him on the team, and I think either is equally likely. It will be a setback to how quickly we can turn the team into the future winner we want. It will also be a pretty clear reminder to all of the Artest lovers on this site that their “best player on the team” has so little value to the rest of the world that no one is willing to pick him up for even a year if they have to trade anything of value. Hmm, why do you think that is.

If Artest does get significant minutes, it will be because GP still has to showcase Artest to get his value up. I totally don’t buy your theory of teams only wanting him for half a year. This is not baseball where you can rent a Frank Thomas as a DH for a few months. You are talking about a major cog in the wheel of your team’s success. If you want Ron, you want him in training camp where he can integrate into your system. If you are so scared of an incident, why would you trade for him in the first place.

But hey, you keep having those special dreams where Ron becomes the Headboy and brings home the Quiddich cup. Everyone needs something to believe in.

"Being loquacious and being right aren't necessarily always the same."
GP, the man, the myth, the legend, puts the smackdown on Reggie

by SavageBeast on Jul 25, 2008 8:56 AM PDT   0 recs

Correction-

You stated …”If Artest does get significant minutes, it will be because GP still has to showcase Artest to get his value up”...

Wrong….. If Artest does get significant minutes… It will be because he is (arguably) the best player on the team!!! No coach (or GM) in their right mind would keep that man on the bench. Regardless if whether your tryin to win a game, or showcase his abilities to other potential suitors

by Hoops916 on Jul 25, 2008 10:34 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

It could be argued

That a coach in his right mind would sit Artest for long stretches simply to keep Artest from bringing the offensive flow of the game to a screeching halt.

Or to let Kevin Martin step into his leadership role.

Or as a disciplinary action in response to being screamed at or Artest not executing the plays as called.

TickTickTickTickTickTick

by LeaguePassAddict on Jul 25, 2008 11:21 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

That is a total crap argument

Let’s say, for the sake of argument, that Ron Artest is the best player on the team. But you know that you are going to trade him anyway. (Which I think Kings management has made very clear.) What does playing him buy you? You are not going to be a serious title contender with or without him. You know he is not part of your long term plans. As I stated above, his presence can win you a few games, but it can also cost you a few games. Why in the name of all that is holy would you want to build a team strategy around him?

Like it or not, this is not a team that is built to chellenge this year or next year. It is a team that is building pieces for two to three years down the road. You HURT your team by playing a demanding player who is only concerened with what he can do and how it will affect his next contract. You HURT your team by not playing the guys who at least have a shot at being part of your future. You HURT your team by F’ing up the team chemistry with a player who doesn’t give a flying crap about what the coach wants him to do.

Unless that player is a part of your future-or you are trying to keep his value up so you can trade him-you do NOT make a mockery of the team you are going to win games down the road with by putting the guy on the floor. I don’t care if he is Bryant, Duncan, and CP-3 combined, which Ron Artest absolutely is not. You play the guys who are going to be a part of your team at the end of the season.

"Being loquacious and being right aren't necessarily always the same."
GP, the man, the myth, the legend, puts the smackdown on Reggie

by SavageBeast on Jul 25, 2008 12:28 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Sorry that was supposed to be a response to hoops not LPA

"Being loquacious and being right aren't necessarily always the same."
GP, the man, the myth, the legend, puts the smackdown on Reggie

by SavageBeast on Jul 25, 2008 12:28 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

I was about to say

...of all the things to pick a fight with the wife over, this one’s not worth the repurcussions.

Mikki Moore in the skills challenge! - LPA

by iashwash on Jul 25, 2008 2:19 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

We don't fight

...about basketball.

TickTickTickTickTickTick

by LeaguePassAddict on Jul 25, 2008 2:43 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Ummm

I hate to sound like a Kansas City chiefs coach here…but “You Play to Win the Game!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!”

Face it, its not a “crap” argument, as you would say. As much as you and many on here (myself included at times) pretend that we are all a bunch of GM masterminds, the fact remains that the reason you suit up every night is to WIN the damn game!!!!!

The argument that playing Artest will hurt your long-haul chances down the road is ignorant on so many levels its ridiculous. I understand the importance of developing your young guys, I really do!!! However, What nirvanaesque “future” are you referring to. Garcia is damn near a veteran, and has proven that he can be a servicible player in the L, possibly even a starter. And I’d express the same faith in Salmons (who I believe is a better fit to start than Garcia). I see nothing wrong with artest sharing their minutes with them (especially at the 4, if it works in a particular game).

