PDA

View Full Version : Artest was clutch last night..



Thirtysomethin
04-08-2006, 09:23 AM
I hate to bring this up, but just watched the highlights on sportscenter, he hit a big 3 late to ty the game and then hit a jumper to take the lead.

This happened on the road btw,

Unclebuck
04-08-2006, 09:29 AM
he did a lot more than that

rexnom
04-08-2006, 09:53 AM
I always thought Artest was clutch. Most competitive guys are.

317Kim
04-08-2006, 10:00 AM
http://www.nba.com/features/nestle/crunch_time_stat.html

10
Artest
Sacramento's Ron Artest is known for his defense, but it was his offense that lifted the Kings down the stretch on Friday. With Sacto trailing the Clippers (the No. 5 team in the West) by three, Artest brought the ball up court and stuck a trifecta to tie the game at 92 with 1:10 remaining. The ball went back to him in the Kings' next trip up the court and this time he bodied his way into the lane and hit a fadeaway over Cuttino Mobley to give Sacramento a 94-92 lead with 34 ticks to go. The Kings left L.A. with a 96-93 win and moved into the No. 7 spot in the West with five games left. Artest finished with 10 Nestlé Crunch Time Points.

Ron-Ron is king for a day: Video

Kegboy
04-08-2006, 12:29 PM
Uh, after game 6, I don't see how anyone can call Ron clutch.

ChicagoJ
04-09-2006, 12:04 AM
Not much pressure, yet.

He can do it sometimes in the regular season when it doesn't really matter.

He'll crumble. That's 100% certain.

Big Smooth
04-09-2006, 12:27 AM
Not much pressure, yet.

He can do it sometimes in the regular season when it doesn't really matter.

He'll crumble. That's 100% certain.

Not really a fair, accurate statement. Unless one wants to base Ron Artest's entire postseason experience on one bad series against Detroit who BTW won the title that season and flustered Kobe Bryant & Shaq in the process.

One bad series against a superior defensive team does not make Artest a choke any more than Reggie shooting 3-18 against in the 1999 Game 6 when the Pacers lost to the 8th seeded Knicks. Apples & oranges? Sure. But struggling against an 8th seeded team in the season your team is favored to win it all is fair game when placed against a guy who had one bad series against a championship team who played great defense.

Defining moment of that series in 2004 had nothing to do with Artest. It was Game 5 when Reggie kind of loafed it and Prince stuffed him.

Hicks
04-09-2006, 12:29 AM
I'm glad we have our facts straight. ;)

Anthem
04-09-2006, 12:29 AM
Not really a fair, accurate statement. Unless one wants to base Ron Artest's entire postseason experience on one bad series against Detroit who BTW won the title that season and flustered Kobe Bryant & Shaq in the process.

One bad series against a superior defensive team does not make Artest a choke any more than Reggie shooting 3-18 against in the 1999 Game 6 when the Pacers lost to the 8th seeded Knicks. Apples & oranges? Sure. But struggling against an 8th seeded team in the season your team is favored to win it all is fair game when placed against a guy who had one bad series against a championship team who played great defense.

Defining moment of that series in 2004 had nothing to do with Artest. It was Game 5 when Reggie kind of loafed it and Prince stuffed him.
Agreed. It's odd that we take his one failure of that season and call it "choking because he couldn't handle the pressure" when in fact he'd been our best player through the first two rounds, both of which we could easily have been eliminated in. I fail to see how Detroit was pressure but Miami wasn't.

ChicagoJ
04-09-2006, 12:33 AM
Miami wasn't pressure. Goodness, we've done this a bazillion times.

JO was triple-teamed in the Miami series.

Everyone lived off tablescraps. Even Foster and Tinsley had big scoring/ high FG% games.

And Ron's meltdown began in that series when he wouldn't board the plane after Game #4, so that doesn't help your argument, either.

With no JO, Miami plays us straight up and beats us. With their gimmicks, and with JO feeding easy opportunities to guys like Ron, and we escape against a team inferior on talent but with a superior gameplan (coach) for that series.

SoupIsGood
04-09-2006, 12:34 AM
Agreed. It's odd that we take his one failure of that season and call it "choking because he couldn't handle the pressure" when in fact he'd been our best player through the first two rounds, both of which we could easily have been eliminated in. I fail to see how Detroit was pressure but Miami wasn't.

:bs:


Celts were beyond terrible.... they were rank and gross in nature.

Big Smooth
04-09-2006, 12:38 AM
Miami wasn't pressure. Goodness, we've done this a bazillion times.

JO was triple-teamed in the Miami series.

Everyone lived off tablescraps. Even Foster and Tinsley had big scoring/ high FG% games.

And Ron's meltdown began in that series when he wouldn't board the plane after Game #4, so that doesn't help your argument, either.

With no JO, Miami plays us straight up and beats us. With their gimmicks, and with JO feeding easy opportunities to guys like Ron, and we escape against a team inferior on talent but with a superior gameplan (coach) for that series.

Ron Artest had a horrible series against Detroit. I won't argue that. But who on the Pacers team excelled against the world champs over those 6 games. Certainly not Reggie who at that point got a free pass because, well he was REGGIE.

The Pistons would have beaten anyone that season. If they could stop Kobe, why would you call Artest a choker for being stopped?

The fact is a lot of fans hold a bitter grudge against Ron Artest and can't help but keep digging at him after he is gone. From an objective standpoint, I can't see a NBA fan that has no agenda calling Ron Artest a choker based on the 2004 ECF.

