Bee: Trading Artest won't be easy

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
http://www.sacbee.com/351/story/177884.html

Trading Artest won't be easy
With teams afraid of the forward, the Kings might have to dump him for little in return.
By Scott Howard-Cooper - Bee Staff Writer
Published 12:00 am PDT Sunday, May 13, 2007
Story appeared in SPORTS section, Page C1


Begin by accepting that there will be no such thing as fair value in return. Low-ball offers will be common, if offers drip in at all. Most calls will be initiated rather than taken.

Just when the Kings thought living with Ron Artest was challenge enough, now comes the real difficulty, trying to get away from him, or at least get away from him without having to mow lawns and take out the trash for a month for whoever takes him off their hands.

Trading Artest has become a priority, if not the priority, within a Kings front office eager to change the roster and, in this case in particular, the culture of the splintered locker room. What basketball president Geoff Petrie and his famed patience will find, as he surely knows, is a mix of window shoppers and a few potentially serious buyers, but also the chance that moving forward will require dumping a talented starting small forward for a minimal return.

"It's getting to the point where you can hope to get some teams that are desperate that are not opposed to taking on that kind of player," said one executive, not wanting to be identified since he was talking about another team's player, yet noting that his team is not interested in Artest.

Meaning there is a likelihood that the Kings will have to swallow hard and take a fire-sale deal to move Artest.

"I would think they would be significant," the executive said of those chances.

There should be opportunities, though. Working in the Kings' favor, Artest is due to make $7.4 million in 2007-08, with the ability to declare himself a free agent afterward, and the same amount in 2008-09 -- an agreeable contract for someone who is 27 and three seasons removed from being named Defensive Player of the Year. He is young and talented, and he makes less than market value for a player with such a résumé.

Working against the Kings: He's Ron Artest.

It has usually been a buyer's market with Artest, only more so now after a season in which he frustrated teammates with bad decisions as a playmaker and a monopolization of the ball. Off the court, he pleaded no contest in May to a misdemeanor charge of inflicting corporal injury on his spouse and received additional negative coverage nationally after being cited in April for not feeding his dog, although no charges were filed in that case.

He has swung all the way back to getting in the way of his own potential greatness, seemingly wasting the good will that had been built from the second half of 2005-06, when he was traded from Indiana for Peja Stojakovic and helped spark the Kings into the playoffs. Once the list of transgressions expanded to include the legal system, organizations that might have had an interest in trying to get him on the cheap had the concern of selling their fan base on a player who had been sentenced to a work release program, 100 hours of community service and anger management courses for striking his wife.

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.

What the Heat does not have is attractive trade pieces. Antoine Walker has four seasons left on a bad contract, although the final two are believed to be non-guaranteed and tied to performance. Jason Williams has one season remaining at a salary similar to Artest's, making Williams moveable. Jason Kapono, after leading the league in three-point percentage, is a free agent and can be used in a sign-and-trade and perhaps packaged with the expiring contract of Michael Doleac or Dorell Wright to make the money match as required.

It all leaves the Kings bargaining from a position of weakness. They have something just in that, though.

The chance to bargain at all.

About the writer: The Bee's Scott Howard-Cooper can be reached at showard- cooper@sacbee.com.
 
This is a tough situation, but I don't think the Kings are really in a decidedly worse-off situation than the Pacers were when they traded Artest the first time. Mainly because as badly as the Kings may want to trade Artest they don't HAVE to trade Artest. To be sure trading Artest is going to be a talent hit, but I don't think the front office is going to accept an unpalatable deal.

In a perverse way, I think Artest's chemistry problems and ball-hogging offensively might be hurting his trade stock as much or more than his off-court troubles. Teams are always willing to overlook some pretty bad stuff if a guy is a good basketball player (i.e. Jason Kidd, Stephen Jackson, etc. etc. etc.), but the ball-hogging may make teams nervous that Artest wouldn't just step in and play great defense but would want to continue his one-man quest to be Kobe Bryant.
 
Personally, I think Artest's ball-hogging is because Muss really failed to define roles for anyone.

I tend to agree. We've read comments from several Kings players who danced around the lack of defined roles they felt they had this year. And with Bibby playing abysmally most of the season, I can understand why Artest felt he needed to step up and do something (even if it was wrong...) At least he was putting forth an effort.

If we don't trade Artest, I hope the new coach is able to communicate with him better than Musselman. Of course, it appears a rock could have communicated better with most of the players than the guy who is now getting $5 million NOT to coach them. Heck, I'd not coach the Kings for much less than $5 mill.

;)
 
Personally, I think Artest's ball-hogging is because Muss really failed to define roles for anyone.

