PDA

View Full Version : Artest's shooting % is better than Lebron's, Pierce, T-Mac and others.



Unclebuck
08-15-2004, 10:14 AM
Allow me to steal this from the IS board. Because it isa good point.

http://www.indystar.com/forums/showthread.php?t=74350



Artest shoots less & has better fg pct than Carter, Tmac, James, Pierce, and more....

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I keep reading on the threads how many shots Ron takes and how bad a shooter he is. Of course, everybody knows that only the best players can take a lot of shots. Because the lesser players can't get off a lot of shots.


Per Game

# Name FGA Pct

84 Artest - 15.2 -- 421

87 V Carter - 20.0 -- 417

89 Tmac - 23.4 -- 417

90 L James - 18.9 -- 417

96 P Pierce - 18.7 -- 402

99 Q Richardson - 16.4 -- 398

100 B. Davis - 20.9 -- 395


44 R. Hamilton 14.9 -- 453

Even Hamilton's shots per game is comparable to Artest. If you look at the top 50, I think peja is 24th, most are centers and role players who shoot very little and highpct shots around the basket. Most of the NBA stars are in the 40-45 pct range.

Check out ESPN 2003-04 statistics. Rons adjusted fg pct including 3s is .455.


Iverson shot .387 last season



_____________________________________________



I think the problem is many people believe small forwards and guars should shoot above 45%, well very, very, very few do and almost none of the best ones do

RimBender
08-15-2004, 10:18 AM
I think they were referring to his fantastic playoff series against the Pistons, when he was throwing up shots with 7 people guarding him.

SoupIsGood
08-15-2004, 10:22 AM
I like looking at his stats from the first two rounds. The stats from the pistons serires scare the **** outta me. He was terrible then. But, everyone has bad series, i guess.

erdega79
08-15-2004, 11:09 AM
Peja's stats. ARtest can't comparehttp://img9.exs.cx/img9/6764/Pejastats.th.jpg (http://img9.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img9&image=Pejastats.jpg)

second in the nba in adjusted fg % only behind Shaq

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/statistics?stat=nba3ptpct&qual=true&sort=afg%&league=nba&split=0&season=2004&seasontype=2&pos=all

5th in the league in points per shot

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/statistics?stat=nba3ptpct&qual=true&sort=pps&league=nba&split=0&season=2004&seasontype=2&avg=none&pos=all

Hicks
08-15-2004, 11:13 AM
The only reason Ron's are higher than those people is because he posts up, and the other's don't. That's all it says to me. I'd rather have Pierce or T-Mac shooting the ball than Ron.

able
08-15-2004, 11:27 AM
I like looking at his stats from the first two rounds. The stats from the pistons serires scare the **** outta me. He was terrible then. But, everyone has bad series, i guess.

let's nip this idiocy in the butt, it is running out of hand!

Ron shooting percentage was less in the ECF, in fact, he took 4 more shots then in the Miami series; made 13 less, where most pain was done on the 3pt, shot 9 more and missed 3 more.
Also he shot 18 less Ft's but at a slightly better percentage then in the Miami series.

He had significantly more rebounds (3 more on avg) and 1 less Ast on avg. but copensated that with 1 more steal then in the the Miami series and even more significant 1.6 les turnover. (in fact he only averaged 1.6 to in the ECF)

The less points scored was A. in line with the rest of the team and the not or at least much less playing of Tins. and B the Det defense.

What you in fact are doing is blaming Ron for one game, and not mentioning Reggie (who failed in two games (lay-up instead of dunk and twice passing up a shot upon pass from JO.

We lost, marginaly, with a winged PG and star PF with mangled knee.

Ron played good, he just (as usual) did not like the losses.

My theory is that Ron can hardly play without a Tins style PG, or he has a hard time with AJ as the PG, which is more likely because when AJ was in, with the lack of Fred Ron had to bring the ball up mostly, this took him out of his "natural" position and the entire offense into a difficult move, add to that the changes made because JO was hurt and the fact that AJ played more (and yes better then he did all season) it made it all harder and harder.

