# DPOY Award Winner: Ron Artest



## MillerTime (Jul 6, 2003)

> *Report: Pacers forward earns honor for D*
> 
> ESPN.com news services
> 
> ...


http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=1784876

Awsome job by Ronnie !!!

Edit: Forgot to add link.


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

Awesome Ron! You deserved it so much!


----------



## nmuman (Nov 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Pacers Fan</b>!
> Awesome Ron! You deserved it so much!


Not more than Wallace. This is an absolute travesty. Looking at the stats, Artest doesn't even stand a chance defensively. 

So what happened? Why did the 2nd or 3rd best defender win the award?


----------



## MJG (Jun 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>nmuman</b>!
> 
> 
> Not more than Wallace. This is an absolute travesty. Looking at the stats, Artest doesn't even stand a chance defensively.
> ...


An absolute travesty? Did I miss the part about the award going to Glenn Robinson? You can have your opinion obviously, but I find it hard to believe that anyone who watches the NBA on a regular basis can call Artest getting the award a travesty.


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>nmuman</b>!
> 
> 
> Not more than Wallace. This is an absolute travesty. Looking at the stats, Artest doesn't even stand a chance defensively.
> ...


I've said it before, i'll say it again, stats mean **** on defense. Ron Artest is the best on-the-ball defender in the league no questions asked. All Ben does is swat away shots that are not even taken by his man and some occasional steals. Ben doesn't stand a chance against Ron.


----------



## nmuman (Nov 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Pacers Fan</b>!
> 
> 
> I've said it before, i'll say it again, stats mean **** on defense. Ron Artest is the best on-the-ball defender in the league no questions asked. All Ben does is swat away shots that are not even taken by his man and some occasional steals. Ben doesn't stand a chance against Ron.


Because of these statements you just lost all credibility that you may have had. Your absolute lack of respect for Big Ben is atrocious. 

I think Ben is the best all-around defensive player I've ever seen and probably to have ever played the game. There's nothing he can't do on defense extremely well. Plus, has there ever been a better clutch defender than Ben? Artest is a great defender, but I think he's a distant second to Ben.

Artest wouldn't have won had Carlisle not PRed the hell out of him.

You all will see who's better when you get the beat down of your lives in the conference finals.............if you're lucky enough to get there.


----------



## nmuman (Nov 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Pacers Fan</b>!
> 
> 
> I've said it before, i'll say it again, stats mean **** on defense. Ron Artest is the best on-the-ball defender in the league no questions asked. All Ben does is swat away shots that are not even taken by his man and some occasional steals. Ben doesn't stand a chance against Ron.


Because of these statements you just lost all credibility that you may have had. Your absolute lack of respect for Big Ben is atrocious. 

I think Ben is the best all-around defensive player I've ever seen and probably to have ever played the game. There's nothing he can't do on defense extremely well. Plus, has there ever been a better clutch defender than Ben? Artest is a great defender, but I think he's a distant second to Ben.

Artest wouldn't have won had Carlisle not PRed the hell out of him.

You all will see who's better when you get the beat down of your lives in the conference finals.............if you're lucky enough to get there.


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>nmuman</b>!
> 
> 
> Because of these statements you just lost all credibility that you may have had. Your absolute lack of respect for Big Ben is atrocious.


I can say the exact same about you. See...

Because of these statements you just lost all credibilty that you may have had. Your absolute lack of respect for Ron Artest is atrocious.


----------



## indiana_07_pacers (Apr 16, 2004)

i was gonna say the same exact thing! lol


----------



## nmuman (Nov 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>indiana_07_pacers</b>!
> i was gonna say the same exact thing! lol


Well it's nice to see one pacer fan agrees with me, has a brain and isn't a homer.


----------



## indiana_07_pacers (Apr 16, 2004)

i was agreeing with Pacers Fan. not u


----------



## PacersguyUSA (Sep 1, 2002)

> Well it's nice to see one pacer fan agrees with me, has a brain and isn't a homer.





> i was agreeing with Pacers Fan. not u


Haha, PWNED.

And if:



> Not more than Wallace. This is an absolute travesty. Looking at the stats, Artest doesn't even stand a chance defensively.
> 
> So what happened? Why did the 2nd or 3rd best defender win the award?


Isn't trolling/baiting at it's finest... 

