Yahoo! Sports:
The L.A. Times and CBS Sports are reporting that Ron Artest is close to agreeing to terms with the Lakers.
What's this mean for Trevor Ariza and the Cavs?
4 months ago
Simmsinns
108 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
It means Ariza has verbally agreed to sign with the Rockets
by Roger Dorn on Jul 2, 2009 9:11 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
NBA sucks
I hate the salary cap and the stupid MLE and BAE or what ever it is called. It really kills teams like the Cavs who would willingly spend the money to win a championship. I hate the fact that we have the best player in the game and seemingly can’t get players to join our team for a run at a title because Cleveland’s weather sucks. I am so disappointed so far this off season. It looks like we are taking a step back if we can’t solve our wing defense and PF positions.
Baseball is God's sport! All Truth Goes Through Three Stages 1.It is ridiculed 2.It is violently opposed 3.Finally, it is accepted as self-evident. kinesiologist
by E5 on Jul 2, 2009 9:26 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
-1
I disagree with pretty much everything you said. Sports would not be worth watching if they didn’t have salary caps. And your “because Cleveland’s weather sucks” point if it were true (which it isn’t) would STILL apply if there were no cap.
We in no way thus far have taken any step back, to the contrary, we’ve taken a quite large step forward with getting Shaq. I big FA move would be icing on the cake, but really isn’t NEEDED.
2009 Prediction: Att - Yds - TD
Jerome Harrison 95 - 532 - 8
by Simmsinns on Jul 2, 2009 9:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ron Artest didn't want to come to Cleveland over LA
not because of money or team talent but because of weather, it is a fact.
Baseball is God's sport! All Truth Goes Through Three Stages 1.It is ridiculed 2.It is violently opposed 3.Finally, it is accepted as self-evident. kinesiologist
by E5 on Jul 2, 2009 9:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, really, it’s a fact. He told your personally? Or maybe you have a quote from him saying that?
by Buckeye Brad on Jul 2, 2009 10:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Didn’t Ron Artest play at St. Johns, Indianapolis, and Chicago? Doesn’t sound like a tropic wonderland to me.
by Bernie19Kosar on Jul 2, 2009 11:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The cleveland.com article mentions that he chose LA over Cleveland because he already has a home in LA. You could make the stretch that he has a home in LA over Cleveland already because it has nicer weather, but I am sure there are a number of other reasons to have a home in LA.
by Roger Dorn on Jul 3, 2009 12:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He fancies himself a record producer, doesn’t he? That might be why.
by JulioBernazard on Jul 3, 2009 1:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sports would still be worth watching without salary caps. For example, plenty of people watch MLB.
by Cols714 on Jul 3, 2009 9:39 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
not as much as they used to
The Yankees run early this decade, combined with the overall lack of trust of the player’s, has caused MLB’s attendance and TV ratings to decline for the past decade
by tandur on Jul 3, 2009 11:11 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That’s actually completely false. Last year MLB set an attendance record, and set many more earlier in the decade, and local TV ratings are steady if not improving for most clubs.
Please don’t just make up things you think are true to back up your point.
by Buckeye Brad on Jul 3, 2009 7:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
really?
The MLB saw an attendance drop last season of nearly 900 thousand compared to the year before.
13 teams also are experiencing an attendance drop since 2000. The teams experiencing increases in attendance are primarily teams with new stadiums, which is absolutely no surprise.
Next time, find some correct facts yourself, Buckeye Brad. Then I won’t have to call you out.
"The problem actually is that PER is a extra-long, double high wagon load of horse crap." - timbo (7/3/09)
by tandur on Jul 4, 2009 4:08 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m sorry, 2007 was the attendance record, not 2008. Last year’s total was the second highest of all time. So I was off by a little bit. The point remains, though, that the past two years have been the two highest attendance marks in MLB history. That’s not a sign of declining attendance as you stated above, so you were still wrong. Baseball is doing just fine.
by Buckeye Brad on Jul 4, 2009 9:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
But, do you really believe that the major sports are or would be better off without a salary cap?
(Especially in a sport like basketball, where there are only 5 guys on the court at a time. If they removed the salary cap you’d see the same 2-3 teams in the finals every single time, creating an eventually boring circlejerk.)
2009 Prediction: Att - Yds - TD
Jerome Harrison 95 - 532 - 8
by Simmsinns on Jul 4, 2009 11:18 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Never, that’s why it was a question. I was just wondering where you stood on the salary cap issue brought up by E5.
