RealGM

"Of course (Artest not being traded) changes a lot of about your perspective; a lot of things change," said Stevens, whose client will earn $7.4 million next season if he doesn't opt out. "Exercising our option at this point is possible, but not likely.


"It's possible, but it's not likely to happen at this point."


"There were situations where his name was mentioned in trade rumors, and - like anyone else - that brings an unsteadiness and an apprehension to (in regards to) your value to the organization," Stevens said. "But after seeing some of the moves that they have made, and their steady effort to keep him there, Ron is happy being in Sacramento...We're happy that this trade process went the way it went, and he's trying to do his best to make a push for the playoffs and help be a leader for this young team."

http://www.sacbee.com/kings/story/730413.html

Interesting.

wow... lets see if it holds true.

and oh, LOL @ Denver for thinking he was a rental.

Funny how everyone on other boards, SWEAR THIS MEANS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. "OH its just an agent saying something, and so on"

I told everyone best thing to do is build with artest, but still warriors and knicks fans swear this is just fake. But they will see.

I hate when you got to wait so long to prove someone wrong.

I love Artest! =)

Is it possible to change my name from bibbinator to ArtestIsMyBFF ? lol

I bet you anything this is how it goes down. Artest doesn't opt out, the kings him a 4 year deal... starting at high 8/9 million per year.

I been saying this is a great way to re-sign artest cheap because no one else has the money. Then trade brad next year for expirings.

I had been all for dumping Artest rather than deal with his flip flopping and "issues" but as the deadline got closer, I felt they should have kept him (which they did) and try and dump Salmons. His value was pretty high (probably as high as it was going to be) and plenty of teams were looking for a player with both his skillset and reasonable contract. He could have fetched a pick or a young player and freed up even more time for Garcia.

Sacramento_King wrote:I had been all for dumping Artest rather than deal with his flip flopping and "issues" but as the deadline got closer, I felt they should have kept him (which they did) and try and dump Salmons. His value was pretty high (probably as high as it was going to be) and plenty of teams were looking for a player with both his skillset and reasonable contract. He could have fetched a pick or a young player and freed up even more time for Garcia.

Yeah I actually kinda wished we would've pulled the trigger on a Salmons deal or atleast looked into it.

Well I think one of either Salmons or Artest has to go. I like them both but Ron is better so I would keep him. However, I get the feeling we will trade Ron in a sign and trade this offseason.

It juts doesnt make sense to sign and trade him, cuz were not going to get a better player then artest, and if we jut do it for expirings were better off just letting him walk.

So what would the point be of a sign and trade?

Sports_1140 wrote:It juts doesnt make sense to sign and trade him, cuz were not going to get a better player then artest, and if we jut do it for expirings were better off just letting him walk.

So what would the point be of a sign and trade?

Well I asked this in another thread but got no reply,
When is the first date we can trade again? or do s&t's?

Because a Artest + Miller for Marbury and pick swap would be okay..not great
or an

Artest + Shareef + (Someone else, moore/thomas/salmons someone) for Marbury and pickswap is also good.

We move up 4-5 spots and draft Bayless and shed salary
NYK moves down a few spots and drafts a Mayo and gets their star

We would be
Bayless/Martin/Garcia/Williams/Hawes
NYK would be
Mayo/Crawford/Artest/Randolph/Curry

Wait what? your saying artest and miller for marbury and pick swap. Not only is that stupid, but the knicks wouldnt trade their pick anyways.

NOw maybe the kings do artest / thomas for pick swap and marbury but the knicks wont. And thats just a stupid trade overall.

deNIEd wrote:Well I asked this in another thread but got no reply,
When is the first date we can trade again? or do s&t's?

Because a Artest + Miller for Marbury and pick swap would be okay..not great
or an

Artest + Shareef + (Someone else, moore/thomas/salmons someone) for Marbury and pickswap is also good.

We move up 4-5 spots and draft Bayless and shed salary
NYK moves down a few spots and drafts a Mayo and gets their star

We would be
Bayless/Martin/Garcia/Williams/Hawes
NYK would be
Mayo/Crawford/Artest/Randolph/Curry

If we're in position to get Mayo I think I'd just draft him and keep Ron anyway.

Sports_1140 wrote:Wait what? your saying artest and miller for marbury and pick swap. Not only is that stupid, but the knicks wouldnt trade their pick anyways.

