Ron Artest vs Bruce Bowen.

[i am batman u die now]

Hypothetically speaking, who do you think had the better man to man defense, perimeter defense, and low post defense? Who's better for chemistry? Who's better all time?

[Nitro]

Man to man defense- Artest. Bowen was probably better at contesting jumpers and doing some of the smaller things, but Artest was so physical and was the more smothering defender. They were about equally quick, but Artest had a much thicker frame, so he was able to bother guys like Pierce and LeBron more than Bowen could. Artest also had freakishly quick hands, so he was able to force more turnovers and would deflect passes that had a way of disrupting offensive flow.

 

Perimeter defense- Don't really know what you mean here with your other 2 questions. If you're talking help defense, Bowen was better. He had a higher IQ and always knew where to be on the floor in proper defensive position, while Artest would sometimes gamble or miss the occasional rotation.

 

Low post defense- Artest. Much stronger and aggressive.

 

Overall player- Depends on what your team needs offensively. If you got a strong offensive team already and just need a great defender who can knock down 3's, Bowen is your guy. If your team needs more help than just a spot-up 3pt shooter offensively, then Artest is your guy.

[Art]

Hypothetically speaking...

 

1. who do you think had the better man to man defense: Bowen

2. perimeter defense: Bowen

3. and low post defense: Artest

4. Who's better for chemistry? Bowen

5. Who's better all time? Artest, because of his offensive game.