I mean, you could at least provide the stats to which you are referring to. I mean Artest leads Ben Wallace in steals, so be more specific, or learn how to hold an argument.


----------



## indiana_07_pacers (Apr 16, 2004)

ya i want to see ben wallace cover paul pierce all around the court.


----------



## nmuman (Nov 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>indiana_07_pacers</b>!
> i was agreeing with Pacers Fan. not u


I was being sarcastic , apparently they haven't taught you what sarcasm is yet in your jr. high.


----------



## indiana_07_pacers (Apr 16, 2004)

> Well it's nice to see one pacer fan agrees with me, has a brain and isn't a homer.


yup really sounds sarcastic


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>indiana_07_pacers</b>!
> i was agreeing with Pacers Fan. not u


Well it's nice to see i'm not alone.

LMAO at nmuman actually thinking someone was agreeing with him 

j/k


----------



## indiana_07_pacers (Apr 16, 2004)

ya so nmumnam, who would u rather have cover pierce, artest or wallace?


----------



## PacersguyUSA (Sep 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>nmuman</b>!
> 
> 
> I was being sarcastic , apparently they haven't taught you what sarcasm is yet in your jr. high.


So what was the purpose of that verbal irony? That contributed absolutely nothing unless you were actually being serious. None the less, sarcasm is 90% of the time designated by tone, and therefor hard to infer over the internet. However, I find it humorous and ironic how you tried to make your self out to be less gullible with the the line about me being in junior high. I haven't heard that comback since I was in junior high, as it shows it is you, in fact, who is in junior high.


----------



## indiana_07_pacers (Apr 16, 2004)

i thought he was makin fun of me?? lol i guess no one know what hes sayin


----------



## PacersguyUSA (Sep 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>indiana_07_pacers</b>!
> i thought he was makin fun of me?? lol i guess no one know what hes sayin


Maybe it's the "sarcasm"


----------



## nmuman (Nov 26, 2003)

Artest is a solid defender. No argument there. However, so is Ben. As for which of them is better, well, that's an argument that is very subjective. So, how to decide then? Well Ben was 2nd in the league in rebounds, 2nd in the league in blocked shots, and 7th in steals. Artest was 3rd in steals. Yep, that's it. So, while Ben finished top 10 in all three defensive categories, Artest only finished top 10 in one of them. What else did Artest finish tops in that got him the award? Public relations. The bottom line is Ben got robbed. This award should have been his hands down, and I hope he holds a grudge if these teams should meet later in the Playoffs.


----------



## jvanbusk (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>indiana_07_pacers</b>!
> ya so nmumnam, who would u rather have cover pierce, artest or wallace?


I know you didn't ask me but I'd like to answer: The answer is obviously Ron Artest.

Now, my question is, who would you rather defend Tim Duncan or Kevin Garnett?

These two guys are better at what they specialize in, but I tend to think that Ben Wallace would be better at guarding Paul Pierce than Ron Artest would be at guarding Tim Duncan or Kevin Garnett.


----------



## PacersguyUSA (Sep 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>nmuman</b>!
> Artest is a solid defender. No argument there. However, so is Ben. As for which of them is better, well, that's an argument that is very subjective.


Ok, thanks for the clarification on the stats, but if it's that close, it can hardly be called a travesty.


----------



## PacersguyUSA (Sep 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>jvanbusk</b>!
> 
> 
> I know you didn't ask me but I'd like to answer: The answer is obviously Ron Artest.
> ...


Artest could at least challenge Duncan and Garnett and atleast be somewhat effective against them. Ben Wallace would be pretty useless against perimiter players such as Pierce in my opinion.


----------



## jvanbusk (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>PacersguyUSA</b>!
> 
> 
> Artest could at least challenge Duncan and Garnett and atleast be somewhat effective against them. Ben Wallace would be pretty useless against perimiter players such as Pierce in my opinion.


Actually, Ben has been decent at worst against perimeter guys on a switch.


----------



## MLKG (Aug 25, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>PacersguyUSA</b>!
> 
> 
> Artest could at least challenge Duncan and Garnett and atleast be somewhat effective against them. Ben Wallace would be pretty useless against perimiter players such as Pierce in my opinion.


There is such a huge misconception around the league that Ben is some sort of stiff that can't cover people man to man. And the misconception seems to get bigger every year.