2009 Prediction: Att - Yds - TD
Jerome Harrison 95 - 532 - 8
by Simmsinns on Jul 4, 2009 1:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think the salary cap in the NFL and NBA is good for fans because it keeps all the teams on an even playing field. In MLB, the NY, LA, Chicago, and Boston teams can outspend everyone else so it’s much easier to keep their star players and to fill the holes in your team with free agents every year. Of course, money alone doesn’t equal wins and there are many small-market teams with limited payrolls who have been successful with younger, cheaper players. The problem is that you have to be almost perfect when you’re working with a small payroll and can’t make any mistakes when you spend big money on a player. The Yankees can cover up a bad signing by buying another good player but the Indians, Twins and A’s can’t do that. That’s why it’s much harder to build a successful team with a small budget, but it’s certainly not impossible.
It’s a very complicated issue, of course, that’s a much longer discussion than I want to have here. Having a salary cap in baseball won’t cure all the problems and it would have to be done the right way. I don’t have the correct solution. Baseball’s financial structure is much different than football’s and basketball’s so it’s hard to compare the sports that way. But, to answer your question, I like the salary caps in the NFL and NBA and don’t want the Cavs to outspend everyone to win a title like the Yankees do in baseball (or did, since they haven’t won anything in a while). I want to win by making smart moves, not spending big money.
by Buckeye Brad on Jul 4, 2009 2:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The NFL also benefits from TV revenue
This helps small town teams compete against bigger markets.
"The problem actually is that PER is a extra-long, double high wagon load of horse crap." - timbo (7/3/09)
by tandur on Jul 4, 2009 2:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
TV revenue itself doesn’t help the smaller market teams, the fact that national TV revenue is shared does.
Local media contracts still help big market teams more than small market teams.
by rufio on Jul 5, 2009 12:36 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I love MLB
I will pass on the perennially bad Indians though.
Baseball is God's sport! All Truth Goes Through Three Stages 1.It is ridiculed 2.It is violently opposed 3.Finally, it is accepted as self-evident. kinesiologist
by E5 on Jul 4, 2009 11:00 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
We know. You jumped on the Red Sox bandwagon and joined all those idiot fans. True fans don’t switch teams like that.
And the Indians aren’t perennially bad. Then won 90+ games twice in the last five years. That’s not too bad for a small-market team.
by Buckeye Brad on Jul 4, 2009 12:45 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
Amazingly the switch corresponded with blog participation
by Roger Dorn on Jul 5, 2009 8:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
So, what, you’d rather have a situation like baseball where the Yankees and Red Sox can try to buy a championship every year?
By the way, you can say it’s the fault of Cleveland’s front office that they don’t have any salary cap space this offseason. They signed the players (or traded them for other players with large contracts) so I don’t know how you can blame the NBA for this situation.
by Buckeye Brad on Jul 2, 2009 10:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It’s not the salary caps fault, money isnt important, it’s how you spend it, look at the red sox and yankees, they have the most money and they dont win every year. The situation with us is we overspent on too many players for too long and made some bad trades, i like big Z but he is not and never was worth 8 figures, same situation with wally and until recently ben wallace, they were/are all making over 10 million when if they got paid according to what they produced Z might be on 8m, and wally and ben on about 2m each, then we’d have money for good players.
Look at the other top teams and who their 3 highest paid players are and how much theyre making, that’s why we didnt win the last two seasons and thats why were not getting our preferred players this free agency, if we had the right players playing for the right amount of money around lebron we’d be aiming for a 3peat this season.
but with shaq with us now we have a very good shot at a ring and then after ’09-10 theres very little guaranteed money on our books so we can start spending wisely, and if we do spend wisely then we will have a dynasty on our hands.
by CavsLebronFan on Jul 3, 2009 4:48 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
mmmm i like the sound of dynasty … i would like a cavs version of the 90s indians … you just sit back and relax during the regular season … and then come playoffs watch some butt kickin
by jsneides on Jul 3, 2009 5:01 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Uhhh…..you know the 90’s Indians didn’t win anything, right? There wasn’t very much “butt kickin” in the playoffs.
by Buckeye Brad on Jul 3, 2009 7:48 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
ok you got me there … but they had two shots to win it all … obviously they didnt but they had the shot and to me as a cleveland fan its about as close as we have ever been in my lifetime … im just sayin if we have teams that are built like that we can at least have shots at winning something instead of going in every season hoping not to lose more than we win
by jsneides on Jul 3, 2009 10:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Blame Charles Nagy
over rated bum who personally killed our World Series. And the Joe Table guy didn’t help either. Blame the umpire in 95 because a ball 1 and a half foot outside is not a strike even if God throws it.
