Ron Artest

by psclavos on Nov 27, 2007 11:51 AM PST

How does Baron at the 1, Capt. Jack at the 2, Ron Ron at the 3, Harrington at the 4 and Andris at the 5 sound?

Artest will almost certainly opt out of his contract next season. Why shouldn't the Warriors pick him up? Better yet, why shouldn't we trade for him before the all-star break while the Kings are still looking to get something in return for him? I say we pair someone with Monta and do it while his trade value is up. The kings are looking to rebuild and Monta is a good young player.

Artest would immediately fit into our system (53% from 3, highest in the NBA!). And he and Stack are really good friends.

What y'all think? I love Monta but Artest is too good to pass up...

This FanPost is a submission from a member of the mighty Golden State of Mind community. While we're all here to throw up that W, these words do not necessarily reflect the views of the GSoM Crew. Still, chances are the preceding post is Unstoppable Baby!

Tweet Comment 35 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

There was...

...another diary about this about a week ago that I made a long post in. To abbreviate, no, both because that lineup blocks both Monta and Kelenna, and because while Jack was a combination of a possibly misguided/unlucky follower in his past transgressions, Artest is the certifiably demented ringleader. No interest for me at all.

by Zack Vank on Nov 27, 2007 11:59 AM PST reply actions

NO

Tru Warier... gimme a break.

by Don III on Nov 27, 2007 12:02 PM PST reply actions

artest = headcase =

NO.

Jax has left that business behind him; we don't need no reminders.

"Hey, i'm a warrior fan so i'm naturally pessimistic." - Kenntoe

by Anomaly on Nov 27, 2007 12:14 PM PST reply actions

In your dreams

Everyone from Nellie, to BD, to Mullin, to Jack, to ESPN would love for that to happen, but Sac isn't that stupid to let him walk, especially not to the cross town rival. They're more inclined at trading Bibby and building around Artest. His rep is one thing, but when it comes to money, all of a sudden, his rep doesn't get in the way much.

But in my dreams, I see the same lineup you just mentioned, in fact, I've tried it in video games, it is amazing.

Because Oakland (Oakland), is just like Compton (Compton).

by dubsball on Nov 27, 2007 12:35 PM PST reply actions

please stop this

Do you really want us to look like the Pacers from back in the day?

by EnticivEclipse on Nov 27, 2007 12:57 PM PST reply actions

Is this how it is on GSoM?

Sorry for discovering GSoM during the playoffs but now that we're winning... are the majority of diaries on GSoM related to trading up our current roster? I take it day by day... play a game... win or lose a game. I never really think about trading cats... I know these are idea's but man, I'm staring to shy away from reading the diaries on a regular basis. There's a lotta heat on the site as of late w/ readers and their opinions... and it's such a turnoff. Its really hard to appreciate the success The Dubz are giving the fans coz in here... it's to critical for me to appreciate the sport. At times all I read are "lets trade such and such for him..."

by Tony.psd on Nov 27, 2007 1:04 PM PST reply actions

You know, you're right

It is a big turn off, especially considering that its the same names poppin up in these recycled threads.

monta
big al
pietrus
j.o'neal
pob
Artest

Can we go at least a week w/o another trade thread? Seriously, if any of the players read this stuff, it might even effect their play.

Best duo since...

by Tim N Chris Burger on Nov 27, 2007 1:20 PM PST up reply actions

Give it time!

A trade right now would simply break any team chemistry that we may have right now. Like Tony, I found GSoM during the playoff run mid last year and everything was fine in the minds of the members. Give it time, they are doing some good things as a team right now. We gave a lot of people time, 13 years, for them to realize that they were Warrior fans all thanks to the playoffs.

This was the first game with their roster in full effect (minus THud). We did some great things last night. We should build on that for the next game and then the next game. We need to concentrate on the season as is and not be too focused on the roster for next year.

by lyricalgenius on Nov 27, 2007 1:22 PM PST reply actions

A little THUD math...

THUD = -
minus THUD = -(-) = +
minus THUD = GSW +

Best duo since...

by Tim N Chris Burger on Nov 27, 2007 1:27 PM PST up reply actions

FUNNY THING

Whether the WARRIORS are on a 6 game losing streak or winning 6 out of their last 7, someone in the GSoM community wants to trade.

I agree w/ lyricalgenius that making any trades right now would break any chemistry the team is finally showing!

