So . . . . If we had kept Parsons locked up . . .. we would have ZERO CHANCE at Bosh, Melo, or any free agent? Rocket River
They did build stability by signing Ariza. Keeping Parsons just sets him up to leave a year later and then we'd be looking to fill in a starting spot and still upgrade two other spots. This was the year, with Lebron, Melo, and some solids wings available, to make a decision on the future of that spot.
We would have 0 chance to add another star to the team . I have faith in this organization at finding young players, I just don't have faith in them keeping solid players around. They made the right call on not matching Parsons though, it was stupid to let him be an RFA in the first place though.
The real question is at a max contract/15M yr.... has Stephen A Smith NOW heard of Chandler Parsons? lol
Not a zero chance, but a million less to offer them. And when we're already having to do a lot of work to offer them anything close to the max (and have the 4 year vs 5 year max rule working against us), everything counts. That, and I think they genuinely thought they would be able to lock up CP for cheaper in the long term this year, in this market, as a RFA rather than as a UFA next year. I think they saw the glut of SFs on the market and thought they'd get Chandler at a reasonable rate, or thought Chandler would play along because he wanted to be here. I'm not defending them, just stating what I think was the reasoning. Before free agency, I was not a huge fan of 'Melo (personally, do love the way he would fit in our offense though) anyway and didn't think Bosh would even be an option. I was a huge fan of getting Lowry as that seemed more realistic. I'd really like a championship contender with guys that I really like rooting for, and I think Kyle Lowry and Chandler Parsons would have made us one. In retrospect, it's clear to me that the best and most realistic option to make us a strong contender would have been to not let CP hit free agency, then have that $12m/yr contract ready for Lowry when we met with him that first night. You then have a full year to negotiate with Parsons on an extension, and I'm betting he had no idea he'd get $15m on the market. Again, this is all retrospect and I won't deny I was excited about the prospect of bosh or Melo. But from a fan standpoint, I think Lowry would have made me the happiest.
This is just grasping at straws. I agree with your speculation that we could have possibly lost Parsons next season anyways, however, when you have a role player that played his role to perfection and was being paid peanuts, you go ahead and keep him.
Other than hindsight being 20/20, why is everyone second guessing the move to make Parsons a RFA this year? The alternative was keeping him in a contract he was clearly unhappy with breeding disgruntlement and hard feelings. It was a typical DM move to allow a player to let the market set their price while retaining the ability to match. In this case, the market considerably over priced Parsons and we correctly chose to move on. Arguably, this strategy backfired with Dragic, who improved considerably, but I do not see as much of a higher improvement ceiling for Parsons as others who are bemoaning his departure.
It's a risk you take with the FA class we had this year. I am absolutely fine with that and I WAS NOT A FAN of Morey before this summer. Upwards and onwards, can't be the guy who worships a loud, nagging, unattractive woman because a few CATCHES rejected us.
Excellent Post. Parsons will ALWAYS be exposed by playoff defenses, even playing alongside a guy like Dirk. Please don't pretend he can create his own shots or for others.... he took full advantage of McHale's system despite being a 6th man at best on a title contender.
But you just stressed the importance of stability. It makes sense to keep him, if he's got more years left, if you're really sure you can keep him, or if you're already knocking on the championships door. None of that applies here. We'd be keeping him to win a small battle that likely doesn't increase our chances of winning the war.
They could have done him the same way OKC did Harden... Nevertheless, if Morey wanted Bosh _ fine... But you don't let Parsons out of that contract to go after someone like Bosh. Figure out another way.
I don't think people are really that mad that we didn't match. I think it comes from all that has happened. Letting him out of the $1mil for this year, chasing FA that didn't come, trading assets (Lin, Asik, 1st rd pick); while getting a 1st rd pick and only signing Ariza and gaining caps pace. If we do something with the cap space by getting some bench help or bringing in a good PF, then some of this will be salvaged. But we are not in a better position than we were a week ago.
Parsons trade value was at its highest at this last trade deadline. From here on out, had we not declined the option and kept him at 1million, his value would have been on a drastic downward trend for two reasons: 1. At such small money, other players/contracts would have to be attached to him in any trade for any significant player. 2. Teams tend to shy away when a good player is in a contract year in fear that he might bolt as a FA. Our suitors would have definitely been narrowed down as we would have been playing that game everyone is so fond of, "he can only go to a team that has a chance to resign him." Now he will be tough to trade for much different reasons.
Upside- Best team in NBA with bosh and parsons Downside- we lose a cheap year with Parsons and replace him with Ariza while remaining in play for other free agents The upside was much bigger than the downside. Good risk/reward move.
Criticism for letting Parsons become unrestricted is completely justified if there isn't more to the story.
Hindsight is definitely 20/20...an aspect that I think is at play here though which doesn't get much run (maybe bc I'm an idiot and have no clue of the inner workings of these things), but in a vacuum, sure we should have picked up that option and gotten another year out of the most valuable contract in the league. However, I think the agent/front office variable is a real one at play here. Sorry to use a baseball reference on a bball site, but think back to Dayton and Scott Boras and the relationship they had and how impacted the Stros' pursuit of FAs and even draft picks...so what I'm saying is, there was an agreement made or another way to say it is that it was the professional way to go about it I guess.
I think it was a mistake to let him out of his contract. I said that before this season even started. However, I understand the rationale. 1) Teams shy away from restricted free agents. Most restricted free agents take awhile to even get an offer because nobody wants to bother with it. This usually means you get an offer after the smoke has settled from a team. It's rarely the max. (exception is Eric Gordon who I will touch on) 2) He probably believed Parsons wanted to stay. This turned out to not be true. No matter what Parsons ever says from now on, they structured the contract in a way that was clearly designed to make it less likely Morey would match. Morey was probably blindsided by this fact. ----Let's address Eric Gordon here. He wanted out of New Orleans, badly wanting to go to Phx. Yet his camp didn't do anything ultra creative to get there. 3) Morey clearly did not expect Parsons to get a max deal. In part because he's not worth it, but probably in larger part due to RFA. His calculation was probably that if waited another year to let Parsons became UFA, he would have improved AND he would be UFA. Suddenly he becomes much more likely to get a max offer sheet.
did asik have any production last year? to me he was rather a deadweight last year - a negative value player... just getting rid of him makes us better imo...
