sorry I stopped after you compared them at all...Parsons is better then barnes at literally everything. but even if they had the exact stats... parsons>>>>>>>>> barnes simply on BB IQ
Harrison is 4 years younger with one more year on rookie scale contract. His upside, contract along with good rookie year performance combined is a better value than Parsons.
If you think a PER of 11 is a "good rookie year performance", you have a very different definition of good than I do. To put it in perspective, Chandler as a rookie (i.e. not even factoring in the tremendous strides he made this year) had a significantly higher PER and more win shares than Barnes. He scored more points per game despite taking fewer shots. Higher FG%, more assists, steals, blocks, fewer turnovers, etc.
lol...how do people see the same thing and get two totally different views. There is no stat, no logic and no real life reasoning that you can say barnes is better or has more value. Now I understand how socialism starts. lol
Check how many rookies have PER above 11 while playing 81 games and 25MPG. And take a look how many of those are at similar age, not to mention PER is a flawed stat.
FYI, the Rockets could potentially still have (near) max cap room in 2015 even with Dwight, Harden, Parsons (cap hold), Beverley (cap hold), various first rounders (Jones, D-Mo, 2014 & 2105 first rounders) and league minimum guys (Aldemir, 2013, 2014, 2015 second rounders). A lot would depend on how much the cap goes up over the next 2-3 years and what the Rockets do in trades, free agency and the draft between now and July 2015. Just saying, is all.
I get what you are saying but please explain to me, how we are so close. Yes we had an outstanding season, made the playoff's and all. But IMO we still have a long ways to go. Especially if we stand pat or not able to get what we want in the off-season. Gutting the team, hmmmmmmm, well look how that worked out in South Beach. You bring in Howard and CP3 to go along with Harden, lol man that will make us immediate contenders. Players will take paycuts to play alongside these guys Old Man. We will have our growing pain early, just like Miami did in their 1st season together. But when these three build that chemistry, watch the freak-a-zoid out..
Oh ****ing please. Development comes down to time in the NBA, not what year you were born in. But if you want to play that game, Maurice Harkless plays the same position, averaged 26 minutes/game and had a PER of 12.5. And he's even younger (19, OMGZ!!!!). Are you taking him over both Barnes and Parsons, I assume?
His contract is better? Come on... Barnes is making about $3 million a year, and Parsons is making $900k for clearly better production. Just in 2015, Barnes will make more than the total amount of Chandler's 4 year contract. I think maybe you're just caught up in the fact that Golden State is still in the playoffs. Honestly tell me that they wouldn't be there if you swapped out Parsons for Barnes.
I'm pretty sure T. Jones put up something like an 18 this season. I may be wrong on that, though! Let me check!
Barnes played an important role in GS's success, so I wouldn't take Harkless over him. That said, Harkless is a promising rookie as well.
HA! The old "winner" excuse! That one never fails. Mario Chalmers is clearly an upgrade for us at PG, right? I mean, he played 27 minutes per game on the best team in the league! STUD!!!
ya but you're coming from just as biased a position. regardless of how good houston could be with dwight, he can still make more money (regardless of taxes), he could definitely get larger/higher profile endorsements in LA, and it's still the lakers... if they want to make something happen they will. you don't have to recruit when you're the lakers.
If you keep concentrating on one aspect of the argument, there's no end to the discussion. Parsons is pretty good. Let's just agree to disagree.
The difference is that our "bias" directly relates to Dwight. Contending for titles is something that matters to most players. It's up for debate how much weight Dwight should/will give it, but it does matter to him. How much of a cut Fegan gets... should be totally irrelevant. That's why I hope he understands that position.
Parsons is clearly superior in almost every way to Barnes, who had a fairly disappointing rookie season for a 7th overall pick. The idea that Barnes is a better "value" based on the fact that he "maybe could develop" because he's 20 years old is just silly. The reason there's no end to the discussion is because there are so many holes in the argument. The bottom line is Parsons is a much better player.
