LAKERS DONE DIRTY TO ARIZA

by STREAKINGLIGHTS on Jul 2, 2009 10:53 PM PDT Comment 21 comments

First, this trade got me all shook'd up - I think its fair to say in fact it blind-sided me. But it turns out, it wasn't Trevor Ariza's fault... at least not entirely as to why today he was not picked up in favor for Ron Artest. We all know the subplots as to why Ron Ron decided to come to Laker town - but we didn't know the subplots behind why the Lakers done dirty to Ariza:

According to ESPN:

Looks like it was the LAKERS who did Ariza dirty - Apparently Lakers GM Mitch Kupchak told Lee (Ariza's agent) to shop around and come back to the Lakers, and then they will *perhaps* match their offer (like a Restricted Free Agent).

Apparently Ariza was mad and then with Artest being signed (and seriously, kind of a steal - 3 years, $18 million?)...well, we know what happened.

Was it fair for Ariza to be put in this situation? And, one has to really question - why in the hell didn't he sign with Cleveland for the Mid-Level Exception if he was going to sign that at Houston (or, hmm... the original team that offered...you know, the LAKERS?!) ???

At first, I thought this was Ariza being greedy and biting the hand that fed him playing time, minutes, and well, learning from one of the best players in the game (cough*Kobe Bryant*cough), and wanting more money then he deserved (Having a breakout-year in playoff times ONCE isn't enough to net you the $8 million reported figure he wanted) - if anything, a 3 year deal with a 3rd year option would have probably been better, considering the current economic status. But instead, Ariza is now going from a championship contending team to a rebuilding team....

Thoughts? Because today's got me questioning why this has all happened...and I'm at a loss of words (not literally).

Check out my blog @ http://streakinglights.blogspot.com/

0 recs | Comment 21 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

It's bullcrap

Lee played hardball and wanted more than the midlevel from Kupchak, who basically told Lee to search the market for a better offer (hint: there wasn’t one) and then Lee threw a massive tantrum in response.

by Ben R on Jul 2, 2009 11:30 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

exactly

Well, sir, you are a cowardly son of a bitch! You just shot an unarmed man!.......Well, he should have armed himself if he's going to decorate his saloon with my friend. – Will Munny

by pslakerfan on Jul 3, 2009 12:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

it's a business

i presume lakers had not expected artest to come and offer himself at such a good price. It still ends up being trevor’s fault for not taking the first offer.

by Nostance on Jul 2, 2009 11:54 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

SQUEAKY CLEAN ARIZA TRIED TO PLAY DIRTY, LAKERS CAME OUT CLEAN

I agree with Ben R. about the tantrum and Nostance’s stance on the business of this situation. It was Ariza that likely threw the tantrum after he realized the market for him was as dry as the Sahara desert. Bad decision.

Look, if Ariza plays nice in the aftermath there is precedent that a player can leave and come back. Witness Fisher’s exit to Golden State, tour in Utah, and return to glory with the Lakers.

The trouble with Ariza’s situation is that he’s leaving for the same amount he would have gotten in L.A. He’s probably bitter that the Lakers held a better hand when he played his.

They say time heals all wounds…however, I believe in this case the wound can become gaping for Ariza if the Lakers win one or more championships w/ Artest.

by 32Laker24-8 on Jul 3, 2009 12:11 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

that's stupid

sorry, but you’re reading it totally wrong… is it wrong for the lakers to tell a player to go out try to find the best price out there, and come back with it? it shows the player that the lakers will pay fair market value. if the market is good, and the price is fair then the lakers will re-sign.. there’s no obligation for the lakers to taken on stupid salary.

david lee is a douche and a bad agent to boot… badly played.

by dach on Jul 3, 2009 12:39 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

the lakers OFFERED him a contract. He didn't take it.

