Marvin or Artest, who would you rather have?

evildallas · Post #1 » by **evildallas** » Wed Feb 2, 2011 11:39 pm

Marvin is often called out (by me at least) as not producing in proportion to his salary. More accurately I feel his role doesn't match his contract and he doesn't strive for more. He's still young, but at this point he's still more potential and promise than reality.

Ron Artest is older and experiencing a down year. He's unpredictable and moody and in the past has sometimes tried to do more than he should. On the place side, he's got attitude and swagger (and some nasty) and won't likely wilt against big name opposition. At 31 he's got a lot of mileage on him and I don't think it's a stretch to say at this point he's more reputation than reality.

Both make about the same amount with Marvin being about $1M more per season and play the same position. I'm not talking about a trade, if we were to trade Marvin it would most likely to get cap space to spend elsewhere. I'm just asking which player and contract obligation would you rather have on the Hawks roster? Or put it another way which bad contract SF problem would you rather have to deal with?

aniloman · Post #2 » by **aniloman** » Thu Feb 3, 2011 1:57 am

What about Wallace instead. I'm sure MJ would like to take 10 mil off the books for next year. Jamal Crawford for Wallace works on the checker.

Harry10 · Post #3 » by **Harry10** » Thu Feb 3, 2011 2:04 am

both guys right now have a zero for trade value. Marvin will always be a below average starter. Ron, with his elite defense and great 3pt shooting, would be more useful to the Hawks or a pretender playoff team.

evildallas · Post #4 » by **evildallas** » Thu Feb 3, 2011 2:24 am

AS I SAID, I'M NOT SUGGESTING A TRADE. I was curious between 2 guys with low trade values because of similar contracts is it better to have the young guy with upside and questionable inner drive or the veteran with once elite defense and 3pt shooting that might be on the productive slide.

I think Marvin has the greater trade value on the grounds that if he could get hot for a couple games in a row someone might take a chance that he could blossom in an different environment based on his age. I don't think anyone looks at Ron's contract, age, and current performance and thinks with confidence they could get more out of him. For us, I think Ron's self-confidence and defensive nastiness could be useful in place of Marvin. I just don't know if he'd stay mentally right here.

There are plenty of other small forward that I'd like instead of Marvin, but from everything I've heard Marvin was shopped with little success. He just hasn't shown enough for teams to sign up to pay that 7-8M price tag.

Harry10 · Post #5 » by **Harry10** » Thu Feb 3, 2011 3:14 am

evildallas wrote:AS I SAID, I'M NOT SUGGESTING A TRADE. I was curious between 2 guys with low trade values because of similar contracts is it better to have the young guy with upside and questionable inner drive or the veteran with once elite defense and 3pt shooting that might be on the productive slide.

I think Marvin has the greater trade value on the grounds that if he could get hot for a couple games in a row someone might take a chance that he could blossom in an different environment based on his age. I don't think anyone looks at Ron's contract, age, and current performance and thinks with confidence they could get more out of him. For us, I think Ron's self-confidence and defensive nastiness could be useful in place of Marvin. I just don't know if he'd stay mentally right here.

There are plenty of other small forward that I'd like instead of Marvin, but from everything I've heard Marvin was shopped with little success. He just hasn't shown enough for teams to sign up to pay that 7-8M price tag.

at this point, we couldn't get a 2nd round pick for Marvin, but i could see a pretender team like NOH give up an expiring for Ron.

MaceCase · Post #6 » by **MaceCase** » Thu Feb 3, 2011 4:10 am

I rather have the younger brawler :wink:

Besides that, Artest is having two down years in a row with this one being worse than the previous. At what point do you say it's a trend in his ability decreasing rather than it being some function of him not liking his role on their team?
To go even further, he's last two seasons have been worse than Marvin's. For a million more is it really worth debating over the younger more efficient scorer and comparable defender playing the same role?

azuresou1 · Post #7 » by **azuresou1** » Thu Feb 3, 2011 4:48 am

Marvin at this point is better on offense, a better rebounder, doesn't kill ball movement, better on both ends in transition, and not even that much worse than Artest is right now against anyone but maybe Durant.

He's also 7 years younger.