Baseball is God's sport! All Truth Goes Through Three Stages 1.It is ridiculed 2.It is violently opposed 3.Finally, it is accepted as self-evident. kinesiologist
by E5 on Jul 4, 2009 11:03 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
please don’t use the word “our” when discussing a team you don’t root for
by Roger Dorn on Jul 5, 2009 8:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It’s not the salary caps fault, money isnt important, it’s how you spend it, look at the red sox and yankees, they have the most money and they dont win every year.
The difference here is that the Yankees and Red Sox have the ability to make mistakes and spend their way out of them, something the salary cap does not allow small market teams to do.
by woodsmeister on Jul 7, 2009 4:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Windy says that the Cavs have moved on to Anthony Parker
by Roger Dorn on Jul 2, 2009 9:35 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I would settle for anyone at this point. Just give me some (more) hope and LeBron a reason to stay around.
A ring wouldn’t hurt, either.
by rufio on Jul 2, 2009 10:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
blah… I hope they move on to someone else. I have a feeling that they’d overpay for a bench guard that has decent defense and handling skills but not much else.
by hans on Jul 2, 2009 10:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i agree … i think our best bet is to pick up someone who isn’t on everyones radar … who is a team player and is motivated to help the cause of bringing a ring to the king (as shaq so eloquently put it). But im interested in who this off radar person is. ive heard matt barnes and parker … i havent seen a lot of either of them but we need a wing player that is tall to help with the lanky kids in orlando. i thought it was funny when people said we needed artest so he could guard vince and paul and kobe and be a shut down defender … did everyone forget we have a shut down defender named LeBron … whatever artest and ariza and their egos can stay out west
by jsneides on Jul 2, 2009 10:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Having an Ariza or an Artest to guard Kobe and let LeBron have an easier matchup and/or offer more help wouldn’t be a terrible thing in my eyes.
We don’t really need anything, but I still think we could use a stretch 4 or a big 2.
by rufio on Jul 3, 2009 12:38 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You mean, having Ariza or Artest. Not an Ariza or an Artest. And yes, I’m just annoyed because that’s how Mel Kiper talks, constantly putting articles in front of players names. And I hate Mel Kiper.
Nothing against you though
by Cols714 on Jul 3, 2009 9:41 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, I meant “an Ariza”
If anything, I meant “a player like Ariza”.
Most definitely not “Ariza, himself”.
by rufio on Jul 4, 2009 1:44 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think we need a PF who can score.
by JulioBernazard on Jul 3, 2009 11:53 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Barnes is probably a better fit for what you are talking about (of the players left in FA), at this point I wouldn’t mind having him.
by hans on Jul 3, 2009 12:52 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
its funny cause when i heard rumors about barnes i was like who the hell is that guy … then i saw his pic and all i could think of was a game in which he got totally pissed off and got ejected … it was like a clothesline or somethin … too funny … but from what i remember he was a gamer and hard nose … i dig guys like that … im down
by jsneides on Jul 3, 2009 4:58 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
My first encounter of knowing who he was, was when he was with Golden State and they upset the Mavs in the first round of the playoffs a few years ago (the 1 vs. 8 seed series) he was a key part of it.
by hans on Jul 3, 2009 10:35 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I feel like a Jewish kid watching everyone else open up presents on December 25th.
You know Selig? Ombudsman.
by rolub on Jul 2, 2009 10:33 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The More I Think About it...
Ferry usually pulls off some kind of miraculous trade towards the middle of the offseason. Maybe he has a trick or two up his sleeve.
by Delonte's Inferno on Jul 3, 2009 12:01 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Except this year when he had the chance to unload Wally and chose not to for chemistry reasons. Oops
by Roger Dorn on Jul 3, 2009 10:59 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t know how close that deal really was. Sources say that the Suns didn’t want to trade Shaq anyways because they still had a chance for the playoffs. So I don’t think you can blame Ferry for that one.
by Buckeye Brad on Jul 3, 2009 7:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I still like Shawn Marion and Kleiza from Denver.
I’m not a fan of Parker.
by Bernie19Kosar on Jul 3, 2009 12:12 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Marion isn’t a bad option either, he’s a very good defender.
by hans on Jul 3, 2009 12:54 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’d rather have Marion over Parker as well.