Ben and Ron aren't so different. Ben actually got his start in the NBA as a defensive minded shooting guard/small forward in the mold of guys like Trenton Hassle, Bruce Bowen, and Ron Ron himself. Ben is very athletic and laterally quick. He is 100% completely capable of checking small forwards out to the permiter without giving anything up. He moved to the 4 and 5 spots when it was realized that he would have a greater impact as a rebounder and help defender than he would as a defensive swingman.

And that cuts right to the heart of the argument. A guy who plays great defense in the post along with extraordinary help defense is just far more valuable than a perimeter defender.

The last time I checked, it wasn't called the "Man to Man Player of Year" award. I think Ben clearly impacts the game more with his defense than Artest does. If you want to recognize Artest as a great perimeter defender- that's what All NBA Defensive 1st Team is for. DPOY is for the guy who has the greatest impace, and I think the voters lost sight of that this year in the face of the campaign Ron has been running since last May.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>nmuman</b>!
> Artest is a solid defender. No argument there. However, so is Ben. As for which of them is better, well, that's an argument that is very subjective. So, how to decide then? Well Ben was 2nd in the league in rebounds, 2nd in the league in blocked shots, and 7th in steals. Artest was 3rd in steals. Yep, that's it. So, while Ben finished top 10 in all three defensive categories, Artest only finished top 10 in one of them. What else did Artest finish tops in that got him the award? Public relations. The bottom line is Ben got robbed. This award should have been his hands down, and I hope he holds a grudge if these teams should meet later in the Playoffs.


Let me say a few things, first, its obvious your trying to be subjective with your stats, when saying Ben is top 10 is 3 stats, and then saying Ron is top 10 in only one. Anyone who is not trying to sway a point while blurring the stats would say Ron was in the top 5 in steals, if not, the top 3.

Secondly, maybe you've overlooked it, but Ron held defenders to 9 points a game, on 8 shots (or it could be ther other way around, either way, you get the point). Now, if you ask me, that stat alone is more impressive than all the rebounds and block Wallace drags down in a game. For every Duncan and Garnett that Wallace guards, he also gets to guard a Chris Anderson or a Greg Ostertag. I dont think you'll see Artest ever realy have an easy defensive matchup since there arnt too many teams without a high scoring 2 or 3. Its obvious you dont want to talk about that though, since it wouldnt help you with your argument.

All in all, you like to give out info that helps Bens case, and leave out anything outside of steals that help Ron. 

Ron is not a "solid defender", Ron is the best on the ball defender in the league, and the stats that have been shown prove that. 

All that being said, I was not sure who would win. I thought both guys stood a 50/50 chance of getting it, and I would not have had a problem if Ben won it. They are both the best at what they do, but their defences are very different.

Lets make no mistake though, PJ Brown is a "solid defender", anyone who calls Ron a "solid defender" obviously doesnt watch, or know a lick about basketball, or is angry that he won the award and has had his healthy share of hateraid.


----------



## MLKG (Aug 25, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>R-Star</b>!
> 
> Secondly, maybe you've overlooked it, but Ron held defenders to 9 points a game, on 8 shots (or it could be ther other way around, either way, you get the point).
> .
> ...


The stats do not prove anything. Why? Because there is absolutely NO basis for comparison. How many shots and points does Bowen allow a game? How about Kirilenko or Christie?

You can't answer that question because nobody has bothered as much with individual promotion as Artest and Carlisle have.

And that's without even getting into the credibiltiy of the stats. Rick even said the purpose of breaking down all the film was to find an overwhelming stat. So do you really think the two guys he sent in the film room to do this work would come back to him without an overwhelming stat? From what it sounded like to me, they didn't count Ron as defending a shot unless he had a hand in the guys face when the shot went up. Say he gets beat inside and Foster has to pick his guy up and the guy scores. They don't count the points against Ron because Foster was guarding him. Or if Ron gets wiped out on a screen and Jermaine can't close out on the resulting open jump shot in time. They don't count that against Ron either because Jermaine was on him.

So 8.1 ppg on 9.3 shots at 42.6% clip in situations where Ron is in good defensive position. Sounds impressive, but who knows if it really is? We don't know the stats for other elite defensive players judged on the same criteria.

