Is Paul George any better than Ron Artest?

[atljonesbro]

I'm not seeing why he's considered a superstar by many but artest wasn't.

[Jlamb47]

Hes definetly better lol

[Clyde]

I'm not seeing why he's considered a superstar by many but artest wasn't.

Thats a fair question.

Artest was more versatile defensively and way stronger.

George is a better athlete and maybe a little better offensively...maybe.

Also Ron was bat shit crazy so he had that going against him.

[kshutts1]

pretty excellent comparison, IMO.

Peak Artest was nasty.

24/6.5/3 on 50% shooting and DPOY worthy D for Artest

vs

22/7/3.5 on 43% shooting and second team all D probably.

[MellowYellow]

Pacer Artest is leagues ahead of Pacers George, guess we will have to give George a couple more years to develop.

[russwest0]

brah its the eastern conference. they have to try to hype the non heat players somehow.

[2LeTTeRS]

pretty excellent comparison, IMO.

Peak Artest was nasty.

24/6.5/3 on 50% shooting and DPOY worthy D for Artest

vs

22/7/3.5 on 43% shooting and second team all D probably.

You realize Artest played 7 games in that 24 point season; right? Artest was a willing shooter; but was never even a good offensive player -- he never even shot above 45.3% for a season.

[PP34Deuce]

Paul George is like 23. I believe he will be better and a great player in 2 years. His issue seems to be he let the hype get to him.

that Pacers team can be scary with the development of Lance and George if they can agree to share the burden and not play hero ball.

Hibbert,George and Lance all seem to want to be "The man"

Get em a PG and watch this team shine

[ralph_i_el]

pretty excellent comparison, IMO.

Peak Artest was nasty.

24/6.5/3 on 50% shooting and DPOY worthy D for Artest

vs

22/7/3.5 on 43% shooting and second team all D probably.

go back and read that artest statline again buddy

[mark henson 123]

ron artest won 2 rings with kobe
paul George 0

plus in his younger days ron averaged 25 pts a game

ron was better@!:coleman:

[ImKobe]

Prime Ron IMO better than current George. Plus he had one of the all-time great Game 7s in NBA history in 2010.

Ron Ron more talented on D.

[Johnny Jones]

pretty excellent comparison, IMO.

Peak Artest was nasty.

24/6.5/3 on 50% shooting and DPOY worthy D for Artest

vs

22/7/3.5 on 43% shooting and second team all D probably.
:facepalm

[fatboy11]

George is doing what he's doing right now at 23 years old. Ron Artest's best statistical seasons came in his late 20s. Artest will always have been the better defender, but George is good enough defensively to have his offense clearly put him over Artest. Artest was very reckless on offense.

[bdreason]

He's not better than prime Artest. He could be though.

[Rocketswin2013]

This is a legit question. I don't think he is.

[BlackVVaves]

ron artest won 2 rings with kobe
paul George 0

plus in his younger days ron averaged 25 pts a game

ron was better@!:coleman:

So much fail in this post it isn't even funny.

For the record, peak Artest defensively utterly shits on George's defense.

He's only 23, so there's that. He's certainly far from the 1st tier star we all thought he was though, that much is known.

[Kblaze8855]

I actually scrolled through this topic to see who would use his brawl season numbers and not look at the games played.

I hoped nobody would...but assumed it would happen.

Anyway...he was a legit 18-20 a game player a couple years. One on the Kings being kinda invisible.

Better depends on what you mean...

George is a better all around player in terms of individual skills....but the current Pacers with peak Artest wouldnt be any worse. Artest more of a ball stopped but a better defender. Both will have odd 13 point games and now and then drop 30 by making bad shots.

Same basic level as players but in the same league George would always be considered superior. The PPG would assure that.

[BlackVVaves]

I actually scrolled through this topic to see who would use his brawl season numbers and not look at the games played.

I hoped nobody would...but assumed it would happen.

Anyway...he was a legit 18-20 a game player a couple years. One on the Kings being kinda invisible.

Better depends on what you mean...

George is a better all around player in terms of individual skills....but the current Pacers with peak Artest wouldnt be any worse. Artest more of a ball stopped but a better defender. Both will have odd 13 point games and now and then drop 30 by making bad shots.

Same basic level as players but in the same league George would always be considered superior. The PPG would assure that.

Unrelated, but since I caught you in a thread:

I'm genuinely curious to hear your opinion on these playoffs, particularly as it relates to your unrelenting belief that you can assemble all the adequate information needed to make an assessment of a player's value that year without his performance in the playoffs.