And your not an insider man, so your comment that Artest “doesn’t give a flying crap (used in twice in one post…nice work) about what the coach wants him to do is unfounded and based on speculation. I wouldnt be surprised if it were true, however, its all speculative BS. And if true, maybe it wasnt such a bad thing cause he was only one of the players worth a damn after the All-star break.

And dont forget that Artest was CLEARLY our best player in the 2nd half of the season. Thats not to say that we should keep him around!!!!!!!!...... but it sure as hell does mean that he belongs on the floor while wearing a Kings jersey.

In the words of the Great (Arguable) Herm Edwards…...You play to win the game!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

by Hoops916 on Jul 25, 2008 3:02 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Hmm I guess I need to tick you off more, you haven't called me champ yet

We can disagree on a lot, but let’s stick to one thing. Do you focus to win the game or the series? Sometimes it is worth losing a battle to win the war. For example, if you have an injured player who could play, you rest him so he will be able to play his best down the stretch. If you have a player on the trading block, you don’t build your offense around him.

I am all about winning as many games in the season as we can. In no way am I interested in watching a team trying to lose. But here is my point. If you have Artest on the floor, you play a different type of offense than if you don’t. What is the point of training a team to play an offense that will become obsolete as soon as Artest is gone? That’s like starting training camp with one coach and going to another midseason.

Now if you want to argue that the Kings may chose to keep Artest, even just for this season, than you can argue that Artest should play. Put your best team on the floor and all that. But if you believe the people who ARE insiders, unlike any of us, then we are not keeping Artest. And if we are not keeping him, we need to create an offense that is built around Garcia/Salmons at the 3. This is why I don’t believe we will keep Artest through the Summer. It is a major distraction.

Let me repeat though, that I am not saying Artest will not play. What I am saying is that if he is here, and if he does play, it is to increase his value, not because it gives us 2 or 3 more wins before we trade him.

Just as an FYI, though, if you reread my post you’ll see that I didn’t say he “doesn’t give a flying crap” twice. Unlike your “You play to win the game!!!!!!!!!!!” line which you did use twice in one post. Nice.

"Being loquacious and being right aren't necessarily always the same."
GP, the man, the myth, the legend, puts the smackdown on Reggie

by SavageBeast on Jul 25, 2008 4:04 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

i believe we are defined by our actions,

you dont have to believe but i do. This means, as a blasphemous heretic, im more christian than many who claim to be christian. This also means that “ron artest doesnt give a flying crap about what the coaches want him to do”

Last year he refused to come out of a game and questioned the way the coaches were coaching on a few occasions. In previous years hes gone into the stands and stated a desire to take time off for his rap career. You know these things, theyve been well documented but you still disagree, you probably also say your christian (so as to not offend any “real” christians, my favorite people in the world are believers(of anything) who live their life by their beliefs, Im just being cheeky about a subject that i should probably only discuss with those who understand me and where im coming from)

"everything was beautiful and nothing hurt"

by richmond02 on Jul 26, 2008 4:09 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

huh

what are you talking about man? Seriously?

Anyways, the past actions you referred to about Artest may in fact be accurate, but don’t forget that he was our best player the 2nd half of the season. If he is in Sac, he belongs on the court for the skills he possesses.. He shouldnt be relocated to the bench because of the actions mentioned above.

This is the NBA…This isnt some church bball league where they dont keep standings and keep track of players moralities.

by Hoops916 on Jul 26, 2008 7:23 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Obviously true

eternal skeptical optimist

by lietothegirls on Jul 27, 2008 6:56 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Wrong

You play to win, every night, until you are eliminated from making the playoffs. That how Theus will be coaching and he will play his best players (of which Artest is one) to try and do that if Artest is still around. If things don’t work out and they head out of the playoff hunt, then tanking and giving your “future” extended action becomes the right thing to do and you’ll probably see Theus do that.

Basically it’s an argument about what Petrie/Theus SHOULD do vs. what they are LIKELY to do whether you think they do it or not.

I think you would score more points if you said what you think the brain trust should do, but them followed up with what you think they will actually do and why.

by coolcatreportdotcom on Jul 25, 2008 11:34 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

I Guess

I should have read the whole thread before repeating what ended up being said below my “thoughts.” Oh, well.

by coolcatreportdotcom on Jul 25, 2008 11:36 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

He Plays

If he’s here, he starts and gets most the SF minutes. Its silly to think anything else.

eternal skeptical optimist

by lietothegirls on Jul 27, 2008 6:45 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Or to satisfy the fantasies of some fans

Or to weaken the team to position it for a better draft pick.

by coolcatreportdotcom on Jul 26, 2008 5:10 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Gotta tell ya, CC

Ron Artest (or the lack thereof) is never a factor in any of my fantasies.