2009 Prediction: Att - Yds - TD
Jerome Harrison 95 - 532 - 8
by Simmsinns on Jul 3, 2009 7:56 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Kleiza is the perfect match at this point
I really like his game for the Cavs. A good shooter that is hard nosed and plays good defense for his ability. He isn’t fast or a good driver but he plays well for his ability and is a good team player.
Baseball is God's sport! All Truth Goes Through Three Stages 1.It is ridiculed 2.It is violently opposed 3.Finally, it is accepted as self-evident. kinesiologist
by E5 on Jul 4, 2009 11:13 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Speaking of the Nuggets, I’d really love to pickup Chris “Birdman” Anderson! He’d be a bargain, is a great weak side defender, and averages more blocks per minute than Dwight Who.
I just can’t picture him leaving Denver.
2009 Prediction: Att - Yds - TD
Jerome Harrison 95 - 532 - 8
by Simmsinns on Jul 4, 2009 11:38 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think Birdman would be
much better then stiff Varajoke but I don’t see him leaving Denver. It would be nice but not likely.
Baseball is God's sport! All Truth Goes Through Three Stages 1.It is ridiculed 2.It is violently opposed 3.Finally, it is accepted as self-evident. kinesiologist
by E5 on Jul 4, 2009 11:43 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No way Denver lets him leave. He is everyone’s favorite player out here, and people even appreciate him over ’Melo sometimes.
We could use his defense for sure, but his offensive game is slightly above AV-level. He cuts to the hoop, he gets offensive boards and putbacks, but he doesn’t have a whole lot more to offer.
by rufio on Jul 4, 2009 1:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Shawn Marion, anybody?
I’m wondering why nobody is mentioning Marion? I think he’s exactly what you wanted from Rasheed Wallace (albeit his post defense is worse), but he’s got speed, decent outside shot, explosive at the rim, great rebounder, and can guard 3 positions. Perfect for facing Orlando, LA, SA, or Boston.
by tandur on Jul 3, 2009 2:43 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
He's waiting
To see whether Toronto will offer him more than the MLE to come back. And I doubt he plays anywhere for less than the MLE.
by Ben R on Jul 3, 2009 4:46 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’d like him. I’m not sure why his name isn’t mentioned more with the Cavs, either.
by Buckeye Brad on Jul 3, 2009 7:51 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yep, Sounds good to me, sign him up. Or maybe Charles Barkley. Happy 3rd of July, BTW. Are you going to watch fireworks tonight? Toth and his new girlfriend are coming to town tomorrow, we are going to Mount Rushmore.
by Cols714 on Jul 3, 2009 9:43 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think signing him pushes Lebron more into the 4 than Marion to the 4, at least physically speaking this seems like the better fit, and honestly that would be a tougher mismatch for most teams if you think about it, another team’s power forward will have to guard either Lebron or Marion and Lebron can probably handle most power forward’s from a defensive standpoint.
by hans on Jul 3, 2009 10:38 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
which is why I think the Cavs need to do it
Since LA just won the title, and essentially upgraded talent wise (let’s leave the chemistry and mental stuff aside, until they start actually playing together), let’s look at some of their key players:
Gasol – PF/C post player
Bynum – C
Odom – F/C, can play 3 positions, from SF up, and can guard G’s at times
Artest – G/F, can play 3 positions like Odom, can can guard slower PGs up to smaller PFs, and everything in between
Bryant – G/F, can guard from SFs on down
Walton – F, can guard two positions, is a PF in a SF’s body
This interchangeability of the majority of the Lakers roster (there’s still Shannon Brown and Sasha Vujacic) on the positions they guard is one of the main reasons people respect LA so much. Cleveland, to compete, needs more players who can cross-match. Remember the times when Cleveland went with Lebron at the 4 to match against Orlando? LA can now beat that. And if LA does go with Artest at the 4, Odom at the 5, Bryant at the 3, then Cleveland needs to match that. Marion could be that guy.
by tandur on Jul 3, 2009 11:19 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
the cavs have still made the biggest move of the offseason in acquiring shaquille. as well, i believe the lakers are worse off (and that seems to be the sentiment across LA) with artest, as opposed to retaining ariza; and the magic appear to be worse off w/ + carter, – lee, battie, alston, turkoglu.
the cavs are going to be fine, and they haven’t even spent the MLE (or resigned AV).
by DontCallMeJoey on Jul 3, 2009 7:06 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The sentiment across LA?