NOw maybe the kings do artest / thomas for pick swap and marbury but the knicks wont. And thats just a stupid trade overall.

Artest and Miller for an expiring contract and a pick swap yes.
It all depends on if the Kings want to keep Artest or not. If not, this deal is great for us. It gives us half a year to have Miller teach Hawes, and Artest teach Sheldon. Marbury could be instantly cut, or kept to trade during the allstar period, regardless it'd be a 20 mil expiring. In our situation, only 2 positions would help us, that's why its cruicial we get the best players at that position. Meaning, drafting a Horford is needed, why a Noah not as much. Bayless will most likely be an allstar PG in the league, exactly what we need.

However, NYK is in a different situation. They don't have a single set position, and every position is expendable. Similiar to drafting a Hawes or Brewer doesn't matter if your weak at both the C and SF position. They also get their ticket seller allstar type player in Artest, and another amazing player in Miller.

And this is how our youngsters get buried for 2 years, instead of one.....

One positive is maybe we can trade Artest on draft night? I can't remember how that stuff works. Still, keeping Ron longterm is the wrong thing to do. If he doesn't opt out it makes things even more complicated. And trading John Salmons? I think we are way past the point of being able to build a contending team around Artest, financially and asset wise it just isn't going to happen. It's time Petrie woke up from his litttle dream now.

He'll opt out...

SacKingZZZ wrote:And this is how our youngsters get buried for 2 years, instead of one.....

One positive is maybe we can trade Artest on draft night? I can't remember how that stuff works. Still, keeping Ron longterm is the wrong thing to do. If he doesn't opt out it makes things even more complicated. And trading John Salmons? I think we are way past the point of being able to build a contending team around Artest, financially and asset wise it just isn't going to happen. It's time Petrie woke up from his litttle dream now.

LOL you're hilarious. Your logic makes no sense at all. Why are we past the point in building a contending team around Artest? In your words "financially and asset wise." LOL whats that supposed to mean? Artest only makes about 7 mill a year. please explain this because you make no sense.

And what would you do if you were Petrie? Trade Artest on draft day? For who? Darko Milicic?

Sports_1140 wrote:I bet you anything this is how it goes down. Artest doesn't opt out, the kings him a 4 year deal... starting at high 8/9 million per year.

I been saying this is a great way to re-sign artest cheap because no one else has the money. Then trade brad next year for expirings.

And then what!? How in the world could we possibly be anything but mediocre in that scenario? There goes our cap space, there goes a rebuild, there goes developing young players and hopefully getting lucky with one or two of them along with draft picks.

sackings916 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



LOL you're hilarious. Your logic makes no sense at all. Why are we past the point in building a contending team around Artest? In your words "financially and asset wise." LOL whats that supposed to mean? Artest only makes about 7 mill a year. please explain this because you make no sense.

And what would you do if you were Petrie? Trade Artest on draft day? For who? Darko Milicic?

Hmmm... pretty simple really. No cap space, no way to bring impact players to surround Artest with. Pretty simple, huh?

SacKingZZZ wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



And then what!? How in the world could we possibly be anything but mediocre in that scenario? There goes our cap space, there goes a rebuild, there goes developing young players and hopefully getting lucky with one or two of them along with draft picks.

lol Dude, we don't HAVE any young players behind Ron. We have Salmons and Cisco. Cisco should get his minutes regardless of Ron being here or not and Salmons is the same age as Ron... Kevin is already basically developed. We have 2 young frontcourt players that Mikki and Brad are in the way of though. We won't have much cap space and there aren't really any FAs better than Ron anyway.

Draft a PG this year with our 10-12 pick and we should be alright. We should've never signed Reef or Mikki, that's what really screwed us over. Reef **** over our salary cap and Mikki is in the way of Spencer and Shelden. Those are the guys stopping us from having cap room, all these crappy MLE signings.

SacKingZZZ wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



Hmmm... pretty simple really. No cap space, no way to bring impact players to surround Artest with. Pretty simple, huh?

No not really. What does Artest have to do with this team having no cap space? Its other players contracts NOT Artest that is holding this team down. Artest is a BARGAIN at 7 mill/year, and if he does get resigned I honestly dont see it being that much higher than that. And for Artest's production and leadership he is WELL WORTH that price.