Artest instead of Ronny Turiaf. What do you think?

by goldenstatewarriors on Jul 13, 2008 5:38 PM PDT

A quote from Yahoo Sports,"But with the Lakers also apparently hedging on matching Golden State’s four-year, $17 million offer for Ronny Turiaf that might not be as big an issue as previously thought. As the Bee’s Sam Amick wrote, “It’s the price of doing business if they want to acquire the underpaid Artest.”"

You think we would still make a run for Artest?I think his chemistry would be great for the team. He has hustle and he would reunite with Captain Jack.

I have been a fan or Artest and I have been waiting for the Warriors management to give him a chance. He's aggressive and great player for the team.

I think we should save that 17 million for Artest's contract. I know he might be pricey but with the right contract and if play the cards right he might be willing to be part of the squad especially with Jack Harrington on the Squad. Ronny is totally not worth much to the Warriors so why bother. Management keeps playing shopping spree without understanding who there shopping for. We offered 100 mil to arenas but we totally could've used that for Garnett last year. Mullin your getting old or maybe you have something up your sleeve I hope.

What do you guys think?

Give me your opinion and other alternatives to the situation.

Thanks

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_ylt=AogIKJFbMAvcLMBHzmab7pI5nYcB?slug=jy-artestsummer071308&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

Poll

Who would you rather have for 17 million for the Warriors Ronny Turiaf or Ron Artest?

Ron Artest

124 votes

Ronny Turiaf

31 votes

155 votes | Poll has closed

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 29 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

how

exactly is he affordable.. we’d have to trade for him…

by saintdee on Jul 13, 2008 5:42 PM PDT reply actions

Affordable

Turiaf is being offered 17 million and Artest wants that Approx. Forget affordable, Artest instead of Turiaf!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

by goldenstatewarriors on Jul 13, 2008 5:57 PM PDT up reply actions

If we can get Artest for 17 million for 4 years,

them I’m all for it. Problem is that is not gonna happen!!! Artest is stupid but not that stupid.

by joestar on Jul 13, 2008 6:14 PM PDT up reply actions

To clear things up....

Artest is making just under $9mil in his final year of the current contract. I highly doubt he’s looking for $17mil over 4 years. He’s probably looking to average $17mil PER YEAR which would make more sense for his case.

by spacedout on Jul 13, 2008 8:13 PM PDT up reply actions

Tell that to goldenstatewarriors

by joestar on Jul 13, 2008 9:59 PM PDT up reply actions

haha exactly

yea more like 17 mil per year. the poll made it seem like artest would take the same contract as ronny turiaf making him even more “underpaid” then he already is. i think it would take too much to get artest and he seems like all but a lock to go to the lakers

by gogoldenbears on Jul 14, 2008 7:49 AM PDT up reply actions

No Contest

Artest!

Bad Boys in Da Bay!

The Time Is Now! Win Warriors Win!

by ballin on Jul 13, 2008 5:47 PM PDT reply actions

I agree

by goldenstatewarriors on Jul 13, 2008 5:57 PM PDT up reply actions

artest

and jackson back togather… yeee!

Run DMW = Don't Mess with the Warriors!

by Run DMW on Jul 13, 2008 7:52 PM PDT up reply actions

How is this true?

Where is it stated that Artest wants a contract like Turiaf is being offered? He is worth around $8-9.5 Million a year. How is it feasible for us to trade for him?

by Knowshon Ciron on Jul 13, 2008 6:12 PM PDT reply actions

Its nopt true

So don’t spread rumors!!!

by goldenstatewarriors on Jul 13, 2008 6:25 PM PDT up reply actions

What

WHat are you talking about it says nothing in my post of the same contract.OK?

by goldenstatewarriors on Jul 13, 2008 6:24 PM PDT reply actions

Turiaf is being offered 17 million and Artest wants that Approx. Forget affordable, Artest instead of Turiaf!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So does that mean you retract this statement?

by joestar on Jul 13, 2008 6:31 PM PDT up reply actions

yes

I apologize.
I and we want artest

by goldenstatewarriors on Jul 13, 2008 6:53 PM PDT up reply actions

But

I didn’t say that so?Sorry I guess just to shut u up

by goldenstatewarriors on Jul 13, 2008 6:53 PM PDT up reply actions

You didn't say this?

Uh it’s what you posted earlier, I just copied and pasted. But I don’t really care anymore. You go ahead and think what you wanna think.

by joestar on Jul 13, 2008 7:18 PM PDT up reply actions

uh oh

jackson, harrington, and artest on the same team again?? wed be the most bad ass team in the league i like it now all we need in jermaine o’neal

by montazing 192 on Jul 13, 2008 6:30 PM PDT reply actions

You misread the article

and spread a bunch of false information.

The story is that the Lakers would have to take crap contracts to get Artest and thus would be less likely to match Turiaf. It has nothing to do with the Warriors.

by greala on Jul 13, 2008 6:50 PM PDT reply actions

better fit

With Stephen Jackson, Al Harrington, Brandan Wright, Anthony Randolph, Corey Maggette, and Richard Hendrix all looking for minutes at the two forward spots, it doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to try to trade for Ron Artest. Unless Sarcamento is trying to give him away for like a future 2nd rounder, we don’t really have alot of trading chips we can part with either.

As for Turiaf, I don’t see what everyone is trippin about so bad. For $4mil/yr, do you guys see any other backup centers in free agency that we could pick up and give consistent minutes to? I’m sick of seeing guys like Harrington, Croshere, and Barnes play center for us. I’m just happy that we have a real rebounding/defensive presence in the paint now when Biedrins take his rest on the bench.

by YaHeard on Jul 13, 2008 7:04 PM PDT reply actions