Ron upped his number in all games before the Det series and had his decent ones in that as well, but just like the rest of the team and other arguably grater players after him (Kobe) he had a hard time being defended by Det, certainly when he was playing more or less out of position.

Ron is 24 years old, no one can tell me he doesn't have it or is a problem to big to cure.

I acccept decisions made when made, simply because I have no influence anyway, but whatever reason is made of if Ron is traded is pure BS.
It also signals something very wrong. No one can deny the obvious improvement Ron made over the past year, certainly in comparison to his previous year(s) and getting rid of him send a clear message, no matter how hard you try to improve, we will keep your past against you and if you make me work extra I will still kick you out.

That would be the last message I would ever want to send out to anyone.

Anyway, if you say Ron was "bad" ni the finals, come with facts and forget the fiction that your opinions are.

SoupIsGood
08-15-2004, 11:54 AM
Ron had a bad series in the ECF, saying differently is idiocy. I never said Ron has some sorta problem, I said he had a bad series. You can't deny that. Everyone has bad series, and ROn defintly was not good in the ECF.

Anthem
08-15-2004, 12:00 PM
I remain firmly planted on the Don't Trade Ron Bandwagon.

zxc
08-15-2004, 12:17 PM
Ron had a bad series in the ECF, saying differently is idiocy. I never said Ron has some sorta problem, I said he had a bad series. You can't deny that. Everyone has bad series, and ROn defintly was not good in the ECF.


Don't think anyone will deny that. Though you said he was "terrible" and his stats were so bad they "scared the **** out of you". That seems like a bit much.

able
08-15-2004, 12:46 PM
Ron had a bad series in the ECF, saying differently is idiocy. I never said Ron has some sorta problem, I said he had a bad series. You can't deny that. Everyone has bad series, and ROn defintly was not good in the ECF.

I show you stats on that series, with definite better numbers then A. reguakr season and B. earlier series and all you can say is because you said he had a bad series (game i will give, series no) it is a bad series? sorry but there are maybe 2 or 3 posters here which opinion I value that much, your's not, thte umbers prove more then your opinion.

Is it so hard to see that your opinion might be flawed?
Is it so hard to admit that he might be defended so well that his percentages on shooting took a nosedive, like Bryant's did?
with half his normal turnovers, twice his normal rebounds and double the steals, as well as half his normal FT's (at a better percentage then against Miami) you can hardly argue that he had a bad series, just because he shot bad percentages?

To base the play of one player solely on his shooting stats ..............


facts, facts and facts.

naptown
08-15-2004, 12:52 PM
I don't think the biggest gripe about Ron is that he shoots too much or shoot too poorly. I think the biggest gripe about Ron is shot selection. Ron just plain takes a lot of bad shots...a lot.

Work the ball and take good shots. That is what it is all about. Ron holds the ball too much and forces too many bad shots. Not just for himself, but for his team mates as well.

I don't care if Ron takes 25 shots a game....as long as they are good shots within the flow of the offense.

Hicks
08-15-2004, 12:53 PM
Ron definitely had a bad ECF. He got a lot of boards. Whooptie s***. Watch the games, man. He never played anywhere near like an all-star. It was ugly. He didn't shut anyone down on D, he looked ugly even for HIM (which is saying a lot) on offense. It was bad. Stats lie.

Old as Dirt
08-15-2004, 01:05 PM
As I have said before, and will say again. I am more than glad that LB and DW are running the Pacers, instead of most of the posters here. You do not trade the DPOY. Yes there are times when RA throws up shoots that he should not.

SoupIsGood
08-15-2004, 01:44 PM
Ron had a bad series in the ECF, saying differently is idiocy. I never said Ron has some sorta problem, I said he had a bad series. You can't deny that. Everyone has bad series, and ROn defintly was not good in the ECF.

I show you stats on that series, with definite better numbers then A. reguakr season and B. earlier series and all you can say is because you said he had a bad series (game i will give, series no) it is a bad series? sorry but there are maybe 2 or 3 posters here which opinion I value that much, your's not, thte umbers prove more then your opinion.