Has KD's playoff performance had any impact on how you judge his game? Since the point of it all is to be at your most productive at this time of the year.

No shade by the way. I just recall you being so adamant, and DMavs saying "what if KD shits the bed in the playoffs?"...which he ironically has at several points this postseason...to which you elaborately dismissed as inconsequential. I'm one that thinks the playoffs do matter in assessing a player's year, so it's interesting to hear the perspective of someone who thinks otherwise.

[sick_brah07]

Thats a fair question.

Artest was more versatile defensively and way stronger.

George is a better athlete and maybe a little better offensively...maybe.

Also Ron was bat shit crazy so he had that going against him.


because i am at work and cant access YOUTUBE... someone please post that video when ron artest was given freedom on offense

i liked Ron but trust me when i tell you, as someone who watched a lot of his games back in 2003-2004 he ain't close to Paul George offensively

[fpliii]

I'm not sure, but this would mean that Artest is more underrated than PG is overrated if anything. :confusedshrug:

[Kblaze8855]

Everything matters....but the "Look what ____ did for a week" crowd just ignore 90% of the reason things happen. For a moment at least. And then common sense kicks back in once more ball is played. Lebron after the 11 finals had people saying he was worse than 5-6 people. Sometimes more. 3 games into 2012.....oh wait...hes the best player in the NBa and its painfully obvious.

The swings brought on by that mentality just blow me away at times.

Ive seen Durant dozens of times in his current form. How good he is....is not decided by how good he is vs one group of players and coaches for a week. He could go 11-54 over the next 2 games and get sent home.

First game next season he drops 54 he will have regained every drop of his current status. So why bother adjusting it in the first place?

[Xiao Yao You]

Artest might be the dumbest player ever. That puts George head and shoulders above him right away.

[BlackVVaves]

Everything matters....but the "Look what ____ did for a week" crowd just ignore 90% of the reason things happen. For a moment at least. And then common sense kicks back in once more ball is played. Lebron after the 11 finals had people saying he was worse than 5-6 people. Sometimes more. 3 games into 2012.....oh wait...hes the best player in the NBa and its painfully obvious.

The swings brought on by that mentality just blow me away at times.

Ive seen Durant dozens of times in his current form. How good he is....is not decided by how good he is vs one group of players and coaches for a week. He could go 11-54 over the next 2 games and get sent home.

First game next season he drops 54 he will have regained every drop of his current status. So why bother adjusting it in the first place?

Do you think no adjustments in perspective should be made then, whether good or bad?

I'm not referring to gross overreactions. I mean, making appropriate adjustments to conventional thought as the sample size grows and grows.

For instance. KD was a reliable facilitator, as well as a formidable and proficient scorer, throughout the season. As the post-season began, and teams were able to attribute more time to their strategic gameplans though, KD has become a far less productive facilitator, and his scoring has fluctuated between tremendous and chuck-centric (ill-advised shot attempts). His impact on the court has become diminished than it was in the regular season.

So, not to say that should negate what he did for 82 games, because it shouldn't at all. But, if your impact is marginalized that much between season and playoffs, doesn't that say something about how valuable your skill-set is when it comes to playoff basketball?

Idk. KD was still the MVP of the season. And I won't get into this whole "well player X plays against better competition right now than player Y." But it just seems, with the high turnover rate and propensity for exclusively relying on jump shots, especially 3s, that KD hasn't been as effective as he was during the year, and that should factor in to how we break down his overall play this season, especially when pouring out extreme assertions like "This KD is better than any version of Kobe" (not saying you said that).

After watching these playoffs, I think saying 2014 is better than any version of Kobe is moth-like idiocy.

[SamuraiSWISH]

2002 - 2006 Peak Artest, by far. Comparable offense. WAY better defender.

[Dro]

I'm not seeing why he's considered a superstar by many but artest wasn't.
You are bordering on insanity with your hate for anything Pacer related...Nobody in their right mind has called him a superstar and you know that. It's been said a billion times......

[Im Still Ballin]

I actually scrolled through this topic to see who would use his brawl season numbers and not look at the games played.

I hoped nobody would...but assumed it would happen.

Anyway...he was a legit 18-20 a game player a couple years. One on the Kings being kinda invisible.

Better depends on what you mean...

George is a better all around player in terms of individual skills....but the current Pacers with peak Artest wouldnt be any worse. Artest more of a ball stopped but a better defender. Both will have odd 13 point games and now and then drop 30 by making bad shots.