TickTickTickTickTickTick

by LeaguePassAddict on Jul 26, 2008 5:25 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

You're Negelcting a Key Point

The fact that Petrie is trying to tie K9 to any deal. That and what he expects to get back are the deal killers. This sounds like someone who thinks he holds all the cards and thinks he still will come February.

by coolcatreportdotcom on Jul 25, 2008 11:25 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Bibby

He’s a good example of a pickup in February that added value to his new team. Yes, it took him 4-5 games to work himself into real game shape, but after that the Hawks played pretty well, and Bibby was part of the reason why.

by coolcatreportdotcom on Jul 26, 2008 4:44 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Artest

Is also a good example of a pickup in February that added value to his new team.

Is this some kind of weird argument for other teams not wanting to trade for Artest until the deadline? Because it seems to me that if a team believes Artest can give them that extra push they need to get to the next level, why would they not want to have him for the whole season?

Unless you think, maybe, he doesn’t have that kind of value to other teams right now, or that they might be put off a tad by his recent histrionics.

If Artest is the

TickTickTickTickTickTick

by LeaguePassAddict on Jul 26, 2008 5:09 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

It has more to do with

Petrie’s high asking price right now, and a possible lack of urgency for the teams interested in Artest.

Things will change as the season plays on, and naturally that would change the list of teams that are interested. A team might feel Artest is the missing ingredient in February for a serious playoff push.

I’m not going to disagree with the perception that less time with Artest on the new team could be a plus if they are concerned about something going wrong off the court given his history.

by coolcatreportdotcom on Jul 26, 2008 5:14 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

So what is it

high asking price or trade for nothing? Is Artest/K9 for Odom too high a price or a trade for nothing? Just curious how you’d rate that one.

We don’t know for sure if that deal is or was ever on the table, but it seems like a pretty fair return to me. If I was GM I’d be very satisfied if I had this deal in my pocket and could go to other teams to see if they wanted to try and beat it.

Ball movement ... is like jogging for most people: They do it occasionally, and it makes them happy. Then they go back to not doing it. - Henry Abbott

by Kfan in Korea on Jul 26, 2008 5:22 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

My Guess

I don’t think the deal was on the table. I thing Petrie would strongly consider such a deal if it were to be on the table, mainly because of getting rid of K9 and also getting decent value for Artest. I’m not a big Odom fan, but he does have some skills, so it’s clearly not a trade for “nothing.”

My guess is the Lakers don’t want K9 and were/are trying to package some garbage like VladRad, Walton, etc. and we clearly don’t need something like that.

by coolcatreportdotcom on Jul 26, 2008 6:14 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Nobody wants K9

But if they want Artest badly enough, they’ll take him.

Not that I believe that the only viable option is to package the two. But the idea is a good one.

Nor do I believe that Petrie is going to hold out for that. I think Petrie is waiting until he sees how the free agent market shakes out and then going from there.

I’m willing to wait for a good deal.

I do like the Odom deal, though. Cap space and a starter at the 4, with an expiring contract for more cap space next year. All good.

TickTickTickTickTickTick

by LeaguePassAddict on Jul 26, 2008 6:50 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

What makes you think

Petrie’s asking price is high?

On one hand, you laud Artest as a top talent in the league. But on the other, you think that asking for any combination of taking on Kenny Thomas or giving us a decent player in return is too high a price.

If a gun were held to your head and you HAD to trade Artest, what would you consider a fair trade?

TickTickTickTickTickTick

by LeaguePassAddict on Jul 26, 2008 5:23 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Limiting to what Petrie appears to be up to

I think any deal that ties Artest to K9 for a top 50 NBA player or a player that has the potential to be plus a high draft pick would be at least worth considering.

by coolcatreportdotcom on Jul 26, 2008 6:17 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

If a gun were held to YOUR head

and you had to keep Artest for the next four years, what would try to do with the rest of the roster?

by coolcatreportdotcom on Jul 26, 2008 6:19 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

After I stopped crying...

(kidding)

I would surround Artest with big post-up players and good spot shooters. The motion offense would be a thing of the past, so we’d probably have to spring for a new coach and possibly a new GM, as Petrie is a Princeton kind of guy.

Seems easier to me to trade Artest than to build a team around him. Better to put him with a team with those pieces already in place, in my opinion.

TickTickTickTickTickTick

by LeaguePassAddict on Jul 26, 2008 6:54 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Cleveland works don't they???