Artest is an upgrade. The chemistry issues everyone is railing about have been way, way overblown. I’d argue Orlando broke even depending on who they get to fill up their frontcourt.
by Ben R on Jul 3, 2009 11:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
well, clearly you don’t read the la times or listen to la sports talk radio. the consistent refrain is that for the lakers, ron ron was the wrong move (in the choice b/w artest and ariza). plaschke had a front-of-the-sports page column about the mistake of signing artest over retaining ariza, for example.
i don’t think it’s a question of who is the better talent today, but the fit for the lakers. and i agree.
also, there’s just no way you can say that math is “break even” for the magic. they may add another front court player, but as of now they are worse.
by DontCallMeJoey on Jul 5, 2009 1:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
So because one sports writer doesn’t like the trade, all of LA does too? Most fans are pretty excited about Ron coming over. We know what we’re getting ourselves into and we’re pretty sure things are going to be alright.
If anything, this trade stops Artest from joining the Cavs.
by chrisbeomsuh on Jul 6, 2009 2:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
while the point about stopping artest from joining the cavs is decent, i still maintain that he’s not a great fit for the lakers at this point…at least not over ariza.
and plaschke was a single example of an article that appeared on the front page of the la times. it’s been all over la sports talk, as well. look, the fact that “most fans” are excited doesn’t mean anything, b/c “most fans” literally know nothing. they recognize artest’s name, and are excited.
i’m pointing to the educated sports person, those who are paid to think/write/talk about sports, and it seems uniform that they would rather have ariza.
by DontCallMeJoey on Jul 6, 2009 11:20 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe my viewpoint right now isn't very accurate
since I’m in South Korea for the summer. But from the sites I’ve been reading (including SSR), I believe most of us thought it was a good trade. Rather, I think it’s the uneducated fans that did not like the trade. When general fans think of Artest, they think of the Detroit-Indiana incident and the scuffle with Kobe last playoffs. Not only that, we are replacing a fan favorite who has spent most of his life in LA. The educated fans, on the other hand, liked the deal. While we were all bummed about Ariza leaving, we knew Artest was an upgrade.
Here’s why I loved the trade:
1. Ron is a better defender. Kobe will not have to guard the opposing team’s best player until critical moments in the 4th.
2. Better shooter. Trevor shot lights out in the playoffs but is still a poor shooter for his career. Now whether he really evolved as a shooter or not remains a question mark but I’d rather take my chances with Artest.
3. Artest doesn’t end up in Cleveland. He can also defend LeBron better than Ariza. Killed two birds with one stone. Favorite part of the deal for me.
4. Only a 3 year contract. And only $18 million. That is a steal any way you slice it.
5. Odom, Artest, Kobe are all good friends. There won’t be any locker room problems.
Will Artest fit as well as Ariza did? Who knows? But still, this move has me pretty stoked for the coming season.
by chrisbeomsuh on Jul 7, 2009 3:54 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
1. Ron is a better defender. Kobe will not have to guard the opposing team’s best player until critical moments in the 4th.
This isn’t true anymore. Artest is past his prime while Ariza is entering his. Ariza was the better defender last season according to basketball-reference.com DRtg (102 to 103 for Artest) and basketballprospectus DRtg (104.4 to 105.4 for Artest). The numbers are close, but I certainly wouldn’t say Artest is the better defender anymore and if anything Ariza will be the better defender for the remainder of both players contracts.
3. Artest doesn’t end up in Cleveland. He can also defend LeBron better than Ariza. Killed two birds with one stone. Favorite part of the deal for me.
While it is true that Artest has kept Lebron’s avg. lower through the ten games he faced Lebron than Ariza has through the ten games he has faced Lebron, the numbers are pretty close and not all that compelling in regards to keeping him from scoring. Lebron has scored 24.6 Pts per game when playing in games with Ron Artest, while he scored 25.9 Pts per game in games with Trevor Ariza. A difference of 1.3 pts.
by hans on Jul 7, 2009 10:51 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry for the late response. Been a bit busy lately with summer school.
I don’t really know how the DRtg works. Care to enlighten me?
Ariza’s got a bright future ahead of him but I would argue that his reputation as a defender mostly comes from the highlight reel he’s made over the playoffs. Trevor’s main strength at the defensive end is to utilize his speed and agility to come up with steals. By no means do I consider him to be a “lockdown defender.” Artest on the other hand, plays his man tough and doesn’t gamble for steals. I have never been a big fan of going for steals. I’d much rather have the offensive player shoot a well contested jumper rather than getting burned on those gambles for steals.