I might have been inclined to trades when we were in our funk, but now that we have everyone back, I'd like to see how THIS squad does! I would still like to see a BIG BOI at the 4, when we play the SPURS and JAZZ, but other than that, we definitely have the fire power to outgun even one of the highest scoring teams year after year in the NBA, the SUNS!

"S.C. gooooo hooooome!!!"

by scottiepimppen on Nov 27, 2007 2:28 PM PST reply actions

By all means...

Don't stop discussing trades... it's a free country lol... my observation is after each win, I see posts on trade scenarios, etc. Shoot, I'll stop being picky- it was just my 2 cents

by Tony.psd on Nov 27, 2007 2:41 PM PST up reply actions

The Truth

we've only had one impressive victory this year, and that's against a team we match up very very well against.. and we've lost to the Clippers and we lost to the Cavs. 5 of our 6 wins came against the scrubs of the association. As of right now, I still don't think we're a #8 calibur team in the West, the Hornets and Lakers are still better than us.

Why be content with mediocrity? There is room for improvement on this squad..

by jlagace on Nov 27, 2007 3:48 PM PST up reply actions

Sure lets do better...

and this is just my opinion... I am happy with what I see. For my wife and I goin' 2 a dubz game isn't just date night anymore... it's reading stats, studying the other team and makin' sure we secure a healthy record. I think as fans we're growing together. If and when any trades happen let it be. I just found myself seeing numerous trade scenarios I simply took notice. We all view our team in many different ways. I'm more excited to seeing whats next for us opponent wise on game day than day dreaming how good so and so would look in a Warriors Jersey if we traded Monta or Beans...

Thats just how I feel.

by Tony.psd on Nov 27, 2007 3:56 PM PST up reply actions

i think

on paper we might be better. but i dont think it can happen. if we trade now, well get him for this season and hell b a FA that we cant afford. if we dont trade, we wont have the space to sign him. hes gonna want above 10 million.

by NinerWarrior on Nov 27, 2007 2:36 PM PST reply actions

Artest is not a FA

until he opts out of his contract at the end of the season. He's guaranteed over $8 million, as it is. I don't think he will opt out, PARTICULARLY if he is traded.

I would not be shocked if the Warriors trade for him, but I think the bait would be Wright and picks, not Monta. Kings are more in need of front court players, ecspecially if they trade Artest.

by San Francisco Slim on Nov 27, 2007 4:24 PM PST up reply actions

interesting

Udrih's solid play has decreased their need for backcourt help.

I would be loathe to give up Wright for a guy that has an opt-out (i wonder if we can extend him in-season).

However...if we spun POB for Warrick, that would make it far easier to deal Wright for Artest. Just a thought.

24 > 23

WE NEED A BACKUP POINT GUARD

AIM: Jetforze

by OptionZero @ Golden State Of Mind on Nov 27, 2007 6:09 PM PST up reply actions

POB

has got to have no trade value at this point. He's an unrestricted FA next season. Why trade any useful player for him? Just wait to pick him up on the cheap next season.

Not picking up POB's option is one of the wierder things Mullin has done.

by San Francisco Slim on Nov 27, 2007 7:47 PM PST up reply actions

value

Some team might need a big body now and not have much to give up (Denver, for example, is down Nene and Martin and really needs help up front immediately, they don't care about next year).

In the case of Warrick, we may have some Stephen Jackson-like situation goin on where front office just wants to ditch a guy. In this case, Iavaroni purportedly is down on Warrick.

24 > 23

WE NEED A BACKUP POINT GUARD

AIM: Jetforze

by OptionZero @ Golden State Of Mind on Nov 27, 2007 7:56 PM PST up reply actions

Well

if POB brings a guy that another team absolutely wants to get rid of, I suppose.

But think about how little trade value POB has. He has something like 75 career minutes in a year + career. His coach is basically saying that he is terrible. The Warriors just put him on their inactive list, even though they have no real back-up canter.

There is little evidence that he will play well for any team this season, even if some of us think he has talent. AND, if he does play well, there is no guarantee that he will be back the following season.

Getting back to the Artest trade, I just get the feeling that this is not the team that Mulson envisions making a playoff run. They need to add something. I don't see the Warriors in a building mode, right now. I see them in a win-right-now mode.

And I'm not sure if they think Wright is the PF of the future. I doubt Nelson does.

by San Francisco Slim on Nov 27, 2007 8:35 PM PST up reply actions

POB value

Thats the difference in perception.

Some Warrior fans see one good game and some preseason performances and extrapolate stud potential.

Yet the reality is that he's had one good game and some preseason performances. Really, that's it.

