A buyer’s market for Ron Artest

Scott Howard Cooper has a great story in today’s Sacramento Bee in which he says that trading Ron Artest has become a priority, if not the priority for the Kings this summer. So which teams might want to take the troubled but talented small forward off their hands? Howard Cooper (a former Lakers writer for the LA Times BTW), names three: 1. Lakers 2. Clippers 3. Miami

Enjoy:

“Said a member of one front office — requesting anonymity since he was criticizing a player not on his team — when asked whether many teams will be willing to take on Artest and his reputation: “I just can’t see it happening. I don’t see how. Especially not now.”

Good thing for the Kings other teams have their own problems to address. Los Angeles Lakers

Going pedal to the metal, after failing to reach the second round or the playoffs at all for the third time in as many years, isn’t just about adding a star to ride shotgun to Kobe Bryant. While that is the obvious part of it, putting them in the middle of any discussion for Kevin Garnett or Jermaine O’Neal, the Lakers on the whole are pushing hard to win now and deal with potential complications later.

The Lakers could offer Kwame Brown in a match of similar salaries. The Kings would inherit the frustration of an enigmatic player unable to grasp his considerable potential, but also the benefit of being able to clear cap space a year earlier than with Artest if Brown did not work out. And if Brown did work out, they would have the inside track on re-signing a talented young center.

The Lakers also could offer Luke Walton in a sign-and-trade, packaged with another, lesser salary (Sasha Vujacic, Maurice Evans, Brian Cook). Artest has superior skills. But Walton has become a good complementary weapon, a smart player who moves the ball, and plugs in to the same spot at small forward. Los Angeles Clippers

Artest for Corey Maggette had been discussed last season. But the serious knee injury that could keep point guard Shaun Livingston out all 2007-08 means a greater likelihood of the Clippers pursuing Mike Bibby. Miami Heat

Much like the Lakers, the Heat has a very strong coach, Pat Riley, and a ticking clock. Miami needs to make something happen before it’s Dwyane Wade against the world.”

Facebook Twitter Plusone Digg Reddit Stumbleupon Tumblr Email
  • Michael Teniente

    Now that would be interesting: Getting Artest for Walton and another player.

    The problem I have with Artest for Kwame is that our defensive middle would be wide open. The Kings allowed 103.1 per contest. The Lakers allowed 103.4 points per contest.

    The Kings played with Brad Miller in the middle and with Mike Bibby at the points and still gave up 103.1 points per contest.

    My point is that you can’t give up your defensive middle for the likes of Artest because Artest couldn’t stop opponents from attacking the middle of the lane in Sacramento. What makes people think he’ll be able to do it in Los Angeles if we give up Kwame?

    Chris Mihm and Andrew Bynum haven’t proven they can man the defensive middle. Bynum may develop into a defensive stopper but there’s no way Mihm will ever be a defensive presence.

    Now giving up Luke Walton and another player for Artest would work perfectly.

    mike

  • Anonymous

    What people seem to ignore is that a team’s defense is relies on the center’s ability to be a phyiscal presence.

    You can’t surround a weak defensive center with good defenders because the other defenders aren’t big enough or strong enough to hold the middle down.

    Ron Artest, Lamar Odom, Kobe Bryant, and the PG wouldn’t be able to stop teams from attacking the rim. No matter how good they are…it’s the defensive center who prevents that.

    Plus if we got Artest what would we do with Walton and Radmanovic? If we got Artest he would play the small forward, which means Odom would continue to play the 4 spot.

    We would have a surplus at the 3 spot. It only makes sense for the Lakers to do a sign and trade with Walton and throw in another player to get Walton.

    mike

  • Charles

    I would rather trade for Vlad and Cook for Ron Artest. Sacto receives two shooting big men and get rid of their belligerent player. Also, I feel Ron would respect PJ and Kobe and would be apt in learning the triangle. If worse comes to worse, I guess Kwame for Ron. However, Luke and anybody would be a bad move. The likes of Luke, Ronny, Farmar and Bynum are babies of the triangle. These players are good role players for this offense. It’s really the starting 5 that needs help.