I don’t put much stock into those points per game numbers. Why? Because LeBron is going to get his no matter who guards him. He is too good, too big, and too fast to be shutdown by any player in the league. But Artest makes him work harder on offense than Ariza mainly because Artest is a big, strong defender. Ariza on the other hand, is too weak to guard LeBron. Remember how hard it was for him to guard Carmelo because of his size? Instead of PPG, I’d be much more interested to see FG% instead (will do so later).
by chrisbeomsuh on Jul 10, 2009 2:12 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
DRtg on basketball-reference is an estimate of pts allowed per 100 possessions by this player…. anything sub 100 is excellent, and both Ariza and Artest are in the very good category.
Its not that your assessment may be wrong in the grand scheme of things, but its purely subjective. Advanced statistics in the NBA are in the infancy (so the validity may not yet be as strong as advanced statistic in baseball or even football), but they do at least offer some glimpse into objective evaluation. So given a single fan’s opinion (which is likely biased from the start and not necessarily intentionally) or an objective stat, I’ll accept the objective stat as more likely to be accurate and free of bias.
I like were you are going in regards to using FG% instead of Pts per game, but I’d recommend eFG% because it accounts for the extra value that a three point shot is by counting the made three point shot as 1.5 vs. 1 for the non 3 pt made field goal.
by hans on Jul 10, 2009 9:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
They are definitely stronger than advanced stats for football.
by rufio on Jul 11, 2009 3:20 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here’s why I loved the trade:
it wasn’t a trade.
and i do understand the excitement about picking up a big name/reputation like artest, but he’s 6 years older than ariza, and much crazier. and his performance on the floor was certainly no better than ariza’s last year, and ariza is the much more likely player to improve.
by DontCallMeJoey on Jul 7, 2009 10:53 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I didn't mean trade. My mistake.
Artest is a bit crazy but he will not be a locker room cancer. He knows who the top dog in LA is and will not try to mess with that. Plus, as I mentioned before, he’s got a great, long friendships with Kobe and Lamar. If anything, I think problems will arise during games when Artest starts gunning it with horrible shot selection. I expect very few of these occasions though.
I REALLY hate to see Ariza go. Without him, the Lakers would not have won the championship last year. But still. Ariza flourished in LA because all he had to do was shoot open 3s. He does have plenty of room for growth but I’m very interested to see how he fares on a Rockets team without Yao and T-Mac. He’ll improve over the summer (especially on defensive end with Battier teaching him) but I expect his FG% to drop a lot. Conversely, Artest will play much better now that he doesn’t have to carry the load himself. He’ll be on the receiving end of those open shots that Kobe and Pau create.
None of us will really know the winner of the off-season until the season gets under way. But for now, I feel better about the Lakers than I did last year.
by chrisbeomsuh on Jul 10, 2009 2:20 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hahahahahaha Bill Plaschke and educated in the same sentence.
If Ariza’s true talent level is what he did in the playoffs, then it’s a downgrade. If Artest starts the Brawl Part 2, it’s a downgrade. Otherwise it’s an upgrade. I loved Trevor but Artest is a better defender and shot 39.9% on 3s vs 35% for Ariza last season. So unless Trevor is now a 47% 3 point shooter (as he was in the playoffs), Artest makes the Lakers better
Go Nova
by dbroncos31 on Jul 8, 2009 10:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
. I loved Trevor but Artest is a better defender
This needs to stop. He’s not the better defender anymore.
by hans on Jul 9, 2009 12:49 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
statistically speaking there about equals allowing for error in evaluation. So I would say that an aging Artest vs. a youthful Ariza will not favor Artest defensively going forward and if anything Ariza will be the better of the two defenders.
by hans on Jul 9, 2009 2:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That Plaschke disagrees with it is a good thing
First, he doesn’t represent LA sentiment. Next, a good portion of what he says is dead wrong, so that he disagrees with this move is a good thing.
by Ben R on Jul 6, 2009 3:56 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
True, Plaschke is one of the biggest idiots in the sports media (and that’s really saying something), so I’d tend to believe the opposite of whatever he thinks.
by Buckeye Brad on Jul 6, 2009 9:13 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
he is a moron. there is no question. but he’s not the only one voicing this one.
by DontCallMeJoey on Jul 6, 2009 11:21 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Plaschke loses to Jackie Mac any day if I am scoring the showdown.
by rufio on Jul 6, 2009 2:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i believe the lakers are worse off…with artest, as opposed to retaining ariza
I definitely agree with this from 2011 on. Next year? I am not so sure. If Artest doesn’t do anything exceptionally crazy, I think the Lakers are better off in the short term.
by rufio on Jul 4, 2009 1:50 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
just had this thought...
we know Artest says he chose LA for the weather, the city itself, and his friendship with players like Kobe and Lamar Odom.
