http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mipzkqnlEo 4 instances of parsons supposive lockdown defense getting burned by hayward, man on man. i wish the video had the rest. but just look at the highlights. parsons cannot hold hayward.
No, I was responding to your post when you said "Parsons has been pretty consistent on what he has been bringing every game this season." We live and die by the 3, and in a lot of games we will win or die by Parsons ability to hit a wide open 3, given the amount of minutes he gets. Its a big part of his game, our game. His hustle has been the only consistent thing about his game, fast breaking, cutting, pump-fake dish. he will always have that. His defense is decent. he is consistently decent.
And I stand by my statement. One aspect of his game hasn't been consistent, but he has been overall. It was obvious enough last night that the offense seems to just be missing something without him the entire game. Aside from his 3 pt shot, he has the ability to make that pump fake and drive in and make the defense collapse or create a shot or a layup for himself. When we didn't have that player with ability to work with the ball in his hands when needed our offense had trouble really getting into our normal rythm. He's not the kind of player that can do this every possession and lead a team, but that's not what we are asking him to be. He has done a good job for a 3rd option on offense. Without him we were completely reliant on Harden alone since Howard wasn't hitting anything other than easy dump offs or alley-oops. We ask him for effort, to create some plays, rebounding, and shooting. I think when you take all of those catergories into consideration he has been fairly consistent this year. Outside of a few games of course. If going forward his shots fall then it will only get better.
He is definately a very good role player as I've stated, but even without him we could have beat the Jazz yesterday. Even in the first game, with jeremy lin, the game was close with 5 minutes left in the fourth, they had a five point lead. We may have missed Lin more than him. We lost this game because of perimeter defense and because our shots were off. Even in the post game interview, a reporter asked mcchale if the reason we lost was because we didn't have Lin and chandler, which he responded NO. with the players that we had out there, we didn't get it done. The Jazz went with a two point guard line up down the stretch that caused us to play aaron brooks, exposing our porous perimeter D. I'm not sure with Chandler in the line up we would have necessarily won, tho possibly. We had a ton of open shots we missed. garcia, brooks were off who normally shoot well. and don't get me wrong, it's not that parsons is a bad player, it's just that hayward is better, he's a better defender, he can create off the dribble, not just from a 3 ball fake, and kickout, he can get in the lane and fade away on his midrange, he's a tweener SG/SF. With parsons as your third best player(giving him 10 million a year plus), we will not win an NBA championship. He aint going to fix all of our defensive woes. it wasn't just hayward going off, those two point guards had a field day.
I agree that Lin would of helped a lot last night as well. Once again it would of given us that extra play maker, not to mention his defense would of been better thank Brooks. We need that extra playmaker right now, and without both Lin and Parsons it made us one dimensional where only Harden was able to get into the lane. I'm looking forward to getting both of them back and seeing how good of ball movement we can have with all the play making ability on the court from a full lineup.
I should have expected as much, you really have no evidence or any basis for your opinion. Let me guess... You think Step Curry is the best point guard in the NBA, you think Harden sucks, you think Kobe is a good defender, you refer to McHale as "McFail", you believe highly in team chemistry, you believe The offense should run through Jeremy Lin, you think Dwight Howard is a disappointment, you want Brooks getting Beverley's minutes and... You believe in democratic ball? No need to confirm.
i just posted two links earlier in this thread...video is evidence, not just pulling up stats. Its OK to be wrong, NOOK.
To be fair, it's not like McHale would have answered yes even if he does feel that is the reason. Many- especially the media- don't like to hear excuses, even if they are true. I can agree that we didn't lose solely because we were missing Parsons and Lin, but there's no doubt that if we weren't missing them we would have won. At the same time, though, we shouldn't ignore that we could and should have still won without them. Our defense was obviously flat out terrible outside of Beverley. Other than a few plays between the two, Harden and to a lesser extent Garcia stunk up the joint defensively- and Howard did not put in as much effort as he could have (though that's been somewhat of a recurring issue from him- something not exclusive to just last night's game).
Are fans that delusional. Hayward was shooting 29% FG for the season before last night. While he had a charismatic break out performance against the porous Rockets perimeter defense lets not get carried away here. He's at best somewhere between JJ Reddick, Budinger, and on days like yesterday Jamal Crawford. Good player to have in the right role, but not a franchise altering piece. Parsons is a completely different player than Hayward. He can play pretty much any role you want on the team based on the needs of that current team, plays super smart on the court to make the right plays, and is a great leader on and off the court. While Parsons and Hayward might get paid around the same with their next contracts, id rather have Parsons on my team any day of the week. You can count on him to make your team better in the end.
You want some video evidence that Parsons is a terrific player and someone with a big arsenal of weapons? You want to see Parsons put the ball on the court to go by his defender? Score in the post? Hot shots over good defenders? Spoiler Parsons has a higher scoring average without the benefit of being the number one option. He has a higher F/G% by a mile, a higher 3pt% by a mile and Parsons is much more consistent then Hayward. Hayward is the very definition of a streaky player. Hayward is not the only player to put up decent PPG on a crappy ass team as their primary scorer, Evan Turner does it for the 76ers and his numbers are better plus he's a better defender.. Do you really think Evan Turner is going to get the max?
Hayward is the best player on the Jazz, and the Jazz are terrible. Just because he bubbled up for one spectacular game, it does not change what he is. I'm not gonna give a guy extra credit for putting up similar numbers, on much worse efficiency, just because he's the best player on a bad team. If the teams traded straight up, the Jazz would still be bad, and the Rockets would still be good. Hayward is a great player, but like Chandler will be the #3 guy on a great team.
Heyward has a Max deal and Parsons can't? Clutchfans all delusional think Parsons should be cheaper? HAHAHAHAHA