He might have talent, but he most certainly has not had production.

As such his value to "warrior fans" is significantly higher than "trade value".

24 > 23

WE NEED A BACKUP POINT GUARD

AIM: Jetforze

by OptionZero @ Golden State Of Mind on Nov 27, 2007 9:21 PM PST up reply actions

The kings dont need front court players

Look at thier roster and look at how many PF/C they have.

i hope we win a championship soon

by Da Jrich tribute on Nov 27, 2007 4:40 PM PST reply actions

Front Court Players They Have

Good ones, they don't. Have you seen Kenny Thomas or Abdul-Rahim play lately? And I'm sorry Mikki Moore is not the answer either. Brad Miller is still decent offensively but is hobbled and can't guard anyone. Without Artest, their front court is in trouble.

At the same time, I don't see the need to keep Artest. The Kings are not going to make the playoffs with him OR Bibby. They should be rebuilding.

by San Francisco Slim on Nov 27, 2007 7:43 PM PST up reply actions

This is most definitely true

They have front court options, but talent? Nope. No ones really seen Hawes play yet, so we can't totally condemn the Kings frontline. They are thin at PF for sure though. Talent wise.

I am not content with mediocrity. I want a championship.

Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.

by kenntoe on Nov 27, 2007 9:18 PM PST up reply actions

Why people want to tinker with the lineup.

As good as the Warriors are playing right now, being without Jax shows that we are one injury to Jax are Davis away from being a non-playoff contender. That is why there is a need to add another player.
That said, I don't think Monta should be that player. He is making strides in his game and has too much upside.
We can get Artest with the TPE. It is just a matter of the Kings wanting to get rid of him and gaining some cap room. He would not be that big of a burden salary cap wise and if he opts out, we really haven't given up anything. The only thing that makes me hesitate on Artest is his past transgressions.
As far as the POB posts, the pick up of Mbenga shows nelson has no interest in dealing with POB's growing pains. I feel he has the skill to develop into a good center, but if we can get a player like Warrick, I would pull the trigger. Then again, speaking of TPE, did we get one from Indiana in the deal made last year? I know ESPN shows one for Diogu, but never here much about it. If available, I would rather use that on an unwanted player like Warrick than giving up talent.

by tangel29 on Nov 27, 2007 10:09 PM PST reply actions

In my mind...

...Artest wouldn't be that guy, though. If Baron or Jackson goes down, I don't see Artest as the time of player who gets us to weather the storm. The reason we'd sink without Jackson/Davis is because of scoring and ballhandling, neither of which is the prime thing Artest excels at. Barnes is essentially your Jackson insurance policy already.

by Zack Vank on Nov 28, 2007 1:06 AM PST reply actions

Artest is no insurance policy

He's there to take on the other sides best forward & force the opposition to see what kind of insurance policies they have on their roster.

As much as this team needs insurance for Baron and Jackson, the warriors could also use some defence, rebounding, and muscle too. I'll admit to having seen very little of Artest on TV, but the guy has averaged 18 points and 4 assists over the last few years, so he has to have some playmaking skills on offense too right?

As for Baron? We've already witnessed that Monta's still improving, and he's as good as the warriors are going to get in terms of replacing Baron. Any deal to get Artest, should the warriors even be interested, cannot include Monta. And Harrington & Wright is too much in my opinion (and it leaves the warriors without a young athletic rebounding big who could be contributing by season's end and definitely by next year).

The starting lineup: Baron, Azuibuke, Jackson, Artest, and Biedrins. That's a lot of defense, a lot of athleticism, and some serious streaky shooting. Jackson, Monta, Artest, and Barnes help Baron out by running the offense. We'd still have a rebounding problem but other areas would be so improved that it might not matter. Especially if they manage to hold onto Wright.

There's still a long way to go before either team considers making this kind of move but I think it makes sense for the dubs, at the right price.

by BingBluNT on Nov 28, 2007 1:56 AM PST up reply actions

disagree

We didn't sink when Jackson was out due to lack of scoring and ballhandling, Harrington was able to pick up the offensive scoring load in that time and well.. we should never rely on Stephen Jackson's ballhandling for extended periods of time in the first place. We lost 6 games in a row because of how much our defense hurt with Stephen Jackson out, and we were surrendering over 120+ points per game.