42.6% is tossed around as a number that is supposed to be impressive, but that is actually a HIGHER percentage than Ron himself shoots from the field. 42.6% is probably around the AVERAGE field goal percentage in the NBA this year. There are so few perimeter players who shoot higher than 43%, I don't know that stat can be considered anything but entirely average.

It's like a situation I was in my senior year of high school. I ended up loosing the voting for 1st team all conference linebacker in football because one of the other teams coaches brought beefed up stats to the voting meeting. His numbers for tackles seemed extremely impressive, but then you go back and look at the film and see otherwise. Each school keeps there own stats, and their statistician had credited this kid with 20 tackles against our team. I went back over the summer and looked at the tape and counted 8 actual tackles, and 12 times where the guy just fell on a pile. But when somebody is looking for stats to support an already established opinion it leads them to pad the numbers to support their case as much as possible.

Ron Artest IS without question the best perimeter defender in the league. But I put absolutely no credence in any of the stats Rick Carlisle's goons brought out of a film room.


----------



## indiana_07_pacers (Apr 16, 2004)

id give it to theo ratliff over ben JMO


----------



## PacersguyUSA (Sep 1, 2002)

> Ben and Ron aren't so different. Ben actually got his start in the NBA as a defensive minded shooting guard/small forward in the mold of guys like Trenton Hassle, Bruce Bowen, and Ron Ron himself. Ben is very athletic and laterally quick. He is 100% completely capable of checking small forwards out to the permiter without giving anything up. He moved to the 4 and 5 spots when it was realized that he would have a greater impact as a rebounder and help defender than he would as a defensive swingman.


Ben Wallace would be beat off of a spin move and falls for pump fakes from perimeter playesr.



> For every Duncan and Garnett that Wallace guards, he also gets to guard a Chris Anderson or a Greg Ostertag. I dont think you'll see Artest ever realy have an easy defensive matchup since there arnt too many teams without a high scoring 2 or 3.


That's the best point brought up in this argument.



> id give it to theo ratliff over ben JMO


Ratliff is a poor man's Ben Wallace.


----------



## MLKG (Aug 25, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>R-Star</b>!
> 
> For every Duncan and Garnett that Wallace guards, he also gets to guard a Chris Anderson or a Greg Ostertag. I dont think you'll see Artest ever realy have an easy defensive matchup since there arnt too many teams without a high scoring 2 or 3.


You named a backup center and a guy who has been among the worst at his position for years.

While your overall point is probably true. For every Chris Anderson or Greg Ostertag Ben guards, Artest guards a Hedo Turkoglu or Jim Jackson. It goes both ways. And besides, that's Artest's game. Ben is much much more than his 1 on 1 matchup. He is an extremely active defender all over the floor. Yeah, he checks his own man, but then he also blocks anything that comes into the paint, takes tons of charges, wrecks havoc reading passes coming out of traps, and pulls in rebounds like a black hole. Detroit plays a very aggressive team oriented defense that relies heavily on trust. And the trust that Detroit's players have built in each other defensively revolves completely around Ben Wallace.


----------



## DetBNyce (Jul 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mike luvs KG</b>!
> 
> 
> You named a backup center and a guy who has been among the worst at his position for years.
> ...



I'm not going to jump in this too much, but I was going to say the same thing. Both guys (Ben and Ron) have nights where they guard a superstar (T-Mac for Ron, JO for Ben) and a night where they guard an average player.

Personally I think it lies right in the numbers. Ben almost equals Ron in steals per game averaging 1.77 to Artest's 2.08. But in addition Ben averages 3 blocks per game.


----------



## Midnight_Marauder (Dec 1, 2003)

You could flip a coin on these two........They are the best two defenders in the game........no one is going to win this arguement........


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mike luvs KG</b>!
> 
> 
> The stats do not prove anything. Why? Because there is absolutely NO basis for comparison. How many shots and points does Bowen allow a game? How about Kirilenko or Christie?
> ...



First thing I will say is *HATER*

I usually don't come out full swing until the end of my posts, but come on mike, are you even serious?

Maybe I will bold the words in my post that say *Average* and try to hide where I said *probably*, just like you. 

I usually respect your posts, but this one is horrid. Entirely average? Yes, your right, Ron Artest is entirely average. They decided to call him a flagrant for every questionable foul he made last year and half of this year, so they decided to make it up, by awarding an entirely average defender with the DPOY, to make it up to him.

