They're Playing Basketball!

NBA Roundtable: Did Lakers make mistake signing Artest over Ariza?
SI.com

SI.com's NBA writers analyze the latest news and address hot topics from around the league each week.

1. Ron Artest said Trevor Ariza "is a better player," and it's been argued that Ariza was a better fit in L.A. Did the Lakers make a mistake in choosing Artest over Ariza last offseason?

Ian Thomsen: We can't answer that until we see their impact in the playoffs. Ariza is scoring more for Houston, but he's also getting more shots on his depleted team while shooting a lower percentage (38.8 percent) than Artest (41.8 percent). So the numbers don't give Ariza the advantage because he's playing in an entirely different environment. Artest was hired to make a difference in the postseason and help the Lakers win another championship. The Lakers are slightly better defensively this season -- opponents are shooting 44.3 percent, as opposed to 44.7 percent last year -- but it all comes down to the playoff matchups and how he deals with the likes of Manu Ginobili, Caron Butler or Carmelo Anthony. I'm not going to call his signing a mistake while the Lakers remain the favorite in the West.

Jack McCallum: Going to Ron-Ron for piquant hoops analysis is like going to Provo, Utah, for a night on the town: It just ain't the place. If you read the entire Artest interview -- "[Ariza's] a role player, a great role player. I haven't been a role player ..." -- I'm not even sure the man was serious or even concentrating on the question. (Artest was probably tweeting as he spoke.) I'm on record as saying that I love Ariza's game, but I'm also on record as saying the virtual trade was a good one, and, during the playoffs, Artest's defense will make a positive difference for L.A. As far as how Artest fits in long-term with the Lakers, well, that's another story.

Frank Hughes: I would have gone with Ariza over Artest. He is six years younger than Artest and he has far less baggage. Plus, Ariza's game just seems to fit better with Kobe Bryant's. In addition, you almost feel like Ariza should have been rewarded for making some of the defensive plays that he did during the playoffs last year. So was the trade a mistake? I guess it remains to be seen whether the Lakers repeat before that can be truly answered.

Chris Mannix: You can't judge the Artest-Ariza question until June, because if the Lakers don't win the whole shebang, then yes, they screwed up. No one has ever questioned whether Artest was a better player than Ariza -- just whether he was a better fit as a role player on a stocked squad. If L.A. wins, it worked out. If it doesn't, let the second-guessing begin.

I'm starting to bristle at the Artest/Ariza comparison game. I understand Ron Artest's play hasn't been at the level many would have expected this season but the Lakers still have the second best record in the league. I don't think there's a negative situation that needs to be explained. Amd if there was a problem I'd say injuries to Pau Gasol, Andrew Bynum and Luke Walton (not to mention Kobe) are just as responsbile for the Lakers not being as good as possible.

Ariza is a younger player than Artest and seemingly a rising star who meshed well with the Lakers. But what people forget is that L.A. tried to resign Ariza for what was a decent amount of money. But Ariza bristled at their offer, instead wanting superstar bucks. Houston gave him that kind of money and Artest accepted a big pay dock to come and try and be a role player in L.A. The dollars and cents worked out better with Artest and if he plays at 85% of what Ariza would have then this is still a good deal. Honestly, I think his toughness is going to pay off huge when things start getting chippy in the playoffs. It's bound to happen, especially if the Lakers draw the Thuggets.