I dont think I can agree with that .... If Parsons improves his outside shot , it will open up his game vastly and you could see a marked improvement to his scoring and effeciency as a result. Consider that he's able to get to and finish at the rim while shooting poorly from the outside where teams play off of him , daring him totake those shots - Should teams have to play honest defense on him outside , he's going to get more opportunities at the rim ... allowing him to become a much bigger part of the offense rather than the afterthought that averaged 9.5ppg with an 11+ eff rating as a rookie. Parsons could be an 20ppg guy at the SF spot while providing great defense , excelent passing and solid rebounding.
Dude..if Barnes reach his potential he will easily average more PPG than Parsons will. Parsons will never be a 20 PPG scorer. At best I SEE him as a 16 ppg scorer like the previous poster said, and that's if he even improves his jumpshot and free throw shooting. Parsons is mad overrated on this board.
Dude, get out of here. Seriously. If anything, Parsons is underated. Plus, there is no reason why Barnes and Parsons could not exist on the court together especially in McHales system where the 2 & the 3 do almost interchangeable offensively and both players should be able to guard 2 guards most nights. If anything it helps the Rockets defensively. Offensively Parsons adds more to the 2 guard spot than Lee due to his playmaking abilities, especially off the pick and roll which he really started to get a good grasp at late in March. Barnes is more of a catch and shoot/pick and pop type of scorer anyways, or at least we think he will be at an NBA level.
You said Parsons could average 20 PPG in the NBA. There has been no indication he can or will average 20 PPG in college or even in the NBA (I know he is a rookie). He still has to work on his jump shot and his free throw shooting. Until he does, I dont see him averaging 20 PPG game. He is a solid player that does a little bit of everything and plays solid defense no doubt, but saying he can be an all-star is a little far fetched, and yes he is overrated on this board.
If the offense revolves around a lot of screens, then D Lamb is the guy we need to take. He is a deadly shooter, and he's a real joy to watch. Maybe not with the #14 but trading down to snag him around 22 wouldn't be a bad idea. I'm sensing the offense is more on ball screens though.
I'd be thrilled with Parsons averaging 16p6r3a .... and dont think its out of the realm of possibility he develops into that type of player. His shot has good mechanics from the FT line as well as his jumpshot. He simply needs repetition and confidence. His poor FT shooting , especially early in the season kinda shocked me since he shot better than 60% in college. After such a horrible start , shooting ~20% at one point he finished the season 55% .... showing significant improvement. . Barnes on the other hand may very well end up the better scorrer but what about defensively and rebounding ? Not to mention the Rockets have little to no chance to land him. Barnes will likely be a top 5 pick .... There are two positions Im satisfied with the play of on this Rockets team , those would be PG and SF. I'd be looking to upgrade the C , PF and SG spots with athleticism and size. No more undersized 4's or tweeners .... and its time to take a gamble on a C with some size , hit or miss. I could live with a combination of Dalembert & Camby at C if they could somehow upgrade the PF spot with a guy who's not a liability on one end of the floor or the other .... and that can rebound with the big boys - Maybe Motejunas is that guy ? SG is a big questionmark for me - I like C.Lee but think you could upgrade the position .... with some length. Just not a whole lot of size at the SG spot in this draft tho T.Ross could be there at the rockets selection.
I do see Barnes as having a higher potential ppg average than Parsons. 26 IMHO is to high for Barnes and 20 is too high for Parsons. But basketball is a complex sport. Take Martin for example. He actually does have a shot at 26 ppg over a season. But does that make up for the other deficiencies in his game? The analysis is complex and has as much to do with team makeup as individual stats. What are a teams needs? Is defense more important from a position than offense? How about rebounds? Is there an advantage for the SF position to act as times as a point forward? Then assists become an important factor. I could write another thousand words on the different variables in this equation, but I think you get the idea. People always quote the maxim "Take The Best Available Player". TTBAP from now on. That rarely happens. To take a hypothetical - if Kevin Love is your PF and you luck into the third pick and all of your pure statistical, scouting and psychological profiles say that the TTBAP should be Robinson, do you take Robinson? No, because Kevin Love is sitting out there soaking up 35+ minutes a game putting up 24/12. You take Beal or whom ever, because you can be sure that Robinson would rot on the bench. That example is certainly more black and white than most draft decisions, but it illustrates a point. TTBAP is always colored by roster makeup and needs. Or should be. I feel that this is something Morey and his staff have struggled with over the last couple of years. Statistical analysis of prospects may have too much of an upper hand. It would explain the pace palm picks of PPat when Scola is sitting there doing his 18/9 thing. And may have had something to do with the selection of Morris when Leonard is sitting there waiting to be plucked. Deciding who to draft is complex. It certainly has dozens of variables at least. I feel sure that Morey and his 7 figure salary team do regression analysis draft studies frequently. I hope they get it right soon.
His defense was suspect at times in college. Is that going to stop you from drafting him if he comes available to you in the draft? Especially outside the top 5? Come on. People that have that kind of scoring ability dont just grow on trees. Im not the biggest Harrison Barnes fan in the world, but if the Rockets have any freakin shot of getting him at any "reasonable" cost they better jump on it.
Why bother when you have a complete player in Parsons holding down that position and have holes at various other positions - Unless you plan to play him at the SG spot. This roster has too many holes to go making a sideways move at the SF spot.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>Scola in prime. People are sleeping on him. RT @<a href="https://twitter.com/TimMooneyCA">TimMooneyCA</a>: <a href="https://twitter.com/search/%2523dxchat">#dxchat</a> what is the ceiling for jared sullinger at the next level?</p>— Jonathan Givony (@DraftExpress) <a href="https://twitter.com/DraftExpress/status/206383188547874816" data-datetime="2012-05-26T13:56:01+00:00">May 26, 2012</a></blockquote> <script src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>Great workout today for @<a href="https://twitter.com/Dame_Lillard">Dame_Lillard</a> Such a hard worker, Great shooter, Good athlete. Strongly believe he's a Top 10 pick.</p>— Chad Ford (@chadfordinsider) <a href="https://twitter.com/chadfordinsider/status/206446709646172160" data-datetime="2012-05-26T18:08:25+00:00">May 26, 2012</a></blockquote> <script src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