If Ron Artest is a choker based upon that, then please immediately crown the entire 1998-99 Pacers team the greatest choke of all-time. Then, I'll feel like the judgments are fair. Otherwise, it's just personal agendas being expressed. Which is fine, that is why we have a public forum.

SoupIsGood
04-09-2006, 12:40 AM
I can't see a NBA fan that has no agenda calling Ron Artest a choker based on the 2004 ECF.



How bout the entire 2005 playoffs

ChicagoJ
04-09-2006, 12:42 AM
JO and Tinsley were playing well until they got hurt.

That seried ended when those guys got hurt in Game #4, even though we won that game.

Reggie and Ron were afterthoughts in that series.

Did you fix your typo above? The block against Reggie was much earlier than Game #5.

EDIT - I'm pretty sure I have called the 1999 team the worst choke artists of all time. I've never blamed any of that on Jess Kersey or Larry Johnson. There was no need to even defend the play, let alone be close enough to commit a foul. That was the bigger travesty than the "continuation" ruling and I've blamed the coaches and players for not understanding that situation.

When I left MSA after game #5 of that series, I was utterly disgusted.

Big Smooth
04-09-2006, 12:49 AM
JO and Tinsley were playing well until they got hurt.

That seried ended when those guys got hurt in Game #4, even though we won that game.

Reggie and Ron were afterthoughts in that series.

Did you fix your typo above? The block against Reggie was much earlier than Game #5.

Typo? Regardless of which game it was, the fact is Reggie loafed got blocked and the Pacers lost. I think whether it was Game 2 or Game 5 it counted equally in the final count of games won/lost.

I just really don't see the point in labeling a guy "choker" based on one series. Especially against a team that ended up proving to be the true champions.

You could just admit you despise the man. Much easier to do rather than re-invent him as the NBA version of Peyton Manning.

Big Smooth
04-09-2006, 12:51 AM
JO and Tinsley were playing well until they got hurt.

That seried ended when those guys got hurt in Game #4, even though we won that game.

Reggie and Ron were afterthoughts in that series.

Did you fix your typo above? The block against Reggie was much earlier than Game #5.

EDIT - I'm pretty sure I have called the 1999 team the worst choke artists of all time. I've never blamed any of that on Jess Kersey or Larry Johnson. There was no need to even defend the play, let alone be close enough to commit a foul. That was the bigger travesty than the "continuation" ruling and I've blamed the coaches and players for not understanding that situation.

When I left MSA after game #5 of that series, I was utterly disgusted.

Tinsley & O'Neal hurt? Seems to be a common theme. I think we need tougher players.

On your edit - I agree. Actually that series conclusion was the ONLY time in my life that I honestly considered giving up my Blue & Gold membership. I mean I get mad when my teams lose, but I was literally ready to swear off this organization at that time.

But I'm still here.

Hey, I just disagree on the Artest thing. It is what it is.

Anthem
04-09-2006, 01:14 AM
I agree that the series was over in Game 4. I also agree that we really couldn't have been beaten by Boston.

But I disagree that Miami spent a lot of time tripling JO. I really don't want to get into it again, but I still think your dislike for Ron is coloring your perceptions a bit.

Big Smooth
04-09-2006, 01:36 AM
How bout the entire 2005 playoffs

Not sure what you mean. Artest was not eligible to play due to the NBA suspension. I'm fairly certain we both know that so if that counts as a "choke" then....I'm not sure that further debate here is worth the effort. I'm speaking strictly of what a player has done on the floor in the postseason.

Agendas rule the day, I guess I'll leave it at that.

Big Smooth
04-09-2006, 01:38 AM
I agree that the series was over in Game 4. I also agree that we really couldn't have been beaten by Boston.

But I disagree that Miami spent a lot of time tripling JO. I really don't want to get into it again, but I still think your dislike for Ron is coloring your perceptions a bit.

They pushed the Pacers hard in Game 2. In fact, I attended that game in person after watching Game 1 on television. The Pacers were down 8 points in the 4th quarter and actually it was the bench who boosted the team to victory. After that win, it was easy. But had the Pacers lost Game 2, it could have been a different story.

In either case, not sure it has much to do with Artest "choking" in the ECF. **shrugs**

SoupIsGood
04-09-2006, 09:43 AM
Not sure what you mean. Artest was not eligible to play due to the NBA suspension. I'm fairly certain we both know that so if that counts as a "choke" then....I'm not sure that further debate here is worth the effort. I'm speaking strictly of what a player has done on the floor in the postseason.

Agendas rule the day, I guess I'll leave it at that.
Isn't ruining your playoff chances months before they even begin a pretty big choke? :shrug: He didn't even have to do anything on the floor in the postseason to screw that one up.

Kegboy
04-09-2006, 10:45 AM
All this talk about Boston. People convienently forget that Pierce owned Ron in the '03 series.

Thirtysomethin
04-09-2006, 11:55 AM
I always felt comfortable having Artest on the floor at the end of games. The guy can get to the basket almost anytime he wants. He in my opinion is unguardable. Sort of like PIERCE is sometimes.

rexnom
04-09-2006, 12:24 PM
All this talk about Boston. People convienently forget that Pierce owned Ron in the '03 series.

And Ron even pulled down his shorts...and Pierce responded by draining a three on him...and Ron responded by singing him a song...