But I also wonder… did Artest maybe choose LA over Cleveland because of Lebron himself? Lebron is recruiting players across the country, but I’m sure some players have to be cautious considering Lebron himself hasn’t given Cleveland a true commitment beyond this next season.
Look at it this way. If your Ron Artest, do you sign with the Lakers, who just won a championship, have one of the top two perimeter players in the league, and one of the top 5 post players in the league…. or do you sign with Cleveland, a team on the cusp of the championship, who has one of the top two perimeter players in the league, and one of the top 5 (or 10) post players in the league?
Really, the difference between the two franchises (other than location) is the “What if?” scenario? Kobe is signed beyond next season (he likely will opt out, merely to get his final big contract till he turns 36), Pau is signed for the next 4 years. In Cleveland, neither Lebron nor Shaq will be under contract after this season, and there’s no certainty that either player will be back, especially if the Cavs do not win the championship.
Pretty much, to any free agents looking at Cleveland, do they want to risk being left behind on a lottery team if things go sour this season and Lebron and Shaq bolt? I mean, even Trevor Ariza’s decision makes sense in this light. Why go to Houston, a team with no hope this season, but maybe the season after and beyond? We know why he turned down Portland (he’s still upset over their treatment of him from the Rudy incident), even though they have a better future than Houston. And why turn down Cleveland, who could give him a chance to put it to the Lakers in a possible Finals showdown?
"The problem actually is that PER is a extra-long, double high wagon load of horse crap." - timbo (7/3/09)
by tandur on Jul 4, 2009 2:18 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Um I think he saw two very good teams (assumed they offered the same deal), and one of the teams happen to be located in the same city he owns a house.
The possibility is that the Cavs really really want to be in position to sign two max contract guys next offseason and are only looking to spend their MLE on a one year deal this offseason. I bet its probably one or both of these not any sort of personal stuff that you are trying to create without any facts to support.
by hans on Jul 4, 2009 5:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
key words
“thought”
“wonder”
“what if”
"The problem actually is that PER is a extra-long, double high wagon load of horse crap." - timbo (7/3/09)
by tandur on Jul 6, 2009 1:05 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I didn’t know this was a place for people to publish their personal diaries. I was hoping I found a place that discussed facts and reality, I’m sure there are many other fantasy blogs around that would better fit what you wrote.
by hans on Jul 6, 2009 9:44 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
you need to look around more
every sports blog is litterally overflowing with suggested trades, wants, hopes, thoughts, and wishes.
Just because my particular thought involves Lebron and the possibility he is leaving, which is costing you free agents (once again, name ONE major free agent signing by Cleveland since Lebron arrived. I’ll wait.), you don’t like it at all, so you want to attack the process.
Sometimes, the truth hurts.
"The problem actually is that PER is a extra-long, double high wagon load of horse crap." - timbo (7/3/09)
by tandur on Jul 6, 2009 10:20 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Its not cost me anything. I don’t work for the Cavs. I’m simpy a fan of the team.
First off, you are hiding behind your little suppositions and acting like some sort of victim when I call you out for having a motive of trying to inflame a tired old topic without any sort of facts to back up your attack. If you are happy with sports blogs that simply allow spouting off of obtuse drivel than I head you to please avoid Fear the Sword and simply take your ideas to whatever team you root for (hell if I can tell since you’ve joined about every blog on SBN).
Second, I’m not even going to get into some lecture about how free agency in the NBA works, but I’ll just point you in the direction of this so that you may learn about how cap space impacts how much money a team is able to offer a free agent. This has more to do with what the Cavs have accomplished through free agency.
by hans on Jul 6, 2009 10:40 AM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
old tired topic
It’s free agency. the point i bring up is due to the time of the year. Lebron can’t make a commitment. That’s not my fault. Take it up with him.
Secondly, I fully understand the cap. I understand Cleveland has been over the cap for several seasons now. That doesn’t change the fact that not one major free agent in that time period has chosen to come play alongside the supposed best basketball player in the world for the MLE or veteran’s minimum.