What some of you Ben Wallace fans are say is just silly (an I say silly because I am a mod and can say no worse than this.)

So, let me get something else straight, you are willing to compare your JV football career between you and some other scrub against two of the best defenders in the NBA league? I don't know if it can be any more self explanirory to some of you, but when they say they watched every single defensive play, the mean they watched *Every Single Defensive Play*. Do you really think the doctored it? And that every GM and voter is dumb enough to fall for that? I don't know about you, but I trust NBA voters who are paid millions a year to do their job more than a gym teacher who is mad because there was no cup cakes in the cafeteria today when he was promised that he would get one. * Serious Mike, I know you, how is this even a serious argument?*

At least I can say either player could have won it this year, and they could have. I cant believe some of the asinine comments some of you are saying. Get out of the rock, or hey, even Ben Wallace named jock you've been hiding under, Ron Artest won, and hey deserved it.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mike luvs KG</b>!
> 
> 
> You named a backup center and a guy who has been among the worst at his position for years.
> ...


First off, if you think Hedo Turkoglu and Jim Jackson are comparable to Chris Anderson and Greg Ostertag, then you obviously dont watch enough basketball. Also, yes, Ron checks his own man, but 95% of the time, he *Doesnt need someone to* block anything that comes into the paint, doesnt need anyone to take a ton of charges, or wreak havoc reading passes coming out of traps, or pull in rebounds like a black hole, or bla bla bla, and whatever you guys will say. The guys doesnt let guys by him, bottom line. If you cant come to terms with the fact that he is head an shoudlers above Christie and Bowen on man to man, let alone, an above average defender like Wallace on man to man defence, then no one will be able to explain it to you.


----------



## MLKG (Aug 25, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>R-Star</b>!
> 
> First thing I will say is *HATER*
> 
> ...


Did you even read what I wrote? I point blank said that Ron Artest is without question the best perimeter defender in the league. My point is that the stat's the Rick came up with need to be taken with a grain of salt. There is no way you can say the stats were compiled by a neutral party. They were compiled by Ron's personal campaign team for DPOY. Of course they are going to manipulate the paramaters of the the anaylisis to favor their guy.



> Do you really think the doctored it? And that every GM and voter is dumb enough to fall for that? I don't know about you, but I trust NBA voters who are paid millions a year to do their job more than a gym teacher who is mad because there was no cup cakes in the cafeteria today when he was promised that he would get one. * Serious Mike, I know you, how is this even a serious argument?*


I don't think they came up with fake stats, I think they carefully choose the way they defined who was guarding who to make for the most impressive case possible.

Do I think sports journalists are dumb enough to fall for this? Absolutely. We're talking about guys like Marc Stein who are doing the voting for these things. Artest and Carlisle have been campaining to these guys all year. They all took these statistics as gospel, proclaiming them the greatest things they've ever seen, without ever stopping to question the validitity or actual meaning.

Like I said the 42.6% that Artest's oppenents scored on him actually surprised me because I thought it would be a lot lower. I've read a lot of articles from voting members of the media who were very impressed by that stat. They obviously didn't bother to compare it what a normal shooting percentage for a perimeter player is because that stat is absolutely average.

This is all in regards to your claim that these numbers are more impressive than all of Ben's rebounds and blocks. I disagree because these numbers were gathered by a biased source and there is no comparison to other players in the league. We know Ben is second in both blocks and rebounds, but we have no idea how Artest's numbers would stack up against guys like Bowen, Christie, Hassle, etc....

These stats were created with the sole purpose of persuading members of the media to vote for Ron Artest. It's not like it's a stat that Carlisle regularly keeps for all his players and Ron's numbers jumped out at him. I question any numbers that are created for the sake of campaign purposes.

None of this is to take anything away from Artest. I'm just saying Carlisle's numbers shouldn't be taken as absolute gospel because there is going to be an inherent bias in them.

As for the DPOY award.

I think Ben Wallace is the best team defensive player of the last decade. I also think this has been the best season of his career. He is the first player since Hakeem to finish in the top 10 in blocks, steals, and rebounds. He became the 1st player in NBA history to record 4 1000 board, 100 block, and 100 steal seasons. He also anchored the most dominant defense in the 50 years since the shot clock was invented.