The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist.

by Justin N. on Jul 3, 2009 12:44 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I agree

Look, I love Ariza and loathe Artest personally. Plus there is a risk that Artest won’t fit in well, learn the O or D enough, etc. But one thing the Lakers did is avoid overpaying for Ariza.

For example: Sacha gets a big contract after ONE good year and then goes zero for 100 (or however many) in the 2009 playoffs. Now they can’t cut him, can’t trade him. Plus Luke’s contract is big considering. . .

And like I said, I love me some Trevor but he wants to be paid like he can hit 45% of his 3 pointers in the Finals. He deserves as much money as he can get but who wants to bet that he will continue at that percentage?

Wish him all the best but in Houston he won’t be playing next to Kobe, Pau, Lamar, etc. who draw a lot of attention and leave Trev with open shots.

But like I said, I like the guy and will miss him.

by lazNirv on Jul 3, 2009 2:19 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree that the Agent played hardball...and Ariza lost because of that

But I just thought I’d put this out there – in all reality, its just sad to see how Ariza could have just gone the MLE with Lakers but we’ll never know now… ’cept when (no ifs) the Lakers win in 2010 with Artest.

Like lazNirv says, i HATE Artest – I would have loved to see a repeat (3-peat? 4-peat?) with the original team that won this year but unfortunetly, ~$5.8 million isn’t enough apparently to stay in Laker town…

Find the latest in stars * media * hype+ * sports * fashion
@ STRKNG LIGHTS BLOG (http://streakinglights.blogspot.com/)

by STREAKINGLIGHTS on Jul 3, 2009 3:01 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

all im saying

if ariza wasnt on the lakers last year

theres no way in hell lakers would have won the championship

no one can deny that

that said artest is a short term upgrade

but i think kupchak had a very myopic view about this seeing how much ariza has shown

at a young age

but then again great contract for an amazing player like artest

by andrew33 on Jul 3, 2009 9:25 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

No one is denying that,

Ariza did play well and he got confient because of it so he demanded more money than he is worth. It’s okay if Artest is a short term upgrade because he was cheap.

by Ariel112 on Jul 3, 2009 9:52 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

oh and

i hope artest doesnt take any shots away from gasol

im not a lakers fan

but i absolutely love gasol

and he doesnt get enough shots as it is

by andrew33 on Jul 3, 2009 9:27 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Artest takes about twice the amount of shots as Ariza,

do the math, shots will be taken away from everyone, except Kobe.

by Ariel112 on Jul 3, 2009 9:54 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

i still this it's kobes fault

if he opts out and takes 3 million less, then they resign Trever! Trever is happy because he is making the money he wants, Lakers are happy because they keep the 24 year old, and kobe is happy because he knows he can get more than 1 ring with this squad. But instead that 3 million was important. Though Kobe deserves the money i just figured the fact that the laker supported him through everything (paying for a private jet for Colorado, traded shaq, fired phil, and even put up with Kobe demanding a trade)

Kobe is a good player, i just thought for a little less money he can win more than another ring, and show his appreciation for everything. And yes Kobe does put butts in the seats but its the Lakers…..It’s America’s team. Butts would have been in the seats regardless….

in conclusion: I am not saying that Kobe doesn’t deserve to be the highest paid player in the NBA, he deserves every dollar he signs for, but i just kind of expected a little more unselfishness. And i know I am going to get a lot of shit for this because lets face it Kobe is the Lakers jesus; but after everything he has been through, i just thought he would do everything he could to keep this team together….and he had a chance to but chose not to.

by shadowchicken on Jul 3, 2009 12:37 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

It’s not Kobe’s fault. Regardless of how much Kobe makes or will make, Mitch was all set out to pay Ariza the MLE for 5 years plus a 10.5% raise each year. Ariza’s agent declined the deal saying that Mitch was not being appreciative of Ariza’s efforts throughout the playoffs and regular season, basically saying Mitch didn’t understand Ariza’s REAL value.