I mean, after all, they have that type of team right? Question is would they do it? Meh, good question. (Wally and a 1st, that’s my dream baby. And I’m sticking to it. Hell or high water. Labels of tanking or no tanking.)

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on

by pookeyguru on Jul 26, 2008 7:11 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

I like....

Your loyalty to that Cleveland deal Pooky.. Although, I cant dissagree with you more. Wally in a Kings Jersey is why worst fear-

by Hoops916 on Jul 26, 2008 7:26 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Who said I want Wally on the team?

Screw that.

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on

by pookeyguru on Jul 26, 2008 7:31 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Umm

you said…

"Wally and a 1st, thats my dream baby.And I'm sticking to it. Hell or high water".......................................???

Maybe I misunderstood you

by Hoops916 on Jul 27, 2008 10:55 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

My worst fear

involves a plane crashing into my house and killing everyone in my family except me.

Basketball doesn’t even make the top 100.

But I still agree with you about not wanting the Cleveland trade. It’s just not my worst fear.

(sorry pg. you’re still wrong, wrong, wrong!) ;-p

TickTickTickTickTickTick

by LeaguePassAddict on Jul 26, 2008 7:31 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Being ahead of the curve means everyone else don't get it

Not my fault, but that’s what being a dangerous heretic is all about.

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on

by pookeyguru on Jul 26, 2008 7:32 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Dangerous heretic?

Somebody’s been reading his own press clippings.

TickTickTickTickTickTick

by LeaguePassAddict on Jul 26, 2008 7:34 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Yes Yes well maybe not really what?

I mean, opposing Ron Artest means hiding in straw while the British stroll by with forces of oppression. To secretly extoll the virtues of the constitution that included Ron Artest only being on the Kings for 2 1/2 seasons. Those fore fathers, I tell ya, were genius I swear!

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on

by pookeyguru on Jul 26, 2008 7:42 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

New Coach? New GM?

That’s a head scratcher.

by coolcatreportdotcom on Jul 26, 2008 11:39 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

He doesn't get along with Theus

And he doesn’t fit well in a motion offense which is the kind of players that Petrie likes.

What’s so hard about that?

TickTickTickTickTickTick

by LeaguePassAddict on Jul 27, 2008 10:05 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Style and Personnel

You may have a style you like to use that doesn’t fit your personnel.

Steve Nash, for example, would be a terrible fit for a team with a Princeton offense and focus on defense. He’s a great fit for the type of run-and-gun style Mike D’Antoni brought to the Suns.

Now I am not saying Artest is Nash, but if you brought Nash or a point guard like him to town, would you still stick to a style to which he wasn’t suited? Probably not. It would be like the Steelers getting Peyton Manning or Tom Brady and retaining an obsessive focus on a three-yards-and-a-cloud-of-dust running game.

I’d also be careful in pigeonholing Artest’s offensive style. Yes, sometimes he can be a black hole, but other times he’s one of the best passers on the team as his assists stats will demonstrate. He also gives the Kings a perimeter shooting threat and end-of-quarter shot creator (although not so great at end of game, like a lot of other Kings post-Bibby).

One thing about Artest is he’s just really starting to develop an offensive game in the past few seasons after years of focusing a lot more on the other aspects of the game.

Ironically, Spencer Hawes reminds me of some of the flaws of Artest. He’s still developing his game, and sometimes he makes poor decisions by shooting bad shots instead of showing the patience to pass out of those situations so the team can create something better.

As for Theus, I am not sure what style he is married to. I think he’s more of an uptempo guy (Martin) with an emphasis on defense (Artest), and in the half-court set he wants to emphasize an inside smashmouth (Artest and who else at this point?)-outside bombs-away (Martin-Cisco-Douby-Artest-Beno) game with the high-post centers expected to open things up by hitting the 15-foot jumper.

I really think the Kings deploy this effectively sometimes when they put both Artest and Martin on the right side, but then other times Martin is on the opposite side and ball doesn’t get to him. And sometimes when it does, he gives it up too much instead of looking to create. It’s part of that efficiency thing, I guess.

A lot of this is part of maturing and growing together as a team, and that’s one reason I have advocated sticking with the group we have now.

by coolcatreportdotcom on Jul 27, 2008 2:02 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

One gripe

I thought this was a really good post (with a good balance of pros & cons), but the one thing that I felt really hurt your argument was that you compared Artest to Hawes in regards to offensive development.