I thought this year he had the strongest case for DPOY he has ever had, and I think a lot what he has accomplished has been lost in the feel good story that is Ron Artest.

You could see this coming since the begining of the year. After being snubbed from the Defensive 1st Team last year Ron Artest threw a fit to the media about how he should have been DPOY and how he was the best defensive player in the league.

At the start of this season a lot of these voting writers had him as the favorite to win the award this season. So these guys go from not voting him to the first team, to calling him a preseason favorite? I think they realized they snubbed him big time from the 1st team last year and he got a lot of make up votes for it this year.

I think when you win an award two years in a row it becomes yours to lose- and Ben Wallace actually stepped up his game defensively. While Ron is the same player he was last year minus the blowups (defensively I mean, he is a greatly improved offensive player).

I'm not hating on Ron Artest. I think he's a great player and picked him for 2nd team All-NBA. I just don't think his defensive impact is as great as Ben Wallaces, and I don't think a lot of voters ever really gave Ben a chance to win it just for the sake of having something new.


----------



## nmuman (Nov 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Mike luvs KG</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Game! Set! Match!

The thread can be closed now!


----------



## Stank You Very Much (Apr 20, 2004)

Deleted, As You Have Been Banned In The Past, Your Messages Will All Be Deleted.


----------



## PacersguyUSA (Sep 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>nmuman</b>!
> 
> 
> Game! Set! Match!
> ...





> if it's that close, it can hardly be called a travesty.


Thanks for responding!  You can't end it while being refutated without acknowledging you were beaten.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>reisedogg</b>!
> You could flip a coin on these two........They are the best two defenders in the game........no one is going to win this arguement........





That's how I feel. Either way, people are still going to disagree.


----------



## nmuman (Nov 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>PacersguyUSA</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I think Mike just blew you all out of the water with his last post. 

So I reiterate.........Game! Set! Match!

The thread can be closed now.


----------



## PacersguyUSA (Sep 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>nmuman</b>!
> 
> 
> I think Mike just blew you all out of the water with his last post.
> ...





> if it's that close, it can hardly be called a travesty.


 Thanks for responding!  You can't end it while being refutated without acknowledging you were beaten.


----------



## nmuman (Nov 26, 2003)

Beaten by calling it a Travesty?


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Im not even going to respond to nmuman, since he refuses to have a intelligent argument. I respect Mike though, so this is for him. 

I think what some of you guys dont see is that Ben Wallace and Ron Artest are not comparable on defence. When Shaq and Kobe are both playing great defence in a game, and Shaq gets lets say 13 boards and 3 blocks, but Webber scored 20 on him, and Kobe shuts down Peja to 9 points, while getting 6 boards and 3 steals, who did the better job? Its hard to say, isnt it? 

If the award is going to be given out every year to whoever gets the most boards and blocks, then guys like Artest, Bowen, Christie and others are being over looked. Its alot easier to judge how a big man defended since there are rebounds and blocks to look at, while there is no stat for locking down a kobe or Tracy, or say, smothering a Peja so well he isnt open for a pass in the final seconds of a 1 point game. 

Big men win the award year in and year out because like I said, their stats are plain and simple to judge, although that is taking nothing away from them. But, constantly over looking the little guy who consistently holds the person hes on to well under their season average just isnt right.

So, to close it all up, like I said in an earlier post, I was 50/50 with who I thought should get the award, since Ron and Ben are the best in the league at what they do, but I am overjoyed that a little guy finaly got it.

And also, I had a few too many last night while watching the Calgary-Vancouver game 7 game and appologise if i came off rude in my earlier post. Like it says at the top, I like you as a poster and have nothing but respect for you Mike.


----------



## PacersguyUSA (Sep 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>nmuman</b>!
> Beaten by calling it a Travesty?


You said it was a travesty, then you said it was close. It can't be both. So, what's youre rebutal?


----------



## nmuman (Nov 26, 2003)

I feel it is a travesty because I think it is Ben's award. Although, I will say and have said that Artest is very good. I wouldn't even have picked him to finish in 2nd place for it. Maybe 2nd behind Ak47.


----------



## jvanbusk (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>R-Star</b>!
> Im not even going to respond to nmuman, since he refuses to have a intelligent argument. I respect Mike though, so this is for him.


