National Televised Games for Ariza 2009>58 2010>0

Mamba Venom · Post #1 » by **Mamba Venom** » Wed Aug 5, 2009 1:39 pm

Wow

Nothing but love for Ariza last year. But alas he jumped ship for the same $.

He says his reason for bolting was about getting more opportunities. Is there a better opportunity than starting for a championship team???

Last season the Lakers had 58 games on ABC, TNT and ESPN.

This year the Houston Rockets will have 0 zero zilth nada no not a single national televised game. (Oww)

Ariza made an awful choice... I don't want to turn this into a bash thread.

Did Ariza expect this when he made his decision... was he really aware of what a great opportunity he had here in LA or did he take playing for the best team in basketball for granted? Will he realize this after leaving the national (and international) stage behind?

Will Ariza want to come back to LA or does he only care about being the man and not about winning championships?

lakersfanatic · Post #2 » by **lakersfanatic** » Wed Aug 5, 2009 1:49 pm

I don't think he really wanted to leave LA. His agent was trying to play hardball like how he did it with bynum so it backfired on them when Artest decided to go to the Lakers for cheap. Like what Kupchak said on an interview... when we heard of this we jumped on it right away because artest was being courted by the Cavs...

i believe their plan was to wait it out until the lakers give in and pay him a little bit higher. But if he had the choice.. and get the same money, of course he would have gone the LA way. You can tell during his interview that he didn't want to leave. He should fire his agent. He lost out on endorsements... LA atmosphere....etc..

Jase · Post #3 » by **Jase** » Wed Aug 5, 2009 2:52 pm

I get the feeling Ariza is going to be paying for this for a long time. It's a shame.

Post #4 » by **snaquille oatmeal** » Wed Aug 5, 2009 3:01 pm

the irony is that Ariza never really wanted to be "the man", but as soon as Tmac goes down (and he will again) Ariza will have to be "the man", a role he is not suited for. a classic case of "careful what your agent wishes for".

and yeah, after it is all said and done, I will blame Ariza, because reguardless of what the agent does in the end it is his decision to make.

Dexmor · Post #5 » by **Dexmor** » Wed Aug 5, 2009 5:00 pm

Ariza isn't gonna be the "man' on offense. He is a role player who was overrated. He played off Byrant and the Lakers great but he wasnt a guy you throw the ball to and get out of his way. Brooks and Scola will be scoring more then him.

Also he went to the most jinxed team in the nba and he has a history of foot problems. My guess is broken foot by game 30.

itsvic · Post #6 » by **itsvic** » Wed Aug 5, 2009 5:19 pm

I'm still proud of Ariza for helping LA get another ring but I can't wait to see what this current squad can do with Artest. Best of luck to Ariza, unless they are playing the Lakers.

PS - He still needs to fire his agent.

AceFresh · Post #7 » by **AceFresh** » Wed Aug 5, 2009 5:22 pm

itsvic wrote:I'm still proud of Ariza for helping LA get another ring but I can't wait to see what this current squad can do with Artest. Best of luck to Ariza, unless they are playing the Lakers.

PS - He still needs to fire his agent.

Post #8 » by **dockingsched** » Wed Aug 5, 2009 5:25 pm

a few people still think ariza WANTED to leave the lakers? ha

DEEP3CL · Post #9 » by **DEEP3CL** » Wed Aug 5, 2009 6:25 pm

Blame it on David Lee,but they still have games on NBA TV,but it's only 7 times.

Dexmor · Post #10 » by **Dexmor** » Wed Aug 5, 2009 7:35 pm

Well as you guys know I was the only Ariza skeptic on the board. I still am. Im glad they didn't sign him.

Mamba Venom · Post #11 » by **Mamba Venom** » Thu Aug 6, 2009 2:32 am

His agent is the scape goat

Agents handle getting the offer to a certain point...

The agent got the Lakers AND the Rockets to make the same offer.

ARIZA chose to leave... PLAIN AND SIMPLE... Agents work for the players and they must be earning their pay if the agent is the fall guy.

ARIZA wanted to play in Houston and not LA. He could start for either the defending champs or an injury ridden team that will most likely be blown up.

Props for 2008-2009 Ariza... he must have gotten a big head in the play-offs though because he didn't want to be on the Lakers for the same $... forget pride and what he thought he was worth... Ariza made the worst choice of ANY player this off-season and after the Lakers treated him like gold (NY and Orlando sure didn't) it was a prick move.

LAL offered him the same deal and he said peace I'm out Lakers, I want more shots... I don't think he knew that people would lose so much interest in the Rockets so quickly.

Post #12 » by **dockingsched** » Thu Aug 6, 2009 2:36 am

i really think most of your post is completely wrong. ariza chose the rockets over the lakers? ariza wanted to play in houston and not la? LAL offered him the same deal and he said peace I'm out Lakers"

as far as i know, lakers didn't offer anything, they told him to go get offers and comeback.

and i'm 100% the lakers picked up artest before ariza ever got back to them. lakers made the choice, not ariza.

Post #13 » by **snaquille oatmeal** » Thu Aug 6, 2009 2:53 am

dcash4 wrote:i really think most of your post is completely wrong. ariza chose the rockets over the lakers? ariza wanted to play in houston and not la? LAL offered him the same deal and he said peace I'm out Lakers"

as far as i know, lakers didn't offer anything, they told him to go get offers and comeback.

and i'm 100% the lakers picked up artest before ariza ever got back to them. lakers made the choice, not ariza.