Is it so hard to see that your opinion might be flawed?
Is it so hard to admit that he might be defended so well that his percentages on shooting took a nosedive, like Bryant's did?
with half his normal turnovers, twice his normal rebounds and double the steals, as well as half his normal FT's (at a better percentage then against Miami) you can hardly argue that he had a bad series, just because he shot bad percentages?

To base the play of one player solely on his shooting stats ..............


facts, facts and facts.



First of all, how can my opinion be flawed? Facts can be flawed, but opinions, no. If I want to think Artest had one bad series, who are you to say that my opinion is flawed? You bring in your fancy stats and try to prove to me that my opinion is flawed? If I want to believe that Rik Smits was the best player to ever play the game of basketball, I can believe that, and you can't say my opinion is flawed. And personally, I don't give a **** if you value my opinion or not. At least I have one, you seem to always base everything on stats. Watch the games, develop your own thoughts and ideas.

I don't care how many rebounds or assists or whatever Artest stacked up, he didn't get the ball in the hoop very well, and Rip killed him on the other side of the ball. I never claimed to be basing this just on shooting perentages. Ron had one bad series, but also had two excellent ones before that. That's my opinion, and it sure as hell can't be flawed.

Lord Helmet
08-15-2004, 02:08 PM
I remain firmly planted on the Don't Trade Ron Bandwagon.
I'm with you!;)

Cory
08-15-2004, 02:24 PM
I think of Ron Artest as a guy with tons of talent and tons of heart, the dude works harder than most players in the nba, the guy wants to win so badly. I've never seen anything like it. He dominates on both sides of the court. The Detroit Pistons of 03-04 was the best defensive team that I have ever seen and the pacers did not have any perimiter shooting. Artest was obviously going to be smothered, he could have passed more in the miami and the detroit series but to whom. If no one is open and you are the best player on the team, u should have the ball, I am confident that he will make better decisions in the future but I would rather him hold the ball too long than anyone else on this team, btw Jermaine is the heart and soul of this team but ARTEST IS BY FAR THE BEST PLAYER. As long as those two can coexist our team should contend for the championship for the next ten years

Anthem
08-15-2004, 05:19 PM
Ron definitely had a bad ECF. He got a lot of boards. Whooptie s***. Watch the games, man. He never played anywhere near like an all-star. It was ugly. He didn't shut anyone down on D, he looked ugly even for HIM (which is saying a lot) on offense. It was bad. Stats lie.

Yup. He had a bad series. Not a reason to trade him.

Hicks
08-15-2004, 05:29 PM
I never said we should trade him because of the ECF.

However it due to that series that I'm down on him at all. If he had played as well in round 3 as he did in 1 or 2 (or close to it), I would have very, very little problem with him. But as of now, I have serious doubts that we can depend on Ron when the heat is on.

My reason for being all right with trading him is that he'll never get traded UNLESS there's a serious problem behind closed doors. If there were no problem, you'd never see his name brought up for trades anywhere excecpt on RealGM or from David Whiteley.

And yet.

ChicagoJ
08-16-2004, 12:43 AM
Well, Ron hits a decent percentage of shots that he should never, ever take. :crazy:

Anthem
08-16-2004, 12:58 AM
I never said we should trade him because of the ECF.

However it due to that series that I'm down on him at all. If he had played as well in round 3 as he did in 1 or 2 (or close to it), I would have very, very little problem with him. But as of now, I have serious doubts that we can depend on Ron when the heat is on.

You don't think the heat was on in round 2?

Sorry, let me rephrase.

He had a bad series. That's no reason to be down on him.

Jermaine's had more bad series than Ron has. Al Harrington has had WAY more... nevermind. Reggie has had more bad series in the past three years than Ron.

Mourning
08-16-2004, 01:08 AM
I never said we should trade him because of the ECF.

However it due to that series that I'm down on him at all. If he had played as well in round 3 as he did in 1 or 2 (or close to it), I would have very, very little problem with him. But as of now, I have serious doubts that we can depend on Ron when the heat is on.

You don't think the heat was on in round 2?

