If Ariza can manage to be efficient offensively, then he will be a clear upgrade over Parsons. We already know he's superior as a perimeter defender. Alas, we know Trevor's deficiencies all too well. Don't let him handle the ball. Ever.
Ziggy, I agree, no one knows how much better or worse Parsons could get, but as of now, Ariza is the better player. I was a bit worried when we signed him up, but dude has improved a lot of the past two years. With the current group of players and the age Howard is at, this is easily the best guy we could have gotten at this time.
I am confused as to why people think Parsons can create? His shot creation is hoping people bite on his pump fake and rushing past people slower than him.
Parsons was a damn good finisher on the break and a very solid 2nd tier PnR creator. He isn't an elite SF creator, but he's similar to Orlando's Turkoglu - underrated vision off the PnR with mismatch size that sucks a defense in.
He relies on others to create shots for him, whether it's via a pick or slashing. Both of those qualities, Ariza can do as well, though admittedly, his court vision is not as good. Some are acting like we gave up significant playmaking by losing Parsons. I do not recall him being a playmaker or shot creator much. The vast majority of his solo points came off lagging D or defenders biting on pump fakes, which only worked so long as his shots were actually falling. Maybe I am just being selective, but I view Ariza as an upgrade over Parsons in virtually all aspects.
turkoglu is about 10 times better than on in terms of offense creation, Turk actually played the point guard position half the time that year Orlando went to the finals, his court vision, passing, dribbling was miles ahead of Parsons.
Haha! Some loser just left me this rep. Why don't you man up and come out with this opinion in front of everyone. Don't be that loser trying to send me messages while hiding behind the anonymity of the rep system. Seriously, that's just poor form. For the record, I was one of the earliest and biggest Parsons fan when he was a Rocket. I remember being excited about the pick. One can hardly call me biased in that regard. For the record, Ariza is just as effective a slasher and shooter, if not better, so no it's not just defense.
i absolutely hated the dozens of instances last season that he refused to advance the ball upcourt or pass off for a better look on the break, opting instead to try and pad his own scoring numbers.
I think they will be roughly even by the end of the season, with Parsons having better offensive numbers and Ariza being a better defender. Judging anything by a few preseason games is how Kelvin Cato got his ridiculous contract. It's hard to imagine that Ariza won't be the better value by a large margin though. It's kind of lose/lose for the Mavs. Either he under performs his contract making it harder to recruit any other star, or he surprises everyone and lives up to it and will be looking for a raise or another team in 2 years. I expect he will underperform his contract while still being a good player like he was for the Rockets. It's also kind of funny how analysts look at what Dallas added and forget to remove what they lost when saying how much they are going to improve. For all of Cuban's shots at the Rockets about "chemistry", they lost Calderon, Marion, DeJuan Blair, Samuel Dalembert, and Vince Carter who were all rotation players in their 7 game playoff series vs the Spurs. The media makes it sound as if they added Parsons and Tyson Chandler without losing any rotation players. You can say Tyson Chandler is an upgrade to Dalembert, but Dalembert got them 8.4 rebounds in only 19.3 minutes per game vs the Spurs, compared to Tyson averaging 9.6 boards per 30.2 minutes, and it's been several years since Tyson hasn't missed ~20 plus games from injuries. I expect the Mavs to be pretty close to where they were last year. Just remember that the Mavs had one more win than the 9th seed Suns and 2 wins less than the 6th seed Warriors. The west is so tight that it wouldn't take a major improvement or slide for a team to go up or down several spots from where they ended last season.
I don't agree with those saying Parsons couldn't create his own offense. He was very good at swooping in and taking his man off the dribble. He is deceptively quick and a good finisher.
1. His "rep" post is not intelligent 2. I am not dissing intelligent discussion, I am dissing some fool that hides behind anonymity by trying to "diss" me via rep. If you have a point, make it publicly. 3. How am I derailing the thread when I am on topic and definitely more on topic than your post which discusses neither Parsons or Ariza?
