Hollinger Insider: Artest Vs Ariza

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/play...?columnist=hollinger_john&page=PERDiem-100602

lock if posted

Now that the Lakers are back in the NBA Finals, it shines a brighter light than ever on one of the few key decisions L.A. had to make since winning the title 12 months ago: The de facto trade of Trevor Ariza for Ron Artest.



Such a swap has become extremely rare in NBA circles, because these days most deals are done based on money and cap considerations. Not this one. While technically this was two separate free-agent signings (Ariza to the Rockets, followed by Artest to the Lakers), in practice, this was a classic example of the so-called "challenge trade" -- L.A. thought Artest was better for them than Ariza, and Houston thought the exact opposite in its case.



Most fans found Houston's logic more compelling, as Ariza was the younger of the two and had completed an outstanding 2009 playoffs. Indeed, the Rockets are likely to come out ahead over the long term -- both players have five-year deals, and by the last year, Ariza will still be in his prime at 29, while Artest will be long past his at 34.




NBA Today: 6/2
Play PodcastRyen Russillo previews the NBA Finals and talks to Trevor Ariza about replacing Ron Artest in Houston. Plus, Dallas' Caron Butler shares his thoughts on this summer's free agency.

More Podcasts »



However, L.A.'s window is different than the Rockets'. The Lakers are in win-now mode while they have Kobe Bryant and Pau Gasol in their prime, and are willing to deal with the fallout later if Artest declines with age. Additionally, the Lakers are more capable than any other team of swallowing the tail end of a bad deal because they rake in so much revenue at the gate.



And to win now, as I've maintained since this first went down in July, Artest was the better play. We'll get to the reasons in a minute, but first I want to point out that L.A. proved it learned two important lessons in pulling the trigger on Artest that other champions would do well to follow.



The first was to avoid complacency, something the Lakers have been guilty of in the past despite their success. Most notably, the Lakers' unwillingness to upgrade an aging roster around the dominant core of Shaquille O'Neal and Bryant should have cost them the 2002 championship, and finally did in 2003; it took them six years to scale the mountain again. Pulling the trigger on Artest was a sign they wouldn't sit idly again while Rome burned.



The other lesson they learned was not to confuse good fortune with a good plan. Ariza excelled as a spot-up shooter playing off Bryant and Gasol in the 2009 playoffs, but that was over the course of 23 games. The much larger sample of games in the rest of Ariza's career indicated he wasn't nearly as good a shooter as he'd been in the postseason. Ariza made 47.6 percent of his 3s during the 2009 playoffs but only 29.9 percent during the rest of his career up until that point. It didn't take a rocket scientist to figure out which trend was more likely to prevail in the future. Not surprisingly, Ariza shot 33.4 percent on 3s for Houston this season.



In fact, while Lakers fans spent half the year lamenting the swap, Ariza went on to have a worse season in Houston than Artest had in 2008-09, posting a miserable 48.8 true shooting percentage while averaging 14.9 points a game. In comparison, Artest had a 51.1 TS percentage in his last season in Houston -- while shooting 39.9 percent on 3s -- and averaged 17.1 points in similar playing time.



Of interest to the Lakers is that Artest was better as a spot-up shooter, too. He hit 35.5 percent this past season, which wasn't great but it did make him a more reliable floor-spacer than the man he replaced. And despite all the criticism of Artest's ability to run the triangle -- which, at least partly, is a result of the hocus-pocus spell Phil Jackson has conducted on the media that now has people thinking it requires several advanced degrees from Princeton to run this offense correctly -- he wasn't much different from Ariza in terms of overall production. Artest's player efficiency rating was slightly worse than Ariza's because, as usual, he shot quite poorly on 2s (45.3 percent), but primarily his numbers were down because he wasn't shooting nearly as often.



So it was ironic that the perception of Artest's season turned at least in part as a result of a crazy shot. Artest shot a quick 3 with 56 seconds left in Game 5 of the Western Conference finals against Phoenix with his team up by three points, when L.A. could have run 20 seconds more off the clock. I'm not sure it would have mattered -- Phoenix was likely to have two more possessions regardless of what Artest did, and that's exactly how many it ended up with -- and in that sense his choice, while suboptimal, was not as hurtful a gaffe as many have written.



In fact, the past two games against Phoenix ended up providing some of the greatest value from the deal. Artest made the winning shot in Game 5 against Phoenix, of course, on a fairly spectacular flip at the buzzer after charging in to rebound Kobe's airball. And in the finale, it was Artest's strong first half -- 17 of his season-high 25 points came before halftime -- that set the stage for Kobe's heroics down the stretch. All told, he averaged a solid 14.3 points on 45.9 percent shooting against the Suns.




[+] EnlargeBrian Babineau/NBAE/Getty Images
Ron Artest's lockdown defense on Paul Pierce could be the difference against the Celtics in the Finals.


Artest was also crucial for the Lakers' escaping the first round against Oklahoma City. Even though he struggled offensively, he played good defense on Kevin Durant. With Artest harassing him, the Thunder's 6-foot-10 star forward shot just 35.0 percent in the series, scored five points fewer than his regular-season average and made nearly four turnovers a game.



It's here we see why the Lakers wanted him so much and why he might be crucial again in the Finals. The Lakers' most glaring weakness entering the season was matching up against big small forwards such as LeBron James and Carmelo Anthony, and while L.A. won't end up facing either the Cavs or the Nuggets this postseason, they'll still end up with two key series against oversized 3s.



Durant was the first, but now comes the biggest test -- a matchup against Boston's Paul Pierce in the Finals. Two years ago, Pierce bedeviled the Lakers in the Finals, storming to MVP honors by averaging 21.8 points and 6.3 assists while earning 53 free throw attempts in six games. However, Pierce was working against lesser opposition -- the likes of Vladimir Radmanovic, Luke Walton and occasionally Bryant. Ariza played only 35 minutes that entire series, nearly half of which came in the blowouts in Games 2 and 6, and one might argue that his presence would have improved things, too. But Artest is an upgrade to the next degree.



Even when the Lakers weren't matched up against the LeBrons and Melos, Artest made an impact. Relative to the league, L.A's defensive results improved slightly overall, from 2.9 points per 100 possessions better than the average a year ago to 3.1 points better this year, and the difference was greatest with Artest on the court. The Lakers gave up 4.5 points per 100 possessions less with him on the court, according to 82games.com, making him L.A.'s most indispensable defender.



And Pierce? In two games against the Lakers this season, Artest held him completely in check. The final tally was 13.0 points, 2.5 assists and only 4 free throw attempts per game and 40 percent shooting.



It will be up to Artest to keep Pierce's production in that range over the next two weeks, and it won't be easy given how well Pierce has played to this point in the postseason. If Artest succeeds, however, he'll walk away with his first championship ring … and the Lakers' oft-criticized decision to swap out Ariza for Artest will have been vindicated.