Is Jeremy Lin the next...just kidding...does Chandler Parsons = Paul George 2.0?

and he's got the euro step now which i've started seeing over the couple of months.

He's taller than LeBron so he will likely never be completely fluid with his moves.
But it's incredible how much he has improved over this summer and the first month of the season. On both ends.

I certainly didn't see it coming.

 

over the past couple months, i.e. basically in 2013

 

Offensively, Parsons is better. But George is vastly superior defensively, and rebounding.

Not to mention George's ceiling is much higher.

 

George appears to be the better player now and going forward. However, that doesn't mean Parsons isn't a good player or can't get better. Both players are going to be very good for years to come.

 

Purely on the 2012-2013 stats, both are essentially the same player - meaning both have similiar stats. The only thing that is making Paul George look better is that with Granger out he had to be their #1 option. You are not going to look as good playing second or third fiddle on a team. The "eye ball" test will dicate that Paul is the better player only because Parsons looks week.:grin:

 

I am a Rockets fan who currently lives in Cincinnati, so I watch a lot of Pacers games. First off id like to say that i was really hoping that the Rockets were going to draft either Paul George or Larry Sanders in the 2010 NBA draft. If only Utah didnt pick Hayward, the Pacers would've drafted him, and George wouldve been ours. I have been saying for about a year now that Parsons is not as good as George, but he is on the same level. I wouldnt say George is a straight up number one option on the Pacers. He and West are 1a and 1b. West is their number 1 post, George is number 1 wing. but in the clutch when they need a bucket, they always go to West in the post.

I want to compare and contrast their games:

Shooting:
George - 42.4% fg, 38.5% 3pt, 81.7% ft
Parsons - 48.5% fg, 39.6% 3pt, 70.6% ft

Parsons is a better spot up 3pt shooter. George is a very good off ball, catch and shoot on the move 3pt shooter. Parsons is better reading the defense and making off ball cuts to the rim. much better bball IQ on the offensive end than George. George is better iso player, but Parsons is better off the pick and roll. Parsons totals may be a bit inflated bc of pace, but when you take pace into consideration and compare it to the fact that George gets more opportunities as the primary perimeter scorer, it evens out.

George is a slightly better rebounder than Parsons, while numbers show George gets about 2 more rbs per game, Parsons has Asik grabbing everything, while Hibbert is having a horrible year rebounding. They both have about the same amount of assists, but Parsons is better at creating for others. he has the ball in his hands way less than George, who is the primary perimeter ball handler. So George has many more opportunities than Parsons.

George is way better defensively night in and night out. Parsons has his nights where he is on his level, but he definitely is inconsistent defensively. Has potential to be just as good as George if not better because he can guard some 4's.

In conclusion, George is a better overall player right now, but it is not by as much as some people may think.

 

George is way better

 

Paul George is the better player, but he struggles scoring, a lot. He is very inefficient from the field and does not get to the free throw line a lot.

Paul George will be a very good player, but as of now he seems more like an Andre Iguodala type player.

 

Chandler is a great player and hes been the x factor for the Rockets this season and is emerging as a star. The only knock I have on him is that he needs a Jlin or Jharden to feed him for spot up jumpers as he cannot really create his own shot. Whereas I believe Paul George can (correct me if im wrong as I have not seen enough of George's game)

 

I like Parsons but I don't really think he has a ton of room for improvement. I think his ceiling isn't a whole lot higher than where he's at now. That being said he's still very good and would be a valuable piece to just about any team.

 

Parsons all day.

 

Yes, "best contracts" means underpaying a player. An example of a "worst contract" would be to pay Andris Biedrins 9 million or Chris Humphries 12 million to not play. For every guy who is underpaid like Parsons, there are half a dozen who get huge contracts and play like crap.

 

i think he was making a joke, in the sense that those aren't "good contracts" if you are Parsons or George

 

He needs to learn the face up game on the post. He has room for improvement. He fades on jump shots, so he could learn to get on the post and shoot fadeaways via Dirk.

 

I think the Pacers' low profile has hidden the fact that the Pacers and George were very different early in the season compared to right now and it distorts the numbers quite a bit.

George was really struggling for the first quarter or so of the season. Which is normal, George has never been the 1st-2nd option before this season, he was consistently the 4-5th option his whole career. He's never even been the 6th man scorer off the bench like Harden. So it was a painful adjustment. He was really inefficient, like, Monta Ellis inefficient. And the Pacers were really struggling, they were under .500 for a long time. The fact that they (and the Celtics) managed to recover and will probably get home court advantage is really ridiculous and shame on the other teams.

But since that time (the last ~40 games) George has been a .550+ TS scorer while averaging over 19 points a game. That's why he's an All Star, besides elite defense.
That's obviously not a superb efficiency of the game's best offensive players like LeBron, Durant or Harden - those guys can be 1st options and still score in the .600s in terms of TS.
But .550s is the area of Paul Pierce, Melo, Tim Duncan or David Lee. I certainly wouldn't call it very inefficient.

 

Dirk is a special case, the shots he's taking are bad for nearly every other player. And the Rockets as a team doesn't seem to like those kind of shots and doesn't seem to want any 'poor man's Dirks'. So i doubt he's going to focus on Dirk fadeaways.

 

Paul Parsons and George Chandler

 

5 stars for title

 

His scoring isn't that great, look at his efficiency.

And the Pacers are just feasting on the Least. They'd be battling us, Utah, and LAL for a Playoff spot in the West. I wouldn't call them one of the best teams in the NBA. Top 10, yeah, but they're not title contenders unless they get extremely lucky

 

Why people keep saying someone is weak because he can't create his own shot. I suppose Stoudemire can't create his own shot but he was really good.

Isn't it the PG's job to create shots for his teammates? I wonder if a team made up by 5 guys who could all create their own shots, how good this team would be?

If you get the best 5 ISO players in the league into one team, will they win a championship?