[ClutchFans] Chandler Parsons won’t be getting a free pass any longer

Agree.

Some like to b**** about Chandler Parsons
Some like to b**** about James Harden
Some like to b**** about Jeremy Lin

It is what it is.

 

Ive rad this tweet a couple times now and I still have no idea what it means..

 

Fantastic article, Clutch.

 

Can we do the following: wait to the last minute on Bosh, if he does not sign max, match Parson and use him in a sign and trade for Love? I believe most of us agree that 15 mil per year is too much for Parson, why not use him to get Love instead of just letting him walk and getting nothing. There may be a reason we can't do this is why I am asking those who are in the know better than me.

 

No one likes to b**** about Patrick Beverly because he is the Wolverine and will seriously hurt you if you say anything mean.

 

Bro, he signed the offer already. He's locked in. He's either coming with us or Dallas.

 

Chandler's a good to great player.

A 15 mill a year player he is not. Dallas doing to Houston what Houston did to NYC with Lin. We all saw how that turned out.

 

Or as Clutch said in his article, it's because he's on a value contract. It's hard to complain about a guy who plays beyond expectations, based on his salary.

 

One part where I would disagree with Clutch is this: The relevant question about deciding whether to match Parsons isn't all about whether you can trade him at a positive value.

If Parsons performs at a value that's worth, say, $11M rather than $15M, perhaps he has negative trade value.

But does letting him go gives you the extra flexibility to add another player who gives you close to $11M worth of production? Even if yes, what kind of contract do you have to pay that player?

In the end, it's about opportunity costs. Does not matching Parsons allow you to gain something else valuable? Conversely, does matching Parsons take away certain options and how valuable are those options?

The potential trade value question is relevant. It comes into play when you want to, well, trade the guy for another player or to open up cap room in the future.

However, this is only a part of the equation, especially for a team that is close to being a contender and looking to be as competitive as possible right away. Depending on the cap tactics, it may well make sense to keep a productive player on a contract that exceeds his production value by a couple million bucks.

 

My love for Chandler is officially over after this dick head move.

I hope we match and then ship his ass to the Bucks.

 

i think it has more to do with Beverley being what he is and has always been, but Chandler went from being a defensive pest to an offensive player. You can't fault Beverley for lacking offensive abilities, but chandler's issue is effort.

 

Two of these guys actually try on defense.

 

This is different. Parsons will yield a positive trade.

 

And only one of those guys actually try on offense in the clutch.

 

True I'm sure that's part of it. But if Bev were at a near-max contract then the first picture someone posted of Bev at a club would have people asking, "Why is he parting and not working on his 3-point shot?" It's probably a mixture of personality and paycheck.

 

"Trying isn't worth a damn if your attempt sucks monkey balls."

--Yoda

 

And i thnk chandler is focused on his next pay day already. With a shorter deal, there really isn't a good time to have a down year. I think he's hoping to be a full blown star in 2 years, so he can opt out and sign up for more money. That means improvement and hard work, not coasting. I'm not sure I'm ready to bet against the guy, not yet.

 

So if we DONT get bosh, is houston still planning to match parsons? or are we letting him walk and just throw all our eggs in a basket and hope we pull out some decent players (deng, etc)?

 

Nobody knows and everything is speculation.

 

Sooo Dwain Price is actually Doc Rocket??!?!?