Sorry, let me rephrase.

He had a bad series. That's no reason to be down on him.

Jermaine's had more bad series than Ron has. Al Harrington has had WAY more... nevermind. Reggie has had more bad series in the past three years than Ron.



:cheers:

Hicks
08-16-2004, 09:55 AM
Round 2 was not as intense as the ECF. ECF was championship-level basketball, the Heat series was not. Ron seemed to crack under the ECF pressure. He went into 100% bull-headed mode, where all he could do was try the same futile charge to the basket over and over, and then not play his normal high-calibur D on the other end, for reasons you can choose for yourself.

Jermaine didn't crack. He got hurt. You point out he's had more bad series. When? 2002? When else? Never, really. He was fine throughout this past year's post-season, he was awesome in 2003. There was no other time, unless you're gonna rip him for his Portland days.

Maybe you'll go back over the box scores and point out JO's statistically weak games, but he never struck me as Ron did that he just wasn't "with it" on the court. He was always trying to do what he was supposed to on both ends, whereas Ron was just doing his own thing in the ECF. They really just are not that comparable to me.

ChicagoJ
08-16-2004, 12:12 PM
Refresh my memory, what did JO do wrong in 2002? He dominated Game #1, then NJ changed their entire game plan to shut him down, and they succeeded. Get a clue. That isn't a "bad series". JO dominated against Miami, too - if they tried to play JO straight up he would've averaged 35 and 20, and we would have swept.

Ron was able to take advantage of Miami's game plan (stop JO at all costs, make guys like Ron prove they can step up). But I keep thinking that Ron's PPG in Round #2 - mostly from feeding off the scraps, was a contributing factor to his decline in the ECFs. After all, he found it a lot tougher when Detroit played both JO and Ron straight up.

I can't think of a single series in which JO had a "bad series", although I think he had some learning experiences in 2002.

Unclebuck
08-16-2004, 12:40 PM
Where is the myth coming from that Ron did not play his usual high caliber defense in the ECF.

Please explain

Hicks
08-16-2004, 12:41 PM
Tell me what he DID do that was high caliber on D in the ECF?

Unclebuck
08-16-2004, 12:51 PM
Hicks:

Let me first say that asking Artest to guard Rip Hamilton is really not fair to him. That is just not a good matchup for Ron for many reasons that were discussed during the ECF, but Ron did the best job he could on Rip, and played him very well in the only two games he guarded him for any length of time which were games 3 and games 6.

One reason Rick gave for not using Artest on Rip more often especially in games 4 and 5 is that it really hurt the help defense, having Reggie defending the small forward position. It also hurt the Pacers rebounding having Artest 20 feet from the basket running through all those screens

When Artest defended Prince he shut him down, but then Prince is the Pistons 4th of 5th option.

How is it Ron's fault that he is not a good matchup for Rip and the Pistons do not have a high scoring small forward, (although the Bucks might think otherwise)

Criticize Ron's oiffense in the ECF, but criticizing Ron's defense is very unfair and completely wrong

able
08-16-2004, 01:24 PM
Since you (Hicks) are the one sayingt that he had a poor showing, it looks to me you will have to provide some form of proof for that or at least tell where and how.

Hicks
08-16-2004, 01:42 PM
It's not like I have a pocket full of proof. I just watch the game and make my own judgements (something UB can relate to). And what I saw was Ron Artest playing poorly.

Hicks
08-16-2004, 01:46 PM
UB, it's not that it was BAD, just nothing special. I agree a large part of that was the matchups. I will not, though, say he did "very well" on Rip. He didn't. No one could. That's not his fault, but I won't say he did very well, either.

Most of my criticism is for his offense anyway, so I wouldn't worry about it. He didn't play within the offense, and he only tried the same stupid charge to the basket every time that either caused a block, an offensive foul, or he just missed. THAT's my biggest beef: He tried to do it himself, and often. That really rubbed me the wrong way.

Fool
08-16-2004, 01:51 PM
I can't imagine Ron saying he had a good showing in the ECF. Thats gotta say something for Hicks' side.