Same basic level as players but in the same league George would always be considered superior. The PPG would assure that.
This. LMFAO to the mfvckers that use that season where he played like 10 games as a peak measurement of play. GTFO fools!

[Dro]

I actually scrolled through this topic to see who would use his brawl season numbers and not look at the games played.

I hoped nobody would...but assumed it would happen.

Anyway...he was a legit 18-20 a game player a couple years. One on the Kings being kinda invisible.

Better depends on what you mean...

George is a better all around player in terms of individual skills....but the current Pacers with peak Artest wouldnt be any worse. Artest more of a ball stopped but a better defender. Both will have odd 13 point games and now and then drop 30 by making bad shots.

Same basic level as players but in the same league George would always be considered superior. The PPG would assure that.
Same here but I actually didn't assume that would happen.......Silly me...this is ish where nobody actually does their homework........They just see stats and go "ZOMG"!! :rolleyes:

[Dro]

And for all of Paul George's shortcomings, he's easily a better offensive player than Ron Artest..and I thought Artest was underrated offensively actually, especially in Indiana.......

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jT1oQnsR2B0

[Kblaze8855]

A few shots fall differently and the close west seedings change and he gets to play the Warriors, Rockets, and then the Spurs and hes putting up 36ppg going into the WCF.....hes the same guy he is now.

Circumstances and the opponent will have changed.

You will play differently vs different teams and in different situations. When they fall in line and you get to cruise...you are not better at basketball.

People are not as good as they are vs 1 o two teams. They are as good as they are vs the NBA.

You ask me the best player to light up Memphis KD may not be my answer. Best player vs the NBA in general? Different issue.

You are as good as you are...you play generally as well as the situation allows....with allowances made for off games and great ones.

Players do not fluctuate as much as their performances in different situations do.

I have little doubt that if swapped for Lebron Durant has more playoff success if only for 2 years of a destroyed east in the playoffs.

It would raise his status all time.

It wouldnt make him any better.

[atljonesbro]

You are bordering on insanity with your hate for anything Pacer related...Nobody in their right mind has called him a superstar and you know that. It's been said a billion times......
This thread obviously isn't far fetched according to the responses.

[SOD 21]

Metta World Destruction had his peak seasons from age 23 years old to about 29 years old when he averaged about 18 ppgs, 6 rpg, 3-4 apg, 43% FG and 36% on threes.

Of course, Paul George is just entering that part of his career and has demonstrated that he's probably a little better scorer; although, their efficiency is very close and George scores a little more just because he shoots a little more.

But there is no question that a prime MWD is a better and more physical defender. Overall, I'd give a slight edge to George because we haven't yet seen his prime. But it's close.

Slight edge to George.

[Dro]

This thread obviously isn't far fetched according to the responses.
If anyone watches the video I posted, I honestly don't even see how its close offensively....And there's still 2 more parts from this year....Paul George has everything in his arsenal...you can tell he's been watching Kobe. But he has to get more consistent and stronger......

And I don't even like PG as much as I liked Artest...I loved Artest when he was here and I wanted him to get the ball more.....He was awkward but effective.....

[BlackVVaves]

A few shots fall differently and the close west seedings change and he gets to play the Warriors, Rockets, and then the Spurs and hes putting up 36ppg going into the WCF.....hes the same guy he is now.

Circumstances and the opponent will have changed.

You will play differently vs different teams and in different situations. When they fall in line and you get to cruise...you are not better at basketball.

People are not as good as they are vs 1 o two teams. They are as good as they are vs the NBA.

You ask me the best player to light up Memphis KD may not be my answer. Best player vs the NBA in general? Different issue.

You are as good as you are...you play generally as well as the situation allows....with allowances made for off games and great ones.

Players do not fluctuate as much as their performances in different situations do.

I have little doubt that if swapped for Lebron Durant has more playoff success if only for 2 years of a destroyed east in the playoffs.

It would raise his status all time.

It wouldnt make him any better.

You're right that circumstance breeds outcomes. But, outcomes direct perception, as you also alluded to. And, shouldn't they? For instance, KD has faced the Spurs twice in the last three years in the playoffs, and the Grizzlies 3 times in the last 4. So, thus far in his career, wouldn't it matter more how he performed against those teams since they have routinely met in later rounds, than bad defensive teams like the Warriors (relatively) or Rockets?