Ironically, Spencer Hawes reminds me of some of the flaws of Artest. He’s still developing his game, and sometimes he makes poor decisions by shooting bad shots instead of showing the patience to pass out of those situations so the team can create something better.

Hawes: 20 years old, 2nd year in the league, making $2.18M on his rookie-scale contract.

Artest: 28 years old, 10th year in the league, making $7.4M and probably looking for $10M+ per when he signs his next contract.

The developing problems that you mentioned are expected for the 20 year old kid making next-to-nothing (relative to the salary cap), but not for the “franchise” guy who is one of your two best players, and compares himself to league MVP candidates.

This is the crux of the argument that Artest doesn’t make his teammates better. Hawes has time to learn these things, but will Artest suddenly change his style in his 10th season in the league? Should a team rely on a guy who needs to develop these skills as one of their best players (and cap space fillers)?

These are all questions (along with that other high profile stuff, obviously) that the Kings – or whomever the Kings trade with – will have to answer when looking at Artest going forward.

by smgmatt on Jul 27, 2008 4:03 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Left Unsaid

Both should be expected to get better offensively, and Artest is already at a base of more than 20 points per game (a career high), while Hawes averages below 10 while playing a lot less minutes. Again, given the length of their respective careers, that’s what you would expect.

You ask whether Artest “will suddenly change his style in his 10th season in the league?” My point is he is doing just that and growing his offensive game by leaps and bounds.

by coolcatreportdotcom on Jul 27, 2008 4:36 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Leaps and Bounds?

I’ll take the point that Artest is continuing to improve at face value, but this is where I see a fork in the road:

My point is he is doing just that and growing his offensive game by leaps and bounds.

Taking a look at his career stats, I see no giant leap in his production.

Ignoring his 7-game stint in 04-05 (due to small sample size), it has taken Ron his entire career to become a 20 ppg scorer, and he has done so at about a 1-2 point per year increase.

His other stats (rebounds, assists, steals, etc.) have been pretty steady over his career, so there are no large changes to point to in those areas either.

I think it’s great that he continues to improve, but to classify it as large improvements is not as accurate as to say that his scoring has steadily improved over his career while not compromising his other stats in the process.

What I find the most interesting is that if he could be counted on to play a higher number of games every year, he could be a model of consistency on the court from year-to-year . . . at least statistically speaking.

It just shows even more clearly how much of a negative value all the “other stuff” carries, when the net result is that this is a player that teams (a) aren’t interested in building around, and (b) feel that because they have to “take a chance” on him that (so far) they won’t give back a fair talent value in trade.

by smgmatt on Jul 27, 2008 6:42 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Agreed

“Leaps and bounds” was a little too strong. He has definitely showed “steady” improvement in his ability to score the ball, without, as you point out, hurting his other numbers.

I think he needs to not only continue to improve his scoring, but improve his shot selection, shooting percentages and overall offensive efficiency.

I did a quick study at season’s end that showed the team’s winning percentage when players took a certain amount of shots. I only had time to do Artest, Martin and Miller. It showed Artest needed to shoot a little less and Marttin and Miller needed to shoot a little more.

by coolcatreportdotcom on Jul 28, 2008 6:11 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

This is my problem with Ron

Ron thinks he’s Kobe. If Ron thought he was Bruce Bowen, I’d be down with offering him the Kevin Martin deal(5-55mil). What I mean is, if he focused on being the best defensive player in the game and let his offense come to him, he’d be awesome. As it is now his defense suffers because he’s focusing on O, and he’s not as good on O as he thinks he is.

I’d be very happy with a monster defensive stopper-Ron who gets 15 points a game on 10-12 shots. The very good on defense Ron who gets 20 points on 22 shots, not so much. But that’s the problem, I don’t think Ron wants to be that player.

For me it’s a similar situation to Bibby. An ego thing where he has a need to be “the man”, and he needs to be moved to allow Martin to continue to develop. And I don’t think Ron would be happy with 11 mil a year.

Ball movement ... is like jogging for most people: They do it occasionally, and it makes them happy. Then they go back to not doing it. - Henry Abbott

by Kfan in Korea on Jul 28, 2008 1:55 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Irony
I don’t think Ron would be happy with 11 mil a year.

The irony is that he might end up having to not be happy with the MLE.

by smgmatt on Jul 28, 2008 2:11 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

In fact

this ron:

I’d be very happy with a monster defensive stopper-Ron who gets 15 points a game on 10-12 shots.

would be the perfect running mate for Martin. Good Ron matches sooooo perfectly with what Martin can and can’t do, it just makes me sad that he isn’t what he can be. Together,