Resigning Ron Artest

Post #21 » by **KF10** » Fri Feb 15, 2008 9:10 am

I have a problem that you said expirings = expirings...True, it accomplish the same objective...But you have to factor in court value in a expiring player as well... It's like saying Ratliff (Expiring) = Jamison (Expiring)...So, that's not true always...

Smills91 · Post #22 » by **Smills91** » Fri Feb 15, 2008 5:59 pm

Oden2 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Atlanta's GM sucks at drafting and passed up players like Brandon Roy, Rudy Gay, Deron Williams, Chris paul, ect. to fill needs above total talent. In many scenarios, rebuilding through the draft is the best scenario and the Blazers have definitely proven that oftentimes drafting on talent over needs is the best thing to do. Quiet honestly, I don't think many teams can do much worse than the Hawks as far as drafting goes and I definitely seen how beneficial building through the draft can be.

BS. Or else he would've draft Paul or Deron instead of Marvin...he THOUGHT Marvin was the BPA and not only was he not, but he played the SAME position as Josh Smith/Childress. Knight went for BPA, not need and it came back and bit him in the butt.

Vlade4life · Post #23 » by **Vlade4life** » Fri Feb 15, 2008 6:07 pm

eeeww, I'd rather die than see the kings re-sign that nut.

Smills91 · Post #24 » by **Smills91** » Fri Feb 15, 2008 6:14 pm

Vlade4life wrote:eeeww, I'd rather die than see the kings re-sign that nut.

I hope the Kings re-sign Ron. Long-term.

sackings916 · Post #25 » by **sackings916** » Fri Feb 15, 2008 6:23 pm

Vlade4life wrote:eeeww, I'd rather die than see the kings re-sign that nut.

eff outta here

Vlade4life · Post #26 » by **Vlade4life** » Fri Feb 15, 2008 6:31 pm

sackings916 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

eff outta here

No, I think I'll stay.

Smills91 · Post #27 » by **Smills91** » Fri Feb 15, 2008 6:37 pm

Vlade4life wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

No, I think I'll stay.

Unless, Ron-Ron re-signs. ;-)

Then you're gone-gone.

sackings916 · Post #28 » by **sackings916** » Fri Feb 15, 2008 6:54 pm

Vlade4life wrote:eeeww, I'd rather die than see the kings re-sign that nut.

your dream lineup is probly
Beno
Martin
Garcia
Justin Williams
Ben Wallace

Vlade4life · Post #29 » by **Vlade4life** » Fri Feb 15, 2008 7:40 pm

Smills91 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Unless, Ron-Ron re-signs. Then you're gone-gone.

lol, yea you're probably right, but I make no guaruntees

Bac2Basics · Post #30 » by **Bac2Basics** » Fri Feb 15, 2008 7:52 pm

Artest just isn't in the long term plans of Sacramento, it makes much more sense for both sides to move him.

_SRV_ · Post #31 » by **_SRV_** » Fri Feb 15, 2008 8:03 pm

It makes more sense to move Bibby and make room for Artest, but that doesn't seem to be happening.

Smills91 · Post #32 » by **Smills91** » Fri Feb 15, 2008 8:54 pm

_SRV_ wrote:It makes more sense to move Bibby and make room for Artest, but that doesn't seem to be happening.

+1, especially if we feel we can re-sign Beno for part of the MLE.

Bac2Basics · Post #33 » by **Bac2Basics** » Fri Feb 15, 2008 11:24 pm

_SRV_ wrote:It makes more sense to move Bibby and make room for Artest, but that doesn't seem to be happening.

Actually it makes the most sense to move both Bibby & Artest.

SacKingZZZ · Post #34 » by **SacKingZZZ** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 6:19 am

mitchweber wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Absolutely. The only thing that Ron hurts is our draft pick.

Wow, just going by what I have seen/heard I think the evidence leans towards the opposite.

Post #35 » by **pillwenney** » Sun Feb 17, 2008 6:11 am

SacKingZZZ wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Wow, just going by what I have seen/heard I think the evidence leans towards the opposite.

What evidence is that? I'm not arguing that we're trying to trade him, but what's the evidence that that is the reasoning?

SacKingZZZ · Post #36 » by **SacKingZZZ** » Sun Feb 17, 2008 6:32 am

What reasoning? I think I lost you at some point. I am just saying that Artest has been out there so much that if the Kings had any want to re-sign him long term he wouldn't be in so many discussions.

Post #37 » by **Wolfay** » Sun Feb 17, 2008 6:43 am

Smills91 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

I hope the Kings re-sign Ron. Long-term.

+1

Artest is one of the best all around players in the league- there's literally almost nothing he can't do. As far as his off-the-court antics, I haven't seen very many since he's come to Sac. If he's relatively happy and willing to stay with us, why not resign him?

Post #38 » by **pillwenney** » Sun Feb 17, 2008 6:51 am

SacKingZZZ wrote:What reasoning? I think I lost you at some point. I am just saying that Artest has been out there so much that if the Kings had any want to re-sign him long term he wouldn't be in so many discussions.

That's not what I'm arguing--I'm arguing that if we could afford to re-sign him, that we would. You seem to be arguing that if we could re-sign him that we still wouldn't because we're not looking to re-sign him now. From how I understand it, you're saying that because we can't afford to re-sign him (and because of that, are trying to trade him) that we wouldn't want to re-sign him anyway.

Post #39 » by **pillwenney** » Sun Feb 17, 2008 6:52 am

SacKingZZZ wrote:What reasoning? I think I lost you at some point. I am just saying that Artest has been out there so much that if the Kings had any want to re-sign him long term he wouldn't be in so many discussions.

That's not what I'm arguing--I'm arguing that if we could afford to re-sign him, that we would. You seem to be arguing that if we could re-sign him that we still wouldn't because we're not looking to re-sign him now. From how I understand it, you're saying that because we can't afford to re-sign him (and because of that, are trying to trade him) that we wouldn't want to re-sign him anyway.

SacKingZZZ · Post #40 » by **SacKingZZZ** » Sun Feb 17, 2008 7:25 am

No that's not what I am saying, what I am saying is the Kings have NO interest in taking on the risk you inherently take with re-signing a guy like Artest long term because the eventual and mostly immediate outcome won't yield much in the way of much greater success than without him at all. Say that in one breath!

I am saying this: Regardless of financial situation, I believe the Kings will not and do not want to re-sign Ron Artest. Period. End of story. In fact, they might not even bring Ron back if he agreed to PAY to play for the Kings.