I haven't even listed every deadline deal yet, but I can tell you that there's one deal that didn't go down that everyone is still thinking about.
Why did the Lakers not deal Ron Artest?
Let's briefly review the faults of Ron on a nightly basis. Firstly, it's true that his shooting numbers are pretty scary this year, and not in a good way. His points are at an all time low at 8.2ppg, but on a team like the Lakers, did you really recruit him to score? His field goal percentage is also at a new low at 40.6 percent, but his three-point percentage remains in tact at 37 percent. Shooting aside, Ron also has a tendency to make bad decisions while in possession on the ball, especially on the fast break. You so desperately want him to make the pass after one of his huge steals, because if he doesn't he's going to be either blocked by the rim, or a player.
After what I have mentioned above, and the fact that Ron does run out of crazy pills from time to time, the fact still remains that the Lakers were smart in keeping Ron Artest around. But why would I defend keeping a player who is shooting poorly, can't handle the ball to save his life, and could self-destruct quicker than a California earthquake?
I can do this because with all of his faults, Ron Artest loves the game of basketball, and he was instrumental in the Lakers repeating in 2010.
When you first talk about what Ron does well for the Lakers (or could do for any team) your mind immediately goes to his ability to steal the basketball and create extra possessions. Ron Artes...
Article Source: Bleacher Report - Los Angeles Lakers