"The problem actually is that PER is a extra-long, double high wagon load of horse crap." - timbo (7/3/09)
by tandur on Jul 6, 2009 2:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ok so lets look at the slight that you are claiming against the Cavs and consider it another way. How many “major free agents” have chosen to play alongside other star’s? And even better what is a “major” free agent anyways? So the Lakers haven’t signed a major free agent until this year where they lost a major free agent (Ariza) and signed a majore free agent (Artest)…so what does that say about them? Why wouldn’t Ariza want to stay and play with the great Kobe Bryant? and why weren’t they able to sign good free agents in the previous years? I think we have to come to grips that with the exception of next years free agent class, free agency in basketball is not a reliable way to acquire the best talent.
by hans on Jul 6, 2009 2:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
apparently, I'm not so wrong
just got posted on ESPN:
James tells Ariza “I’m staying.”
However, I loved this little portion of the report:
When James told Ariza he’d be a Cavalier past next season, Ariza was less than convinced.
“He thought it was just a recruiting tool,” the source said. “LeBron definitely said it, but until he signs the contract it doesn’t mean much.”
Just on a side note, this report was published by Chris Broussard. While not as bad as JA Adande, Bill Simmons, etc., it’s widely viewed by most non-Cavs fans that Chris can be quite the Cavalier’s homer. To be honest, he almost looked like he wanted to cry when he reported that Artest was signing in LA instead of Cleveland. Or maybe it was just fatigue.
"The problem actually is that PER is a extra-long, double high wagon load of horse crap." - timbo (7/3/09)
by tandur on Jul 7, 2009 1:56 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I like how you left out this portion of the report:
Sources say several factors led to Ariza’s decision. First, his toddler son lives in Los Angeles with his mother and Ariza liked that Houston was a much shorter flight than Cleveland. Second, Adelman promised him the Rockets would feature him offensively while the Cavaliers refused to guarantee him a starting job. Instead, the Cavs told him he’d be given a legitimate chance to compete for the spot against last year’s starter, Delonte West.
“He wanted to be sure he’d start,” the source said. “That was a big hang-up.”
There are much more mundane yet human factors that play a part in these decisions.
by hans on Jul 7, 2009 11:07 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The possibility is that the Cavs really really want to be in position to sign two max contract guys next offseason
this is so spot on. as well, consider the quality of the free agent crop this year. i know signing time gets huge media play, but the biggest contract handed out so far was ben freaking gordon. seriously? a zero time all-star, zero time all-nba selection, sporting a career PER of 14.9. this is one of the weakest free agent classes in history. spending big this year would have been foolhardy.
which leads me to the conclusion that the cavs have likely been very selective shoppers, with limited interest in any of the free agents they’ve “lost” to date. it has more to do with the offers the cavs have made (or not made) than it does the potential that LeBron leaves.
by DontCallMeJoey on Jul 6, 2009 11:59 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
What do you think would be more successful in terms of keeping LeBron next summer:
Winning a championship this year
or
Being able to sign another max guy?
by rufio on Jul 6, 2009 2:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
whoa rufio, I just realized that your avatar is that rufio….awesome.
by hans on Jul 6, 2009 2:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
championship
hand’s down.
"The problem actually is that PER is a extra-long, double high wagon load of horse crap." - timbo (7/3/09)
by tandur on Jul 6, 2009 2:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i don’t think those are mutually exclusive, for one thing. they can win a ring this year AND retain the space to sign another max guy next year…i believe the shaq deal is illustrative of that (even if affording the max guy next year will be very tight).
are you implying that they’ve hurt their championship chances by not signing one of this year’s free agents? i think that’s a pretty big leap, especially when they’ve acquired shaq.
and i believe that it’s a delicate balance for the cavs…obviously winning a ring is huge for LeBron staying, but if they win that ring with all rental pieces, all one-year guys, all old guys, is that an enticement for LeBron to stay? i think they need to focus on winning now AND building a long-term vision.
by DontCallMeJoey on Jul 6, 2009 3:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m not trying to imply anything, really. More of a “if this weren’t reality and you had to choose one or the other”.
by rufio on Jul 11, 2009 3:26 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
largely because Lebron will go wherever gives him the best chance to go going forward. so the prior season while nice, would not be as important as the next season
by Roger Dorn on Jul 6, 2009 7:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Socialize With FearTheSword
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
