[ClutchFans] The Chandler Parsons Contract: An Analysis (UPDATED)

That too is possible. I'll find out.

 

That's how I feel. Parsons is good but not really good. We shouldn't pay a boat load of money to keep him. He is replaceable.

 

Uh....what? First round picks are more rigid because otherwise lottery picks like Wall and Irving would be demanding max contracts on day 1, similar to what happened in American Football before the rookie scale contracts were created. 2nd round picks have more leeway because they aren't deemed important enough to warrant their own salary structure, you're gonna find a 2nd round pick getting significantly more than the minimum simply because these guys are the ones at the end of the barrel and are just happy to be drafted.

You're acting like the agent did something wrong when he structured his contract the way he did, but Parsons fell to the 2nd round for a reason, he wasn't rated that highly based on his performance in college. Considering how very few 2nd round picks last in the NBA, his agent's priority should be attaining Parson's job security, not trying to maximize his hypothetical earnings if he blew up in the NBA. What you're saying is totally opposite of reality, the Houston Rockets aren't gonna sign whatever Parson's agent wants, they are the ones in the position of power because Parsons has very little value in the league. If his agent demanded a shorter contract then DM would obviously offer a lower base salary, because they want to lock up Parsons on the cheap as long as possible. You're looking at it totally from hindsight, oh Parsons should have made his rookie contract as short as possible so he could earn more. Well what if Parsons got injured during his rookie year and couldn't play anymore? Or what if Parsons just wasn't good enough to make it in the league? No matter how much his agent believed in him, it's his responsibility Parsons get as much guaranteed money as possible, because Parsons making it in the league is not a sure thing.

I dunno if Parsons regrets his contract, but he shouldn't his agent was amazing and did the right thing for him. I find it totally funny that you talk so freely about spending other people's money for no reason other than altruistic purposes. Do you give tips that are 3x larger than normal when the service is really good? Do you pay more than the retail price in a store when it's something you really want? No? Then why are you trying to apply this same nonsensical standard for Parsons and the Rockets? He's a rookie, he's gonna earn rookie salary until his first contract expires, just like the rest of the league. And once again, Parsons would be making 800 grand a year for the next four years. That's more than 99% of what people make in their lifetimes. At age 23. You could make it sound like he's making 4 cents an hour.

 

No, no, no - I meant, how'd you know the last two years weren't team options but that the contract's an outright 4 year deal? That's contrary to say, hoopshype, which says they're team options. There's something implied in the contract or do you have a copy of it?

Never said this.

Thanks, btw.

 

Parsons cap hold come the end of his contract will only be some 1.6m or so (let's be honest, he's no superstar but he's definitely a full MLE calibre player), he'll undoubtedly get way more than that, and I imagine that year may the "Summer of Love", Houston could easily make a verbal agreement so his amazingly low cap hold is his only hit til it's all said and done.

 

Exactly. They have more leeway. It didn't have to be as long. Why can't you understand this?

Protip: the agent's priority might be influenced by his client.

Well, duh. But if you're this is the only contract they could've signed, you're assuming too much.

Again, conjecture. Possibility but I don't see how this helps what you're arguing. If he had a shorter contract, he'd be paid now.

It's a risk. Idk if they were informed about it.

As I've said above, that's a lie. You have no idea what you're talking about.

Because it's fair. He's not being paid market value. The team can obviously do so if it wanted (through renegotiation).

Like I have been saying, if they had any inkling he'd perform this well, and they should, they should've signed on for shorter. They might not have and they're regretting this decision. They might have and chose the safe path and he's happy with it, then no problem. But, even if the latter happened, and he's regretting it now, I'd pay him, unless it bars the team from acquiring a superior player.

I'm not die-hard advocating this, btw. I'm just putting the idea here. But you seem to be hell-bent on negating it for whatever reason and the amount of rhetoric you have to use is ridiculous which I find really funny. I do happen to be a good tipper.

 

one thing i will ask, is that year with lin and asik coming off the books, their cap holds would be up towards the 12.5m range (150%? i think) so unlike parsons, it would probably be worth resigning them prior to the whole FA market unless they can demand more?

 

What most fans don't get here is that Chandler Parsons is, because of his contract, one of the most valuable players in the entire league. He provides incredible bang for your buck. He makes it much, much easier to put together the best roster possible.

Parsons is, interestingly, a more valuable asset than Carmelo Anthony, who is being stupidly presented as an MVP candidate this season. Parsons makes just under $900,000 this season. Anthony, meanwhile, makes about $19.5 mil. In other words, a team with Parsons can spend $18.4 mil on one, possibly two other players and the 2-3 guys will combine to make the same amount of money as Anthony. Alternatively, a team can choose to not spend that $18.4 mil and can pocket the money as profit. My guess is that all advanced plus-minus systems out there rate Parsons higher than Anthony this season, too, which means that not only is Parsons infinitely cheaper than Anthony, he's just flat out a better basketball player.