Not saying I necessarily agree, but I'm glad you see what it's like to be a Pistons fan on these boards.


----------



## MLKG (Aug 25, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>R-Star</b>!
> 
> If the award is going to be given out every year to whoever gets the most boards and blocks, then guys like Artest, Bowen, Christie and others are being over looked. Its alot easier to judge how a big man defended since there are rebounds and blocks to look at, while there is no stat for locking down a kobe or Tracy, or say, smothering a Peja so well he isnt open for a pass in the final seconds of a 1 point game.


Very true. I think rebounds are a bit overrated as a defensive stat anyway. They are valuable in denying teams second chances, but rebounding is a thing that SOMBEBODY has to do. I put more value in blocks and steals because they are something you have actually create. Big guys get blocks, and little guys get steals. But Ben is near the top of both categories anyway.

I realize Artest's defense can't even begin to be summed up by steal stats, what makes him a great defender is his ball denial. Guys have a lot of trouble getting the ball in good position on him, and a lot of the "superstar" guards like Paul Pierce have no idea how to move without the ball and just get wrecked trying to take Ron off the dribble every play.

But just like stats don't tell half the story of what Artest does, the same is true for Ben. Yeah, he blocks around 3 shots a game, but there is no stat for the amount of times a guard gets into the lane, takes a look at Ben, and launches up a bad floater.



> Big men win the award year in and year out because like I said, their stats are plain and simple to judge, although that is taking nothing away from them. But, constantly over looking the little guy who consistently holds the person hes on to well under their season average just isnt right.


I don't know if this is just my feeling, but I think big men win the award so much because they are a lot more important. No matter how great a perimeter defender you are, you can still only guard one guy at a time. And while it's great to be able to shut down a guy like Kobe, that really doesn't help you against Shaq. A great big guy can give Shaq trouble all night, and can also force Kobe to become a jump shooter by taking the paint away.

I guess I've never agreed with a perimeter players selection but they still do it every now and then. Deke won the award in '95 and then had the best season of his careeer in '96 but they gave the award to Payton that year. Then Deke has his two worst seasons since his rookie year in '97 and '98 but he wins the award in both those years.

When perimeter players win the award I don't think it's for having the best defensive season. Deke clearly had a better season in '96 and I felt Ben had better season this year. When they give it to a little guy it's just to recognize them as the top perimeter defender in the game. They gave it to Jordan in '88 I believe, but then never again even though his defense never really changed. They were just recognizing him as the leagues best perimeter guy. Then after Jordan left they gave it to Payton too recognize him as the best perimeter defender and then never gave him consideration again. Now Payton is washing up and Artest has established himself as the premier perimeter defender so he gets his award too. In all 3 cases, I think most voters had decided long before the season was over who was going to win. But then on the other side, they never really gave Jordan or Payton consideration again and the same will probably happen to Ron.

A big guy will get it again next year, and a little guy won't get it again until Ron gets old and someone new establishes themself as the best perimiter guy.

I disagree with this thought process as I think that's what the All NBA teams are for, but I realize it's going to happen now and then. I just wish they wouldn't do this in years where DPOY regulars like Ben and Deke are having career years because it just seems inconsistant.



> And also, I had a few too many last night while watching the Calgary-Vancouver game 7 game and appologise if i came off rude in my earlier post. Like it says at the top, I like you as a poster and have nothing but respect for you Mike.


:laugh: It's all good. I've done that to people before too.


----------



## noogie_da_sheep (Jan 12, 2004)

Ronny thoroughly deserved the award

...i thought Kirilenko might have come second.


----------



## MillerTime (Jul 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>nmuman</b>!
> I feel it is a travesty because I think it is Ben's award. Although, I will say and have said that Artest is very good. I wouldn't even have picked him to finish in 2nd place for it. Maybe 2nd behind Ak47.


And I wonder why you think that..........?  

Every time you see NBA players on a show like ESPN's "Hot Seat" on Sports Center and are asked "best player you've played again" they ALWAYS say Ron Artest because of how good he is on defense. 

Artest is the best defensive player in the league. He'll get this award more then us so we might as well get used to it.

And AK47 is not as good as Artest on defense so let's not even start that. He's very good on defense, and has alot of skills with the ball, but only basing them on defense, Artest is way better.


----------

