Exactly my though. KL might be the worst player on a some 4 player list..but not on this fukkking list
Parsons' highlights are mostly wide open layups/dunks/3s created by Harden or Lin. Things that most competent NBA players can do just as easily. The next time Parsons splits 2 defenders in a pnr like Hayward will be never. They are not even in the same conversation offensively. And Hayward isn't far off defensively if at all.
they're probably about equal. hayward is the better creator but hes on a bad team where he gets all the scoring oppurtunities. chandler plays within himself by being the glue guy on a winning team. also hayward had multiple chances to ice the Thunder game and he blew it missing wide open shots the other night which lost them the game.
That proves that Hayward is not a superstar, which no one is saying. You put Parsons in those same shoes and ask him to ice the game for you, and he puts up Omri Casspi numbers in Cleveland. Sub 40% fg.
They are very close in terms of skill set and what they bring to the team. At this point I would chose Parsons because of his playoff performance last year. He needs to get his head out of his ass though. He has looked flat out terrible in the first two games. PS. If given the opportunity, I would take Ilyasova over both Parsons or Hayward.
Parsons looks less awkward and I think people (including himself and the team) under value his defensive ability. Parsons won't ever be a guy that can carry a team but he has potential to be a solid to great supporting player as long as he doesn't get blinded chasing stats or acclaim.
Whiles Hayward is likely to turn out to be a more versatile player than Parsons, I don't think that gap is going to be too big. His assisted field goal percentage is in the 70s, same as Parsons, so I don't think he would be a good primary or secondary ball handler. I think he would be at his best if he was complementing star players, like Parsons, instead of being the star. He is also asking for a 4 year, 50+ million dollar contract, which is higher than Iguodala. It would be interesting to see how the FA turns out. Hayward still has a lot of room to grow, but I don't think he will ever live up to that type of contract if a team decides to commit to him. I have a feeling that Hayward will end up being the better player and getting a bigger contract, but Parsons would still be a better value.
It's worth mentioning that if we don't make Parsons an RFA after this season, he could very well be an UFA in 2015 along with Leonard and Butler as RFAs (if they don't agree to contract extensions.) This may be a better option as three young SFs hitting the market at the same time could drive the contracts down...or it could backfire Also, you guys are right, I am biased against Kawhi and that ranking was wrong. Revised, based on present and future value to a team: Butler>Hayward>Kawhi>Parsons *Note that the talent gap between the first three guys is close, you really can't go wrong picking one over another. The bottom line will be what kind of contract they will be signed to (Hayward on a Rudy Gay contract would destroy his value)
I think Parsons is more complete, while Hayward is a little more skilled. I'd definitely take CP, and I expect him to pick it up after 2 down games. One guy getting forgotten in the young SF talks is Tobias Harris. That guy is an offensive stud.
Good call on Tobias Harris. Wow, so in 2015 there could be: UFA - Parsons RFA - Butler RFA - Leonard RFA - Harris
Some of you guys are trying hard to make Hayward look like a superstar. Do you have an estimate as to when he will start playing like you guys are describing? Chandler was clearly better tonight.
Just because someone is better than Chandler doesn't make him a superstar. Other wise there would be damn near 100 superstars in the NBA. Nice game tonight, though.
Chandler Parsons. His a 2nd round pick, we kept him instead of Budinger. So definately would pick Parsons.
IMO they are very similar with slight differences. Hayward being a better ball handler and slightly better offensively, while Parsons being a little longer and better defensively. From a potential standpoint I think both are who they are, solid to potential all-star caliber players. Parsons fits our team better and is very unselfish almost to a fault, not as ball dominant and decent at spot up shooting and attacking the basket. Hayward is a better 1 on 1 player and by far better handles. If Parsons can get a better handle and become and become a little more fluid in his movements he will become a very good player, and if Hayward can be more of facilitator and more consistent outside shot he could be a solid number 2/3 option.
