Some say Chandler, he is a superstar That knocks down the easy 3 Some say Chandler, he is a glue guy That leaves your team...so easily. Some say Chandler, he is overrated, Media seeking with all his deeds . I say Chandler, he is a flower, And max money, is all he needs. When the year has been too lonely And the road to a title has been too long, And you think that rings are only For the lucky and the strong, Just remember in the future Far beneath the money and hoes There is Chandler that with Dirk's love Someday soon becomes the rose.
True, but I don't really believe we could have had ariza and parsons. Of course in theory we could have, but I don't think ariza signs here without a guarantee that he was starting.
At this point, Ariza is clearly>Parsons. Now a question is that it is a possible that Ariza with the left cap >Bosh+Parsons with two max contracts? Sometimes, missing something is a good thing for other things, just loot at the Pau Gasol trade, which resulted in Harden for a return.
he is three years younger... While Chandler was fighting acne at Florida, Trevor was winning titles with Kobe. I'll take the experience.
3 years. Parsons is 26 and ariza is 29 Glad your not the rocket gm btw. Overpaying for potential that does not exist. Parsons created shots and played defense best in his rookie year. His 3 was very inconsistent lat year. 2 months where he could not find the basket, and he always goes through these dry spells. Not sure what you see that i dont. A white boy that can dunk and shoot threes. Budinger can dunk, and people think he is a good shooter.
3 years is a very long time. A player like Parsons will evolve a lot. Look how much Ariza evolved in his last 3 years. I don't get why people get so upset that Parsons will be the better player. Parsons has more versatility and is taller. That said, it's just a statement of observation. I think his game will evolve and he has another level to take his game. Would I have kept Parsons for the money he was asking? No. I would not have. Not because Parsons won't be really good, but because his defense is lackluster for the price tag. I think Ariza might turn out to be better on a dollar for dollar basis. But if they had the same price tag, I'd trade Ariza for Parsons without a doubt at this stage. And that's all I am saying. If Ariza ends the seasons shooting 43% from beyond the arc, than I might reconsider.
Give him a break. When he said Morey was stupid for not matching Parsons that was probably just him posting his cousin's opinions to get feedback.
Ariza didnt evolve....he's the same player he was on that championship lakers team. He accepted who he was/is and is excelling at it.
Parsons is NOT going to ever be a star. He is a very good player who can play off other stars, but he is not going to become some offensive juggernaut. All the 'stars' in the league have some truely elite physical/skill level or a combination of both. Length, speed, athleticism, ability to get consistently get your own shot, ability to get in the paint/penetrate/collapse the defense,run an offense through them/etc. Parsons does things at a very good level. But he will NEVER be a superstar because he doesn't have anything that seperates him from the herd Is he good enough to win a chip with Bosh on the rockets? yes. Is he good enough to win as the team was constructed last year? no. I'm not putting the rockets championship aspirations in the hope that Parsons would turn into a star. Cause he isn't and won't be.
just saying but the height difference 6'9 & 6'8 bw parsons and ariza doesn't really matter here as ariza's wing span is better than parsons
I agree that Parsons will never be the guy you build around. But I do think he can be that 3rd star someday. He's not there yet, but I think in 2 years time he can be a third wheel. His development has been impressive, and he has shown he can get to the rim and create shots. He hasn't done it consistently though. And he has a lot to learn for sure. But he will grown.