Ron won't accept a role which doesn't involve him ballhoging, so the distinction is kind of moot.

Maybe, MAYBE, if a guy like Riley told him to play third fiddle to two guys like Wade and Shaq or some such. Otherwise, he forced his way out of Indiana exactly to no longer be stuck playing a role. And actually, while it was only sporadically mentioned, from Jan 1 onward he was a better offensive player than either Kevin or Mike, so maybe he had reason too. But almost bordering on a good numbers on bad team sort of guy. More efficient than any other King yes, but sucking the wind out of any offensive flow.
 
Last edited:
And this is the dilema that the front office has to sort out. You have a player that you want to and NEED to get rid off but you have very limited number of teams who would be prepared to take him. But every offer you get will be a low ball offer not reflecting the true value.

Do the Kings

a) Keep him unless they get a fair value in return
b) Trade him regardless of what you get in return
c) Buy him out.

Either way, the Kings lose.
 
And this is the dilema that the front office has to sort out. You have a player that you want to and NEED to get rid off but you have very limited number of teams who would be prepared to take him. But every offer you get will be a low ball offer not reflecting the true value.

Do the Kings

a) Keep him unless they get a fair value in return
b) Trade him regardless of what you get in return
c) Buy him out.

Either way, the Kings lose.

Well, I can pretty much guarantee they aren't going to buy him out. And I'm not convinced that every offer we get for him would necessarily be a low ball attempt.

We have more pressing needs, IMHO, than moving Ron Artest, who at least wants to play and brings it every night.
 
And this is the dilema that the front office has to sort out. You have a player that you want to and NEED to get rid off but you have very limited number of teams who would be prepared to take him. But every offer you get will be a low ball offer not reflecting the true value.

Do the Kings

a) Keep him unless they get a fair value in return
b) Trade him regardless of what you get in return
c) Buy him out.

Either way, the Kings lose.

We have to get Artest off this team, it would be just a waste to keep him. Take any deal that will give us an expiring for Artest and maybe a pick along with him. We need to start fresh and keeping a headache like him is just a bad way to do it. I have faith Petrie will successfully dump him and I'll be a much happier kings fan when that happens.
 
Last edited:
We won't get a player anywhere NEAR as good as Artest via trade, but that doesn't mean we can't come close to FAIR value for him. Through youth, picks, dumping of other contracts, we should be able to come out smelling okay if we were to deal Artest...I mean the Pacers at least turned Artest into Harrington eventually. That's not too shabby considering their hand was forced...our hand isn't even forced and his contract situation has improved as well.
 
If he's going to opt out at season end anyway, then why don't they just keep him??? :confused:
Also Artest has a fairly cheap contract so while it does fee funds it's not the kind of mony you can normally buy comprable tallent with.

I'm not sure Artest is a lost cause, but unless the new coach is a much venerated experienced guy whol can deal with personalities then yes Ron will do more harm than good and better a slight hit or risk tallent than playing him.
 
If he's going to opt out at season end anyway, then why don't they just keep him??? :confused:

He's a pretty minor contract. Only a good option if the only alternative is landing Antoine Walker or some such crap long term deal.

Ideally you would trade him for an equal ender, a kid, and a pick (that might be what you could get from Miami BTW in a JWill(ender)/Dorell Wright/ #19 package.
 
^Unfortunately I don't think Miami is going to trade JWill if they're not getting a point guard back. Otherwise they're left with no one at the point.
 
He's a pretty minor contract. Only a good option if the only alternative is landing Antoine Walker or some such crap long term deal.

Ideally you would trade him for an equal ender, a kid, and a pick (that might be what you could get from Miami BTW in a JWill(ender)/Dorell Wright/ #19 package.


Well, this article kind of suggests that is what the market may look like when it comes time to deal Artest.
 
^Unfortunately I don't think Miami is going to trade JWill if they're not getting a point guard back. Otherwise they're left with no one at the point.


You may be right, but then again with Jason's deteriorating knees, and with the extra salary cap room they have freeing up this summer, mght they not just go drop the full MLE on a guy like Steve Blake and consider themselves well ahead in the deal with a Blake/Wade/Artest/Haslem/Shaq lineup?
 
Last edited:
And this is the dilema that the front office has to sort out. You have a player that you want to and NEED to get rid off but you have very limited number of teams who would be prepared to take him. But every offer you get will be a low ball offer not reflecting the true value.

His "true value" is low.
 
Ron Artest for Kwame Brown?

Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah

I prefer Artest+Martin for Brown+Smush

Ahahahahhahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahhahahahah
 
Ron Artest for Kwame Brown?

Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah

I prefer Artest+Martin for Brown+Smush

Ahahahahhahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahhahahahah

I'm guessing you were joking about that last trade unless you are a Lakers fan.
 