What I'm saying is. True, he could have played the Warriors and Rockets, put up godly numbers, and reinforced his regular season performance. But, he didn't. He faced pretty good defensive teams, or coaches capable of deploying pretty good defensive strategies. As he has much of his playoff career. So, shouldn't there be weight added to those games, than the games against inferior defensive teams in the regular season?

Idk. Think KD was sensational this year, but I can't look at his play...not his numbers, but watching him and how he aims to contribute to his team during the games...during the playoffs and just dismiss it as "well if he played against more inferior defensive teams he would have been okay so it's cool, no beef." There have been many moments when he has just stood in the corner of the court and been a decoy for LARGE stretches of the game, by his own admission. And, in doing so, not contributing at all. That minimizes his impact. That affects the team's ability to be effective. Those moments stand out, especially when they continuously happen. Like Bron in 2011. Or Kobe in 2006. And they both received criticism for it, and rightfully so.

They may all still be the same player. But does it matter if you're the same player if you don't produce like it when needed most?

[fpliii]

You are bordering on insanity with your hate for anything Pacer related...Nobody in their right mind has called him a superstar and you know that. It's been said a billion times......
Can't say I haven't bro. :lol

Stand by it, if you value defense. He's having a rough series against this defense though. :facepalm Making me look dumb

[BlackVVaves]

Can't say I haven't bro. :lol

Stand by it, if you value defense. He's having a rough series against this defense though. :facepalm Making me look dumb

Bro let's keep it real. George has been having a "rough series" since February :lol

He's definitely not a superstar. I feel ashamed for saying George > Melo in December. Melo on this Pacers team might be going to the Finals.

And he wouldn't be sounding like a stale bitch complaining post game, crying about "we outplayed them on the stat sheet" "they won because of home-cooking" either :facepalm

[kshutts1]

pretty excellent comparison, IMO.

Peak Artest was nasty.

24/6.5/3 on 50% shooting and DPOY worthy D for Artest

vs

22/7/3.5 on 43% shooting and second team all D probably.
:facepalm

Just glad I can quote myself.

Thanks, everyone, for pointing out how idiotic I was. Obviously, totally my bad. I thought I remembered Artest having a pretty nasty 24ppg season, so as soon as I saw something that fit what I was looking for, I ran with it... didn't bother looking a touch deeper.

Anyway, I'd still take Artest, He's more similar to Stephenson on O, but on D he's Tony Allen on crack... you know, if crack made you better on D.

[ProfessorMurder]

I'd rather have Artest on my team.

You can find scorers a lot easier than you can find crazy DPOY wings.

[Legends66NBA7]

I'd rather have Artest on my team.

You can find scorers a lot easier than you can find crazy DPOY wings.

It's more the opposite, IMO. You can find defenders more than you can find scorers.

And George has definitely been a DPOY caliber wing the last 2 seasons. Just hasn't won the award.

[East_Stone_Ya]

maybe on offense yes, but overall hell no

[Quizno]

pretty excellent comparison, IMO.

Peak Artest was nasty.

24/6.5/3 on 50% shooting and DPOY worthy D for Artest

vs

22/7/3.5 on 43% shooting and second team all D probably.
LMFAO classic "let me look up his stats on basketball-reference.com and pretend like i know what i'm talking about" moment

[GimmeThat]

Paul George can probably be better in the help defense area, not so sure on the one on one department since the lack of size compared to Artest.

I think George can be a more efficient scorer than Artest
He has a faster release with his shooting form compared to Artest.

If Paul George really wants to work on his offense,
his ability to go baseline and finish is going to be what separates him from other star players or Ron Artest.

Since, you're not suppose to go baseline, and it's the toughest path to the cup and all.


It's odd, because what aspect of the game he wants to work on depends on where he wants to stay. If he wants to stay at Pacers, I think he just needs to be very efficient. If he chooses to play in the Western Conference, post moves, footwork is going to matter more.

Or he can just work on different aspects of his game throughout his career. Still young after all.

Got the talent, but work ethics makes a huge different. Because I actually still think his game is quite raw compared to his potential.

[Dro]

:facepalm

Just glad I can quote myself.

Thanks, everyone, for pointing out how idiotic I was. Obviously, totally my bad. I thought I remembered Artest having a pretty nasty 24ppg season, so as soon as I saw something that fit what I was looking for, I ran with it... didn't bother looking a touch deeper.

Anyway, I'd still take Artest, He's more similar to Stephenson on O, but on D he's Tony Allen on crack... you know, if crack made you better on D.
No worries bro. Didn't mean to be so hard on you. Honestly, I didn't even look at the user name, I just quoted the post..:lol