Alot of people always worry so much about our offense.. we have so much offensive firepower on our team that offense should never be a concern. However, our defense is, and has always been, our biggest weakness. And that's exactly what mr. Ron Artest brings..

by jlagace on Nov 28, 2007 2:16 AM PST up reply actions

artest

They way Artest is playing, the Kings would probably laugh at any offer that didn't include Ellis or Wright. Artest is making $7M - a ridiculously low amount for a potential game changer. Furthermore since he can opt out or stay for around $8-9M (i think its 8.9 or somethin), he's almost like an expiring. If he stays out of trouble until the deadline, the price is gonna be more than just the TPE and a pick.

24 > 23

WE NEED A BACKUP POINT GUARD

AIM: Jetforze

by OptionZero @ Golden State Of Mind on Nov 28, 2007 9:40 AM PST up reply actions

come january.........

If a deal were made today, there's no way the Kings part with Artest. Hopefully Bibby's return doesn't greatly improve them, although Artest, Martin, and Bibby and a supporting cast of decent half-court bigmen could certainly stay competitive.

But IF the Kings are out of contention at the deadline, are looking to deal Bibby and rebuild, then Artest becomes much less useful for them. Nevertheless, Optionzero's right: dealing for Artest without trading Ellis or Wright is very very unlikely. The best the warriors can do is probably Harrington, POB, and a 1st. That's not that bad a deal but they're looking for something better.

Trading for Warrick and then dealing Wright is intriguing. I expect Wright to be light years ahead of Warrick in 2-3 years but this season and next the warriors would have a very competitive lineup. Maybe Mullin could get Cleveland involved (they were rumored to be interested in Bibby) and net the Kings Varaejo...

Either way, we still have a couple months before anything goes down. The performance and development of Monta, Wright, and POB and Sacto's record come january will all figure into wether Mullin makes this kind of move.

That is, if Mullin would even dare pair Jackson and Artest together in the first place.

by BingBluNT on Nov 28, 2007 1:44 PM PST up reply actions

the best

You mean thats the best we "could" do or the best we "should" do?

A substantially better offer we "could" do is eat Shareef with the TPE, then swap Pietrus (expiring w/ permission), Ellis or Wright, and POB or Kosta, their choice. We could even throw in a pick.

Now, whether we "should" do that...can't be determined this early

24 > 23

WE NEED A BACKUP POINT GUARD

AIM: Jetforze

by OptionZero @ Golden State Of Mind on Nov 28, 2007 2:58 PM PST up reply actions

clarity

I'm not sure what I was smoking when i wrote that but here's what I meant to say:

The most ideal trade for the warriors, that is somewhat realistic, is to dump Harrington, POB, and a 1st for Artest. The Kings only do this if 1) POB plays like he did against the Clippers every so often between now and the deadline and 2) the Kings don't improve much with Bibby back and decide to rebuild.

I cannot see a situation in which the warriors take SAR's contract to get Artest. If they did, they'd be forced to go over the cap and keep only one of Monta/Azuibuke, unless Cohan's willing to fork out $80 million in payroll just for one year.

by BingBluNT on Nov 28, 2007 4:08 PM PST up reply actions

that situation

In that situation Ellis would be sent to Sacramento, eliminating the need to pay him.

Effectively Shareef would take Ellis's projected contract for next year. Artest would take Barnes money and the money we'd pay a first round pick + slightly more...assuming he doesn't opt out.

For this year only, i dont think it's a big deal, luxury tax or not. If we're trading for Artest, management is basically screw everything we're gonna take the Tru Warier and risk it all.

I mean, if u have Jack and Artest on the same team again, are you REALLY worried about the luxury tax? You've be finding an insurance policy to cover damage from a fight.

24 > 23

WE NEED A BACKUP POINT GUARD

AIM: Jetforze

by OptionZero @ Golden State Of Mind on Nov 28, 2007 4:18 PM PST up reply actions

Wouldn't do it

Trading Ellis and taking on SARs' contract?

No thanks. I'll leave it at that.

by BingBluNT on Nov 28, 2007 10:52 PM PST up reply actions

SAR's Contract

SAR's contract is $6.2mil next year.

You know what.. can somebody clarify exactly how much our payroll is at right now? ESPN Trade Machine has us at $58.6mil, without Sarunas' and Foyle's buyouts. HoopsHype has our payroll at $65.6mil, with Sarunas' and Foyle's contracts still on the payroll. I'm guessing our true payroll is somewhere between 58 and 66mil, the luxury tax is set at 67.8 mil.

Even being optimistic in estimating our payroll, we won't have that 6.2mil of room to absorb SAR's contract.

by jlagace on Nov 29, 2007 2:51 AM PST up reply actions