Well, I can pretty much guarantee they aren't going to buy him out. And I'm not convinced that every offer we get for him would necessarily be a low ball attempt.

We have more pressing needs, IMHO, than moving Ron Artest, who at least wants to play and brings it every night.

I keep reading about "low ball" offers. I think it's going to be "market" offers.

Artest's market value is probably low. So, are we talking about "lower than low" ball offers?

Artest's value is not = Top 20 NBA Player.

Artest Value = Top 20 NBA Player - RISK

The question for all the teams in the NBA, including the Kings, is how much weight do they give to RISK.
 
I think the Knicks would take him BUT who would we get back....Frye?

Mentioned before, as a general rule, if the Knicks don't want it, neither do you. In such an arrangement would far prefer to just take the Knicks pick and then involve a thrid team to take the Knicks players (Frye would be a likely component) and pass an ender + pick or some such onto us. Philly might be a target of such a deal, although they are division rivals. Still, they could use a young PF like Frye, and they have spare #1s this year. If you could spin a deal getting the Knicks pick (#23), having Frye and the matching veteran salary go to Philly, and then maybe Kevin Ollie and Philly's #21 to us (+ would have to be an extra body there -- maybe Shavlik Randolph), I wouldn't feel too bad about things. If you get Philly to give up their #12 I would feel downright giddy. But either way, parlaying Artest into two extra picks = would be neat. One pick and Frye...eh...could be sending us down the path of rebuilding as an all-skinny/softy squad.

As an aside, my issue with Frye, as somebody who has watched him, is that he's 6'11" tall and yet I wouldn't hesitate for a second to start something with him. And I'd win too. He is soft, soft SOFT. Which is what everyone feared about him coming out of college. Arizona produces great guards and weak bigs. In any case, Frye is taller, but every bit as soft as Reef. Check out these numbers:

Frye: 26.3min 9.5pts (.433 .167 .787) 5.5reb 0.9ast 0.5stl 0.6blk 1.4TO
Reef: 25.2min 9.9pts (.474 .150 .726) 5.0reb 1.4ast 0.7stl 0.5blk 1.5TO

I submit that adding another Reef to the frontline is NOT the answer to our frontcourt woes.
 
Last edited:
Mentioned before, as a general rule, if the Knicks don't want it, neither do you. In such an arrangement would far prefer to just take the Knicks pick and then involve a thrid team to take the Knicks players (Frye would be a likely component) and pass an ender + pick or some such onto us.

Sac
->Artest
<-#23 Pick+P. Garrity+K. Dooling

NYK
->#23 Pick+Q.Richardson
<-Artest

ORL
->P. Garrity+K. Dooling
<-Q. Richardson

How about that one?
 
I think Artest is alright...as long as we can keep him somewhat under control, he helps us. He will never get the credit he deserves; and we will never get anything of value in return. I personally like him and the toughness he brings to our team. Therefore...KEEP RON!
 
I think Artest is alright...as long as we can keep him somewhat under control, he helps us. He will never get the credit he deserves; and we will never get anything of value in return. I personally like him and the toughness he brings to our team. Therefore...KEEP RON!

We're not going to compete next year, so what's the poing in keeping him? So he can make our team slightly better? Trade him for an ender and a pick.
 
Well, I can pretty much guarantee they aren't going to buy him out. And I'm not convinced that every offer we get for him would necessarily be a low ball attempt.

We have more pressing needs, IMHO, than moving Ron Artest, who at least wants to play and brings it every night.

Yep yep. Of all the vets (Ron, Bibby, SAR, KT, Miller) I think Ron's the last one I'd want to see traded. He has his issues, but at least with him there's some pros to go along with the cons.
 
As an aside, my issue with Frye, as somebody who has watched him, is that he's 6'11" tall and yet I wouldn't hesitate for a second to start something with him. And I'd win too. He is soft, soft SOFT. Which is what everyone feared about him coming out of college. Arizona produces great guards and weak bigs. In any case, Frye is taller, but every bit as soft as Reef. Check out these numbers:

Frye: 26.3min 9.5pts (.433 .167 .787) 5.5reb 0.9ast 0.5stl 0.6blk 1.4TO
Reef: 25.2min 9.9pts (.474 .150 .726) 5.0reb 1.4ast 0.7stl 0.5blk 1.5TO

I submit that adding another Reef to the frontline is NOT the answer to our frontcourt woes.

And THANK YOU Bricklayer...I dunno what people's fascination with Frye is (do we really need another frontcourt player who doesnt rebound or block shots?). If we send Ron to NY I'd rather get Balkman or Lee + expirings back.
 
Back
Top