  • Anonymous

    Plus Jim Buss already said he wasn’t going to over pay Walton. He said it was his the Lakers intention to keep Derek Fisher but someone over paid him. He said that if someone was going to over pay Walton he would be happy for Walton but the Lakers aren’t going to overpay the guy. He said Fisher was worth about half as much as he got from Golden State. Fisher got around 30 million, right? If Fisher, in Buss’ mind, was only worth about half of that then what is he saying that Walton is worth? Around 15 million. That’s about right.

    If you listen to Buss’ interview he makes a lot of sense.

    Walton is a defensive liability and Ron Artest can’t cover that.

    Plus the triangle isn’t our problem. It’s the defense. And Walton is part of that problem.

    mike

  • LA_Eagle786

    I like the rade proposal of Vlad Rad+ Cook for Artest. I don’t want to give kwame(Our only defensive center) away to the Kings leaving us with Bynum and possibly of Mihm

  • gdchild

    No Artest. We don’t need another player with the attitude. To make matters worse, Artest is a punk who abused his dog.

  • Ron

    Mike T,

    You have wayt too much time on your hands. Get a girlfriend.

  • Michael Teniente

    Naaaw, it’s not that I have too much time on my hands, it’s that I’m not going to let likes of your kind run Kwame Brown out of town for the likes of Luke Walton and Chris Mihm.

    NO WAY!

    mike

  • Archon

    Please explain to me what is it about Kwame Brown you like so much. He’s a big guy that can play some defense, but his lack of offensive skills makes him a backup center in this league, nothing more.

  • Anonymous

    Archon,

    It’s simple. Chris Mihm scores 10 points per game but he allows between 20 and 30 in the paint. The Lakers were never 2 or 3 games above 500 with Mihm as the center. The Lakers never won 2 or 3 in a row with Mihm as center.

    The Lakers started winning when Kwame Brown was inserted as the starting center. Brown may not score 10 points per game. In fact he only gets about 6 points per game. But he allows 10-15 points less in points in the paint. That is proven by the number and also in wins. It’s that simple.

    Mihm scores 4 more points than Brown but allows about 15-20 more points than Brown in the paint. Do the math. It’s not a hard decision.

    Everyone knows that the Lakers problems aren’t offense. The problems are defense. You don’t cure your defensive problem by trading you best post defender for another scorer. We can improve the scoring at the 1 and 3 spot and still keep our post defended. But we can’t try to improve the scoring at the 5 spot by trading our best post defender and keeping the defense weak at the 1 and 3 spots. And then add to the fact that you’re creating a weakness at the 5 spot by trading Brown. That would mean a weakness at the 1, 3, and 5 spots.

    The Lakers are as stupid as the suggestion that come from these blogs.

    mike

  • Anonymous

    Archon,

    It’s simple. Chris Mihm scores 10 points per game but he allows between 20 and 30 in the paint. The Lakers were never 2 or 3 games above 500 with Mihm as the center. The Lakers never won 2 or 3 in a row with Mihm as center.

    The Lakers started winning when Kwame Brown was inserted as the starting center. Brown may not score 10 points per game. In fact he only gets about 6 points per game. But he allows 10-15 points less in points in the paint. That is proven by the number and also in wins. It’s that simple.

    Mihm scores 4 more points than Brown but allows about 15-20 more points than Brown in the paint. Do the math. It’s not a hard decision.

    Everyone knows that the Lakers problems aren’t offense. The problems are defense. You don’t cure your defensive problem by trading you best post defender for another scorer. We can improve the scoring at the 1 and 3 spot and still keep our post defended. But we can’t try to improve the scoring at the 5 spot by trading our best post defender and keeping the defense weak at the 1 and 3 spots. And then add to the fact that you’re creating a weakness at the 5 spot by trading Brown. That would mean a weakness at the 1, 3, and 5 spots.

    The Lakers aren’t as stupid as the suggestion that come from these blogs.

    mike