I think Lee wanted more than the MLE and Mitch offered just below the MLE. Lee didn't take well so Mitch told him to go get offers elsewhere then comeback. at least that is how I remember the reports, but I am sure some Rockets fan will come here and contradict me.

Dr Aki · Post #14 » by **Dr Aki** » Thu Aug 6, 2009 3:03 am

i dont think he had a choice after the lakers secured a verbal agreement with artest

they had committed to artest and weren't going to have artest/ariza/luke/ammo on the books...

ariza needed to find a good suitor for his services and went to houston, though im not sure why houston instead of cleveland though...

Post #15 » by **dockingsched** » Thu Aug 6, 2009 3:05 am

snaquille oatmeal wrote:
dcash4 wrote:i really think most of your post is completely wrong. ariza chose the rockets over the lakers? ariza wanted to play in houston and not la? LAL offered him the same deal and he said peace I'm out Lakers"

as far as i know, lakers didn't offer anything, they told him to go get offers and comeback.

and i'm 100% the lakers picked up artest before ariza ever got back to them. lakers made the choice, not ariza.
I think Lee wanted more than the MLE and Mitch offered just below the MLE. Lee didn't take well so Mitch told him to go get offers elsewhere then comeback. at least that is how I remember the reports, but I am sure some Rockets fan will come here and contradict me.

i don't think the lakers ever offered anything, at least i don't think there was a report stating that. if there was an offer less than the mle, then thats not any reason to blame ariza either. they had artest in their cross hairs the entire time.

Guy986 · Post #16 » by **Guy986** » Thu Aug 6, 2009 3:06 am

snaquille oatmeal wrote:
dcash4 wrote:i really think most of your post is completely wrong. ariza chose the rockets over the lakers? ariza wanted to play in houston and not la? LAL offered him the same deal and he said peace I'm out Lakers"

as far as i know, lakers didn't offer anything, they told him to go get offers and comeback.

and i'm 100% the lakers picked up artest before ariza ever got back to them. lakers made the choice, not ariza.
I think Lee wanted more than the MLE and Mitch offered just below the MLE. Lee didn't take well so Mitch told him to go get offers elsewhere then comeback. at least that is how I remember the reports, but I am sure some Rockets fan will come here and contradict me.

I think Ariza's agent probably asked for higher than the MLE as a negotiating tactic knowing full well that the Lakers are going to say no. If Lakers offered the MLE to Ariza, he would've taken it. Instead the Lakers signed Ron Artest with the MLE.

The Lakers CHOSE Artest over Ariza. This has nothing to do with Ariza wanting to sign with the Rockets over the Lakers or that his agent screwed up. Lakers signed Artest so they have no money for Ariza. Period.

Post #17 » by **snaquille oatmeal** » Thu Aug 6, 2009 3:12 am

Akiho wrote:i dont think he had a choice after the lakers secured a verbal agreement with artest

they had committed to artest and weren't going to have artest/ariza/luke/ammo on the books...

ariza needed to find a good suitor for his services and went to houston, though im not sure why houston instead of cleveland though...

that is true, but the Lakers talked to Ariza before Artest, but once the Lakers talked to Artest it was bye bye Ariza. I am convinced that if Ariza takes the original offer the Lakers made, Artest would not be with the Lakers.

Erik Eleven · Post #18 » by **Erik Eleven** » Thu Aug 6, 2009 4:23 am

dcash4 wrote:i really think most of your post is completely wrong. ariza chose the rockets over the lakers? ariza wanted to play in houston and not la? LAL offered him the same deal and he said peace I'm out Lakers"

as far as i know, lakers didn't offer anything, they told him to go get offers and comeback.

and i'm 100% the lakers picked up artest before ariza ever got back to them. lakers made the choice, not ariza.

QFT, dc4.

Artest's agent did what Artest wanted — he got him on the Lakers in a hurry, even if it required offering a below market tag that the Lakers simply couldn't resist.

Ariza's agent's plan — to cash in big via escalating counter bids — fell on its face before it even got off the ground. The Lakers could no longer justify paying Ariza big bucks after having committed to Artest. With the Lakers out of the Ariza-race, the bids couldn't be haussed up anymore, and they took the best offer on the table — Houston.

Artest got what he wanted. Ariza's agent got what he wanted.

That's what I think happened.

The primary reason for why he wouldn't go to Cleveland must have been PT (playing behind LBJ), right?

Erik Eleven · Post #19 » by **Erik Eleven** » Thu Aug 6, 2009 4:30 am

And yeah, snaq, I think the Lakers talked to Ariza early, to find out his off-season plan, and told him they want him back. But I'm not sure there was a low-ball offer on the table at that time yet. Did you hear there was?

Sofa King · Post #20 » by **Sofa King** » Thu Aug 6, 2009 6:56 am

I don't think there ever was an offer. Mitch just told Ariza's agent to go out and see what he gets and then Mitch will decide to match it or not. I think Ariza's agent was just taken back by that and expected a solid offer that he didn't get. Just from what I've read about it.

Then when Artest came into the picture, it was more about paying him than anything. Once the Lakers couldn't offer Ariza the MLE, end of story.