View Single Post
Old 06-29-2016, 11:37 AM   #49
EricaLubarsky
Inactive.
 
EricaLubarsky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 42,573
EricaLubarsky has a reputation beyond reputeEricaLubarsky has a reputation beyond reputeEricaLubarsky has a reputation beyond reputeEricaLubarsky has a reputation beyond reputeEricaLubarsky has a reputation beyond reputeEricaLubarsky has a reputation beyond reputeEricaLubarsky has a reputation beyond reputeEricaLubarsky has a reputation beyond reputeEricaLubarsky has a reputation beyond reputeEricaLubarsky has a reputation beyond reputeEricaLubarsky has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Underdog View Post
Occam's razor... Why else would the FO be so ready to move on from a guy that they were planning on making a cornerstone player?
Maybe he just isn't that good. Of our five-man units, those with Parsons as SF rank among the bottom. His offense is okay but he was a ball killer and his fairly effective offense didn't make up for his wretched rebounding and poor defense. Plus, this is Rick's team. Rick wants defense and without even mediocre rebounding, we were physically unable to be an up-tempo team that would maximize Parsons' effectiveness and hide Parsons' defensive liabilities. Parsons would be decent on a Don Nelson/Dantoni team. It just seems like we want to go in a different direction with defense, rebounding, and grit based on who were targeting in free agency.

Last edited by EricaLubarsky; 06-29-2016 at 11:41 AM.
EricaLubarsky is offline   Reply With Quote