This is the guy who started it all for me. My buddy Thatchmo e-mailed me enraged that random announcer-x stated matter of factly that Artest is one of the 10 best players in the NBA. Thus, a discussion of "best" ensued much as it does annually when people are pissed at the likely MVP award recipient. As I've stated before, I think this argument can be broken down into three components: talent; talent-maximization (or effort); and skill. Talent is obvious. It is the potential that is talked about as upside, and it is the quiet inner nexus that allows players to grow. Obviously, you need to have this if you’re going to be one of the elite. (Quick aside: top 5 most talented players ever have to be MJ, Lebron, Chamberlain, Dr. J, and Magic) The other aspect that goes hand in hand with talent is effort. Effort is often thought of as the refuge of role players and glue guys. I look it as the maximization of potential. Think of talent as a bubble and maximization as the extent to which a player fills this space with actual ability and accomplishments.
The last aspect speaks to those abilities filled out through maximization. Tops ever would probably include Kobe Bryant, Tim Duncan, Bird, MJ, and Chamberlain. The difference between talent and skill is that skill exists outside of realms solely inhabited by athleticism. Skill is generally acquired, often through a long procession of maximally realized years, whereas talent lies latent in the thews and sinews and fibrous, nerve-ending tissues of the athlete. You're born with talent; you create skill out of using your talents, maximizing them, and learning how to continually do that.
Bush's WMD, originally uploaded by Kevin.Donegan.
The Skinny: Ron's a bull on defense and potentially potent (word play!) on offense. He won the D-PoY in 2004 and has made 4 All-D teams, so we know the people with the votes think he's good. He made was an all star and third team all NBA in 2004 as well. I could get into advanced stats, but there are other scribes who do it better than me, so I won't over step my abilities, unlike Ron Ron. It's not that he doesn't have the talent to be the dominant defensive or offensive force he touts himself as. It's just that when he thinks he's doing this he's more often detracting from his team's ability to function as a unit. On defense, he can tend to focus on locking down his defender even when he should be rotating to complement what his teammates are doing on D. Offensively, he tends to jack up shots at the most inopportune time. In short (and skinny...I wish), he seems like he has the weapons of mass destruction, but he just can't remember the codes to set them off.
Why he's #47: Before Malice at the Palace (you didn't think I'd get through this without the obligatory mention, did you?), the Pacers looked to be one of the top teams in the league. Artest was arguably their number 2 guy, though that roster was more of an ensemble featuring Jermaine O'Neal, Reggie Miller, and Stephen Jackson, along with Tru. The point is Artest could be a legit second marquee player on a legit contender. Even last season, he was the best player for the last games as the Rockets took the Lakers to 7 games in the conference semis. It doesn't look like that kind of output is in his near future, as he joins a stacked Lakers team. And, in the end, conference semis are conference semis and beer brawls with fans cannot be erased from public consciousness or, perhaps, Ron Artest's psyche.
Ron Artest. , originally uploaded by tiffkathlee.