Just to flesh things out here: Parsons, James Harden, and Omer Asik will, in 2013-14, combine to make approximately the same amount of money as Anthony makes all by himself. Total number of teams who would take Anthony, whether he is stupidly awarded the MVP this season or not, over Harden, Parsons, AND Asik = presumably zero. Although there are some incredibly poorly managed teams out there, so I suppose I should clarify this statement to "Total number of RATIONAL teams."

 

Look I understand your point, what you're saying is Parsons shouldn't have signed as long a contract as possible, because then he wouldn't have been locked onto a rookie scale salary and would have been paid right now. However, understand that the Rockets have the opposite objective, they want to lock in Parsons as cheaply as possible as long as possible. This is something you seem to have trouble with, the NBA is a business and the GM and the agent have different objectives, the GM wants to underpay the player as much as possible while the agent wants the player overpaid as much as possible. In this case since Parsons is just a 2nd rounder with very little chance staying in the league much less "blowing up", then his agent's priorities logically went to earning as much guaranteed money as possible. If you're not a sure thing then you want to earn as much NBA level bucks as possible, ask any of the 2nd rounder agents of their opinion on this and they would all say the same thing.

Why am I so against this? Because what you keep saying has no benefit for the Rockets, and can destroy the team from the inside. Maybe Parsons is indeed regretting his contract, so what, why should the Rockets pay him his market value when they don't have to? Do you realize Parsons' market value right now is in the 6M+ range already(Courtney Lee territory)? So you want us to destroy our cap for nothing? Not only that, if you renegotiate his contract what will all the other players say? Asik is underpaid, we're paying him 8M a year but he's giving us almost a double double a night. Smith is signed to a contract that is similar to Parsons, should we give him a raise as well? Etc. etc. etc.

Paying everyone market value=mediocre team. This is against the moneyball theory, which actually looks for UNDERVALUED players.

 

OK; so there's something implying it in the contract and hoopshype was wrong.

Where do you get your information on contracts? I want to have a more reliable source, too.

 

You can't have two team options in a contract. That's the rule. The only exception is rookie scale deals, and they're a law unto themselves those things. To get around that, often times teams will have partial guarantees, which function in largely the same way. Indeed, partial guarantees are so prevalent now that it's very rare to find an actual team option.

 

Sham and BimaThug,

I have some question about the effect of the "Poison Pill Provision" AFTER a player under such a provision is traded:

We know that the Poison Pill Provision ("PPP") is effective when a player under the rookie contract is given an extension but before the extension kicks in (Taj Gibson and James Harden are two examples of players currently under such a provision) and that, in a trade, the PPP causes this player's "incoming salary" to be the average of his current year salary and the salary of the years covered by his extension while the his "outgoing salary" for his original team remains at his actual salary.

For example, due to Taj Gibson's 4 year, $33M extension, if he is to be traded from Chicago to Houston (an unlikely scenario, used solely for CBA number crunching purpose), his outgoing salary would be $2,155,811 and his incoming salary would be roughly $7M. Houston, which has $7.46M in cap room (according to ESPN's Trade Machine), can absorb his salary, even with the PPP's effect, without sending any salary back to the Bulls. So, let's say Houston trades some draft pick/cash consideration for Gibson, does Gibson then show up as a $2,155,811 salary on Houston's 2012/13 cap or does he show up as a $7M cap (matching his "incoming salary" for the purpose of the trade)? What about (1) his hit on Houston's cap in subsequent years and (2) for the purpose of any subsequent trade from Houston to another team either in 2012/13 or later on?

Kind of wondering if the Rockets (or any team with substantial cap room), takes on a "poison pill player," whether the CBA rules leaves the team enough room to take on another salary. In Gibson's example, if his cap hit for Houston after the trade is done is only $2,155,811, this would leave the Rockets more than $5.3M in cap room with with to take on additional salary in a 2012/13 in-season trade.

 

Am I wrong or does Royce White make more than Parsons this year for sitting on his azz?

 

Parsons is finding the fruits of his labor bitter sweet...playing above and beyond the call of duty. Bottom line, he is gonna get a huge pay bump...if the Rockets wanted to dictate his value they could act earlier, but if I was running a business, I would do exactly what the Rockets will do...and thats wait with Parsons...I just hope that he gets rewarded for his hard work. He really deserves it...

 

For someone to argue with Bima about salary cap related issues must be either stupid, actually know their stuff, or have some huge cajones.

I have to say the 'sham' moniker made me think what if its a guy from Shamsports. If that's the case, welcome to clutchfans Mark, i'll surely be on the lookout for your posts.

To Bima, thanks again for clearing up an issue with poisen pill. Merry Christmas!

 

Yarp.