Then Ariza went on and signed to Houston, who offered the same amount of money but Ariza will now only get an 8.5% raise. Therefore Ariza took less money to sign with a team that isn’t a title contender AND took less money. Money wasn’t the issue, it was about Ariza and his agent playing their cards and hoping that Mitch would act on impulse and sign Ariza to an even bigger deal. It didn’t happen and now Ariza’s stuck in Houston.

Even if Kobe takes a pay cut it doesn’t change the fact that Ariza’s agent stinks and doesn’t know how to price his players at market value. He over values his players way too much. David Lee drove Trevor out of LA.

by intuitive on Jul 3, 2009 2:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I personally in no way agree that this is Kobe’s fault but then again a lot of people like to lay the blame on him when things aren’t going right (didn’t make the playoffs, Shaq gets traded, etc). It will however be interesting to hear his thoughts about this deal once it is official.

The free agency period is hardly over yet for the Lakers. I don’t think this move is as enticing if they don’t re-sign LO, which I’m pretty sure they’ll be able to do now at more than fair market value. Having Shannon Brown back in the fold would round out the 2009-10 Laker roster.

by Samurai on Jul 3, 2009 8:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

even if kobe takes 3 million less

i doubt mitch would want to pay ariza the 8-9 mil, especially if he already had artest in mind for plan B. without even thinking about luxury tax, do you think mitch would’ve taken a 8-9 mil Ariza over a MLE Artest?

by Nostance on Jul 3, 2009 1:38 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

who cares!

Artest > ariza

sure he’s got some baggage, but theres no one disputing the fact artest is more talented. We get a huge upgrade for kobe’s last couple years. Kobe doesnt have time to wait for ariza to develop. You guys are all forgetting what ariza played like during the regular season. There was always a dispute over playing time between walton and ariza. Now theres no argument. No MORE LUKE! Artest is gona be better at defending pierce, melo, and LEBRON!

by robi s on Jul 3, 2009 8:40 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Thank you!

I agree 100%

by PURPLE AND GOLD FOR LIFE on Jul 3, 2009 8:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

It doesn’t really matter about who is more talented. It’s about which guy fits better within the system.

by intuitive on Jul 3, 2009 9:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

WHAT??

Ariza>Artest!!! What you see from artest is what you get. Ariza is only 2 fucking 4! You thought he played well? He is the reason why the lakers beat the Nuggets (2 last min. steals? going on 12-0 runs by himself) and he is only 24. Ariza always has to guard the other teams best guard and he still found a way (after running threw screens, and chasing and defending) to average 12+points a game. And all of that stuff about Him taking less money, is bullshit. Now he doesn’t care about the money; he feels disrespected by the lakers. You know the same disrespect Kobe felt when Kobe demanded a trade. Is 9-10 million worth keeping a guy who is a) a great defender b) a guy who already knows the offense c) who has proven himself on the one stage that really counts (the playoffs) d) a guy who isn’t crazy e) a guy who is crazy athletic and can jump out of the gym f) he is 24! He will only get better (unless he blows out a knee or something)

This goes well beyond money for Ariza, he felt disrespected. And he chose to go to the Rockets to prove a point.

by shadowchicken on Jul 4, 2009 12:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Maybe so but I the point will be lost on the Lakers. You hear a lot of players talk about how this is a business and that seems to be something that Trevor didn’t really take to heart. It would have been a poor business decision to sign him for 5 years at around 8-9 million per. Have you not forgotten how much luxury tax the Lakers will be paying once they have paid out the cash to just bring Odom back? They got a great deal on Artest who is saying all the right things now and appears to fit in well with our plans to compete at a high level for the next 3 years.

The jury is still out on Ariza as to whether he will be a star in this league and deserve the kind of money that he was initially seeking. Remember that he was a role player on a championship team, albeit an important one. No matter how you feel about him, Artest has put up some very consistent stats over the course of his career and does have the ability without question to make the Lakers even stronger than they were this year.

by Samurai on Jul 4, 2009 9:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs