Mavs get Parsons!!!

[hayth.james.g]

Originally Posted by gmoney411

Your best offensive player is 36 and your best defensive player is a very old 31. Your backup and starting PG are 30 and 31. Ellis will be 29 when the year starts and in his 10th year in the league. So sure your average age is 28.4 but the guys that you will be relying a majority of the time aren't.

Just want to add I respect and appreciate your perspective on this forum. Love to get feedback and perspective from fans of other teams.

[gmoney411]

Originally Posted by grndmstr_c

1) I was talking about the road to landing Dwight, who was the piece that got the Rockets talked about as near-contenders, and the Lin/Asik signings and Harden trade/extension were absolutely among the moves that paved the way for that particular success. The rest of those guys, Lowry and Dragic in particular, are just talent that got away.

2) Good for him for putting together a group of good young complimentary players…and then letting them go to other teams before they'd fully matured into winning basketball players.

1. 3 year year deals at $8.33MM dollars isn't going to crush your cap. Morey gave himself flexibility with those deals. If Chandler had come at such a low number he would have matched too. Morey's comments were about throwing large amounts of money at players like Chandler. You gave almost all of your cap space up for him while trying to compete.

2. Lowry was the reason they got Harden. Dragic was a mistake though. The other players are guys that flipped for other pieces along the way.

[gmoney411]

Originally Posted by hayth.james.g

Just want to add I respect and appreciate your perspective on this forum. Love to get feedback and perspective from fans of other teams.

Thanks I appreciate it. I'm not trying to be a homer or troll when I come here. Just trying to see how people feel about Parsons and talk about it and if the other Rockets come up in the process I'll talk/defend them too. I've enjoyed our discussion.

[hayth.james.g]

Originally Posted by gmoney411

Thanks I appreciate it. I'm not trying to be a homer or troll when I come here. Just trying to see how people feel about Parsons and talk about it and if the other Rockets come up in the process I'll talk/defend them too. I've enjoyed our discussion.

Well inevitably all of us are prone to our own bias. It's impossible to get around. It's just nice to have people come with an informed opinion that at least holds water. I respect your view... I even lean towards it mostly. Just disagree on the point of what makes a "superstar" in today's game.

[grndmstr_c]

Originally Posted by gmoney411

1. 3 year year deals at $8.33MM dollars isn't going to crush your cap. Morey gave himself flexibility with those deals.

A pair of three-year $8.33M deals can definitely crush your cap. And in fact that was part of what went wrong for Houston this summer. Those deals were eating up cap space that they wanted to have available to throw at a max player, and in the process of trying to clear them and the big third-year payout on their contracts they ended up making a Lin trade that was disadvantageous for the team.

If Chandler had come at such a low number he would have matched too. Morey's comments were about throwing large amounts of money at players like Chandler. You gave almost all of your cap space up for him while trying to compete.

Houston didn't match because on the basis of their evaluation of Parsons it didn't make sense for their team for them to do so. Dallas gave him the offer sheet because on the basis of their evaluation of Parsons it made sense for their team for them to do so. With most guys around the league their's no obviously right answer. There's just a set of more or less ambiguous circumstances and the best bet you can make. The Mavs' front office knows this. The Rockets' front office knows this. Morey's comments did not reflect this.

[jthig32]

I do think there's more to the decision to give Parsons's an offer sheet than Dallas' evaluation of him being higher than Houston's. I think they clearly must value him more than Houston. But you also have to note the difference in roster makeup. Dallas has an elite, top 15 NBA player making 8Mil this season. That gives them flexibility to overpay to add to their talent. Also, their roster is setup in such a way that they can easily offer a max contract next season, if they so choose.

So roster makeup has a lot to do with this decision as well.

Great discussion in here, today, btw.

[hayth.james.g]

Originally Posted by jthig32

I do think there's more to the decision to give Parsons's an offer sheet than Dallas' evaluation of him being higher than Houston's. I think they clearly must value him more than Houston. But you also have to note the difference in roster makeup. Dallas has an elite, top 15 NBA player making 8Mil this season. That gives them flexibility to overpay to add to their talent. Also, their roster is setup in such a way that they can easily offer a max contract next season, if they so choose.

So roster makeup has a lot to do with this decision as well.

Great discussion in here, today, btw.

Can't agree more.

[gmoney411]

Originally Posted by grndmstr_c

A pair of three-year $8.33M deals can definitely crush your cap. And in fact that was part of what went wrong for Houston this summer. Those deals were eating up cap space that they wanted to have available to throw at a max player, and in the process of trying to clear them and the big third-year payout on their contracts they ended up making a Lin trade that was disadvantageous for the team.


Houston didn't match because on the basis of their evaluation of Parsons it didn't make sense for their team for them to do so. Dallas gave him the offer sheet because on the basis of their evaluation of Parsons it made sense for their team for them to do so. With most guys around the league their's no obviously right answer. There's just a set of more or less ambiguous circumstances and the best bet you can make. The Mavs' front office knows this. The Rockets' front office knows this. Morey's comments did not reflect this.

I strongly disagree with them being hurt by those contracts. Yes they had to give up their first next year to dump Lin but they also got a very likely lotto pick from the pelicans that will be a much better trade chip than their pick would be. It was a net positive for the rockets.

The mavericks know they overpaid parsons and locked up their cap space in the future. It's a pretty big gamble and one Morey would never make and that's why he said that. If parsons needs to be moved it won't be done easily like the rockets moved Lin and Asik. But the mavs front office isn't dumb so I'm not going to call it a bad move but instead a fairly risky one that might pay off.

[hayth.james.g]

Originally Posted by gmoney411

I strongly disagree with them being hurt by those contracts. Yes they had to give up their first next year to dump Lin but they also got a very likely lotto pick from the pelicans that will be a much better trade chip than their pick would be. It was a net positive for the rockets.

The mavericks know they overpaid parsons and locked up their cap space in the future. It's a pretty big gamble and one Morey would never make and that's why he said that. If parsons needs to be moved it won't be done easily like the rockets moved Lin and Asik. But the mavs front office isn't dumb so I'm not going to call it a bad move but instead a fairly risky one that might pay off.

This is where I strongly disagree with you . We did not lock up cap space at all by going for Parsons. Dirk took 8 million per to accommodate that contract. Next year Tyson Chandler comes off the books... and Ellis is a potential off the books. Chandler Parsons + Dirk at 23 million per year is a no brainer, and its the reason Dirk took less money. It's that simple. Morey couldn't of done that deal bc he doesn't have a superstar who is willing to take 120% pay cut to maximize the chances of a championship. This isn't even debatable imo.

The counter argument to that is "o well you could of gotten Ariza for 8 million per for the next 3 years and had more room". If this is the case I doubt that Sunday, after the germany win, Dirk agrees to 8 million per year. More than likely we would of paid him closer to 10-11 if we had the cap space. Dirk's discount seemed largely contingent on us landing as big of a splash player wise as possible... whether we overpaid or not is irrelevant.

If we want to be in the free agency for a "superstar" next summer we can.. simple as that.

[grndmstr_c]

Originally Posted by gmoney411

I strongly disagree with them being hurt by those contracts. Yes they had to give up their first next year to dump Lin but they also got a very likely lotto pick from the pelicans that will be a much better trade chip than their pick would be. It was a net positive for the rockets.

So not only did they lose two rotation players, they had to give up a first round pick to get another team to take one of their rotation players off their hands, and yet in your estimation everything worked out just hunky-dory. Right.

The mavericks know they overpaid parsons and locked up their cap space in the future.

They know they paid on potential. But no, they really didn't lock up their cap space in the future. They've got other avenues to flexibility.

It's a pretty big gamble and one Morey would never make and that's why he said that.

Except that: 1) he made similar gambles, even if not with Harden, then certainly with Lin/Asik, and 2) according to all reports and common sense, he would have made the move if they'd landed Bosh.

If parsons needs to be moved it won't be done easily like the rockets moved Lin and Asik.

At least from my perspective, offloading Lin and Asik was not easily done. That said, absolutely, Parsons would not be easy to trade. Dallas didn't sign him to trade him, though. And even if it's an open question whether Parsons will be able to earn every dollar of that contract, I'd say the odds of him being at least a quality starter in Dallas are extremely high, so the Mavs are unlikely to be forced to change their minds about whether he's a keeper or not in the next 2-3 years.

[gmoney411]

Originally Posted by hayth.james.g

This is where I strongly disagree with you . We did not lock up cap space at all by going for Parsons. Dirk took 8 million per to accommodate that contract. Next year Tyson Chandler comes off the books... and Ellis is a potential off the books. Chandler Parsons + Dirk at 23 million per year is a no brainer, and its the reason Dirk took less money. It's that simple. Morey couldn't of done that deal bc he doesn't have a superstar who is willing to take 120% pay cut to maximize the chances of a championship. This isn't even debatable imo.

The counter argument to that is "o well you could of gotten Ariza for 8 million per for the next 3 years and had more room". If this is the case I doubt that Sunday, after the germany win, Dirk agrees to 8 million per year. More than likely we would of paid him closer to 10-11 if we had the cap space. Dirk's discount seemed largely contingent on us landing as big of a splash player wise as possible... whether we overpaid or not is irrelevant.

If want to be in the free agency for a "superstar" next summer we can.. simple as that.

If that is Dirk's real thinking than I seriously question his judgment. Ariza and Stephenson at $17MM is a lot better than Chandler at $15.3 IMO. The overpaying isn't irrelevant at all when you look at what you could have gotten for a similar price.

[gmoney411]

Originally Posted by grndmstr_c

So not only did they lose two rotation players, they had to give up a first round pick to get another team to take one of their rotation players off their hands, and yet in your estimation everything worked out just hunky-dory. Right.

The Rockets gave up one rotation player from their team last year. Asik was hurt half the year and sulked for the other half. He just wasn't a contributor on their team last year. And they didn't have to give up either one they chose to. If they wanted to hold on to both they could have. But in the long run getting the Pelicans pick will be much better for them. Plus, the only reason Lin is gone for that pick is because Bosh flipped on them in the last minute.

Originally Posted by grndmstr_c

Except that: 1) he made similar gambles, even if not with Harden, then certainly with Lin/Asik, and 2) according to all reports and common sense, he would have made the move if they'd landed Bosh.

1. We will have to agree to disagree on Lin/Asik being like Chandler. They were half the cost and didn't have trade kickers. Moving Parsons if he doesn't work out is going to be much harder than it was to move Lin and Asik.

2. If they land Bosh they have no cap space for a long time but they have their 3 stars. Paying Chandler at that point isn't affecting your flexibility because you already lost it when you signed Bosh.

Originally Posted by grndmstr_c

At least from my perspective, offloading Lin and Asik was not easily done. That said, absolutely, Parsons would not be easy to trade. Dallas didn't sign him to trade him, though. And even if it's an open question whether Parsons will be able to earn every dollar of that contract, I'd say the odds of him being at least a quality starter in Dallas are extremely high, so the Mavs are unlikely to be forced to change their minds about whether he's a keeper or not in the next 2-3 years.

How wasn't it? They got a lotto pick for Asik so that one was for sure easy. And they dumped Lin the instant they thought they needed the space. Dumping Lin was a little costly but it was still easy. And Lin doesn't even play out like that if not for the whole LeBron spectacle playing out the way it did.

I'm not saying the Mavs are looking to trade Parsons but having the option to is always good. The Rockets don't have a single player on their roster right now that they couldn't move easily and that is how Morey likes it.

[jthig32]

Giving away a first round pick is not "easily" dumping a contract. That move, without an immediate corresponding use of the money, was a HORRENDOUS move. I assure you, Morey would give his left pinky to have it back. He paid the Lakers for the privilege of giving away a rotation player without a better one to take his place. But he apparently had to agree to it before getting the confirmation from Bosh.

You traded away two rotation players and in return you might have moved up, what, 8 spots in the draft? Maybe? That's a net positive? Come on, man. You can explain away Asik not being a rotation player for *you* but that's only because you had roster duplication. He's a starting caliber center that you couldn't get equal value for because of the contract Morey gave him. There was a valid reason Morey gave him that contract, but don't then turn around and claim Morey doesn't give out risky contracts.

[hayth.james.g]

Originally Posted by gmoney411

If that is Dirk's real thinking than I seriously question his judgment. Ariza and Stephenson at $17MM is a lot better than Chandler at $15.3 IMO. The overpaying isn't irrelevant at all when you look at what you could have gotten for a similar price.

I mean how else could you interpret his thinking? He didn't finalize his contract until Sunday... the same day they found out they got Parsons. I agree with your point that overpaying isnt irrelevant when you look at other similiar priced options. I'm inclined to agree about Stephenson being a better "bang for your buck", but MBT wasn't high on him. Going for either player was a step for both next year and the future. They felt more comfortable overpaying for someone that had a lot less risk. Everything that has leaked from Mavs camp indicated that Stephenson was only a last option gamble. We (Us mavs fans) have to trust in the organization when they decide on pursuing a player with such risk factors.

Factor that in with the established relationship between Parsons and Dirk and I think you get the general line of thinking from Mavs camp. I would much rather win in the regular season than the off season (going for value and neglecting any risks pundits are willing to overlook on the merit of value).

Originally Posted by gmoney411

I'm not saying the Mavs are looking to trade Parsons but having the option to is always good. The Rockets don't have a single player on their roster right now that they couldn't move easily and that is how Morey likes it.

I agree, but the trade kicker and player option were two things that were necessary in order to "steal" Parsons away. I don't think, and evidently Cuban and Donnie don't either, that it would of been enough to just give him a max contract. I'm glad the Rockets feel good about their flexibility. It's what everyone was banking on when Parsons was offered that contract. It's very well known that Morey has a strong distaste for player options. For all intents and purposes the Mavs have a tremendous amount of flexibility going forward as well. They are basically locked in on two contracts. Parson and Dirk for 23 million for the next 3 years (now Harris for 4). I'll take it.

[gmoney411]

Originally Posted by jthig32

Giving away a first round pick is not "easily" dumping a contract. That move, without an immediate corresponding use of the money, was a HORRENDOUS move. I assure you, Morey would give his left pinky to have it back. He paid the Lakers for the privilege of giving away a rotation player without a better one to take his place. But he apparently had to agree to it before getting the confirmation from Bosh.

We are just playing a game of semantics at this point. He had to dump a contract quickly to lock up Bosh and he was able to do it. The Rockets late first round pick is an asset but not a great one. Of course he would take it back and would have likely moved Lin for something better later in the season or offseason but he didn't have time to wait it out then.

Originally Posted by jthig32

You traded away two rotation players and in return you might have moved up, what, 8 spots in the draft? Maybe? That's a net positive? Come on, man. You can explain away Asik not being a rotation player for *you* but that's only because you had roster duplication. He's a starting caliber center that you couldn't get equal value for because of the contract Morey gave him. There was a valid reason Morey gave him that contract, but don't then turn around and claim Morey doesn't give out risky contracts.

You couldn't find a GM in this league that wouldn't sign Asik for $8.33MM two years ago and then flip him for that Pelicans pick two years later. They got value out of that signing. Morey was able to use a similar pick to land Harden two years ago.

If I said those contracts were risk free I take it back. I'm not sure if I did and I'm too lazy to go back and read what I said. But those two contracts are nowhere near the risk of Parsons. That contract is a much bigger risk with a much lower payoff. Even if Chandler turns into a star he can opt out before 2016 and will demand even more money when the cap possibly soars to $80MM. And even if he plays just to the level of that contract he is going to opt out and get more money. The best the Mavericks can hope for is even value on that contract in the short term.

[gmoney411]

Originally Posted by hayth.james.g

I mean how else could you interrupt his thinking? He didn't finalize his contract until Sunday... the same day they found out they got Parsons. I agree with your point that overpaying isnt irrelevant when you look at other similiar priced options. I'm inclined to agree about Stephenson being a better "bang for your buck", but MBT wasn't high on him. Going for either player was a step for both next year and the future. They felt more comfortable overpaying for someone that had a lot more risk. Everything that has leaked from Mavs camp indicated that Stephenson was only a last option gamble. We (Us mavs fans) have to trust in the organization when they decide on pursuing a player with such risk factors.

Factor that in with the established relationship between Parsons and Dirk and I think you get the general line of thinking from Mavs camp. I would much rather win in the regular season than the off season (going for value and neglecting any risks pundits are willing to overlook on the merit of value).



I agree, but the trade kicker and player option were two things that were necessary in order to "steal" Parsons away. I don't think, and evidently Cuban and Donnie don't either, that it would of been enough to just give him a max contract. I'm glad the Rockets feel good about their flexibility. For all intents and purposes the Mavs have a tremendous amount of flexibility going forward as well. They are basically locked in on two contracts. Parson and Dirk for 23 million for the next 3 years (now Harris for 4). I'll take it.

I get it and I won't call it a bad move. I just think they could have gotten better value. But you could very well be right that Dirk only takes that pay cut for a guy like Chandler and if that really is the case then you almost have to consider Chandler to be a $12MM player which is closer to his value.

[hayth.james.g]

Originally Posted by gmoney411

We are just playing a game of semantics at this point. He had to dump a contract quickly to lock up Bosh and he was able to do it. The Rockets late first round pick is an asset but not a great one. Of course he would take it back and would have likely moved Lin for something better later in the season or offseason but he didn't have time to wait it out then.



You couldn't find a GM in this league that wouldn't sign Asik for $8.33MM two years ago and then flip him for that Pelicans pick two years later. They got value out of that signing. Morey was able to use a similar pick to land Harden two years ago.

If I said those contracts were risk free I take it back. I'm not sure if I did and I'm too lazy to go back and read what I said. But those two contracts are nowhere near the risk of Parsons. That contract is a much bigger risk with a much lower payoff. Even if Chandler turns into a star he can opt out before 2016 and will demand even more money when the cap possibly soars to $80MM. And even if he plays just to the level of that contract he is going to opt out and get more money. The best the Mavericks can hope for is even value on that contract in the short term.

Again, I fail to understand any risk in Parsons contract. Say he gets better, but not much. What risk is there? We know hes a solid locker room, hard worker, and competitive player. We got him on a big contract because Dirk basically agreed to pay his contract. Your argument of "well you could of had this" is purely speculative and somewhat misleading. Stephenson seems like a value, but MBT never felt that way. He was always a fall back plan. His risks were too great. Ariza for 8 million is ridiculous. Sure if he continues last years success it will be a fair contract, but nothing indicates he will do this. He has done this same thing TWICE now. Parsons is a perfect fit in every single way for the Mavs locker room.

[jthig32]

The contract is certainly structured in such a way that it will be difficult for the Mavs to get surplus value. That's' very true. But the Mavs don't NEED surplus value from that contract, because they have the best contract in the NBA for their superstar (assuming he performs at a similar level next year).

Even if Parsons never blossoms into more than he is, the Mavs will still be in great position to add to a quality roster.

On the Asik/Lin thing, you seem to be simultaneously writing off the value of your own pick while propping up the value of the pick from NO. Except there's significant chance that there's a marginal difference in value between those two picks when they actually get used.

[hayth.james.g]

Originally Posted by gmoney411

I get it and I won't call it a bad move. I just think they could have gotten better value. But you could very well be right that Dirk only takes that pay cut for a guy like Chandler and if that really is the case then you almost have to consider Chandler to be a $12MM player which is closer to his value.

This is exactly what I am saying. I completely understand your point on value, and its the same thing I thought and was vocalizing here on the boards in the event we did not get Parsons. Stephenson has a ton of potential. I, as a Mavs fan, felt like it was a great value. The Mavs, along with almost every other team with any kind of cap space, disagreed. Stephenson's character issues and bizarre episodes were a huge risk evidently.

[gmoney411]

Originally Posted by hayth.james.g

Again, I fail to understand any risk in Parsons contract. Say he gets better, but not much. What risk is there? We know hes a solid locker room, hard worker, and competitive player. We got him on a big contract because Dirk basically agreed to pay his contract. Your argument of "well you could of had this" is purely speculative and somewhat uninformed. Stephenson seems like a value, but MBT never felt that way. He was always a fall back plan. His risks were too great. Ariza for 8 million is ridiculous. Sure if he continues last years success it will be a fair contract, but nothing indicates he will do this. He has done this same thing TWICE now. Parsons is a perfect fit in every single way for the Mavs locker room.

The risk is that you have a guy taking up $15MM in cap space for the next three years that might not perform. And after those three years Dirk is probably done. Even if you have extra cap space when Tyson and Ellis come off the books you don't want to tie up that much in somebody that might not play to that level. It will greatly hurt your chances to win a title.

The whole Ariza has done the same thing twice is completely unsupported by stats. Ariza got hot in the playoffs during the Lakers run but that is it. His shooting numbers didn't improve greatly in his Lakers contract year. Nor did his shooting numbers improve greatly this contract year anymore than they had the year before or the year before. Trevor has gone from 30 to 33 to 36 to 40 as a three point shooter the last four years. That is a very even climb for a guy that is just becoming a better 3 point shooter as he gets older. Jason Kidd did the same thing.

[gmoney411]

Originally Posted by jthig32

The contract is certainly structured in such a way that it will be difficult for the Mavs to get surplus value. That's' very true. But the Mavs don't NEED surplus value from that contract, because they have the best contract in the NBA for their superstar (assuming he performs at a similar level next year).

Even if Parsons never blossoms into more than he is, the Mavs will still be in great position to add to a quality roster.

On the Asik/Lin thing, you seem to be simultaneously writing off the value of your own pick while propping up the value of the pick from NO. Except there's significant chance that there's a marginal difference in value between those two picks when they actually get used.

LeBron James is the best value in the league but that's a different story. And I can't get behind overspending on one guy because you are saving on another. $15MM in cap space is $15MM in cap space. Saving money one guy doesn't justify blowing it on another to me.

The Rockets aren't missing the playoffs. They will likely be a top 4 seed all over again. Bev/Harden/Ariza/Jones/Howard is enough to win you 50 games. Their pick will be in the 20s.

The Pelicans on the other hand are more than likely going to miss the playoffs. The most likely difference in the two picks is 11-14 spots. And you can bet that Morey is going to shop that pick hard while that is still the most likely outcome.

[hayth.james.g]

Originally Posted by gmoney411

The risk is that you have a guy taking up $15MM in cap space for the next three years that might not perform. And after those three years Dirk is probably done.

The deal is constructed so at worst we have him for the duration of Dirks career. I mean seriously what are the odds that Parsons doesn't perform. Thats my entire argument about his contract. There is very little risk that Parsons can't continue to put up 17/5/4 with efficiency. Is that worth 15 million alone? Probably not, but there are other factors to consider when looking at the deal. You want to put the deal in a vacuum and base it on that. The fact remains that if we had offered him 13 million a year with no other stipulations that the Rockets would of matched. Point blank. The trade clause, player option, and extra 2 million are NO BIG DEALS TO BIG D! You take all of that.. then you take the fact that the kid is 25, he is known as a A+++ guy in the locker room, has an established relationship with Dirk, and will be inheriting a much better coach/system. Nothing indicates bust on this contract.

[gmoney411]

Originally Posted by hayth.james.g

The deal is constructed so at worst we have him for the duration of Dirks career. I mean seriously what are the odds that Parsons doesn't perform. Thats my entire argument about his contract. There is very little risk that Parsons can't continue to put up 17/5/4 with efficiency. Is that worth 15 million alone? Probably not, but there are other factors to consider when looking at the deal. You want to put the deal in a vacuum and base it on that. The fact remains that if we had offered him 13 million a year with no other stipulations that the Rockets would of matched. Point blank. The trade clause, player option, and extra 2 million are NO BIG DEALS TO BIG D! You take all of that.. then you take the fact that the kid is 25, he is known as a A+++ guy in the locker room, has an established relationship with Dirk, and will be inheriting a much better coach/system. Nothing indicates bust on this contract.

The Rockets offense was perfect for Chandler. Running up and down the court and shooting open 3s fits his game. Plus he was the second best ball handler and perimeter player on the team most of the time. I know the Mavs also run a free flowing offense that he might fit perfectly into but there is a chance he doesn't repeat those Rockets numbers. I don't think he will bust by I have my concerns about his back and his hollywood style but not a ton. The most likely scenario is that you at least get similar production out of Chandler.

I'm not really sure the Rockets match Chandler at $13MM a year. I think Chandler wanted to be a Rocket and if they had offered him a 4-5 year deal that price he would have taken it. At $12MM I think Morey matches but anything above that and I think he thinks long and hard because it is locking up most of the cap space for the next few years.

[grndmstr_c]

Originally Posted by gmoney411

The Rockets aren't missing the playoffs. They will likely be a top 4 seed all over again. Bev/Harden/Ariza/Jones/Howard is enough to win you 50 games. Their pick will be in the 20s.

Yeah...good luck with that.

[gmoney411]

Originally Posted by grndmstr_c

Yeah...good luck with that.

Luck isn't really needed. They are bringing back the same starting 5 with the addition of Ariza who fits better than Chandler. The Rockets biggest problem last year was perimeter D and they got one of the best in the league in Ariza. Ariza is just as good of a 3 point shooter as Parsons so they didn't lose anything there. Bev and Jones are likely get better as second year starters and Howard and Harden are likely to have better chemistry this year.

The NBA is a star driven league and on most nights the Rockets will have the best two players on the court. It's how they won so many games last year and it's why they will likely win a lot next year. Now come playoff time they are toast with the current roster because McHale can't out coach anybody.

[jthig32]

Originally Posted by gmoney411

LeBron James is the best value in the league but that's a different story.

That's probably fair. I mainly meant within the constraints of the CBA. Dirk's a top 15 player getting paid less this season than Jordan Hill.

And I can't get behind overspending on one guy because you are saving on another. $15MM in cap space is $15MM in cap space. Saving money one guy doesn't justify blowing it on another to me.

Who said anything about "blowing it"? They paid a couple million more than Parsons is worth because otherwise they wouldn't have gotten him. They're paying 22million for the combination of Dirk and Parsons, if you prefer to think of it that way. Seems like a steal now, no? If the Rockets could have signed Parsons and still fit another max player on their roster next season, they would have done it. Just so happens the Mavs are in that exact spot.

The Rockets aren't missing the playoffs. They will likely be a top 4 seed all over again. Bev/Harden/Ariza/Jones/Howard is enough to win you 50 games. Their pick will be in the 20s.

The Pelicans on the other hand are more than likely going to miss the playoffs. The most likely difference in the two picks is 11-14 spots. And you can bet that Morey is going to shop that pick hard while that is still the most likely outcome.

I don't think the Rockets are missing the playoffs, but I certainly don't agree that they're "likely" to be a top 4 seed. Not at all. 50 wins would've gotten you the 7 seed last year. That was the 22nd pick. The difference in value between the 13th pick and the 22nd pick is marginal. And while I wouldn't bet on the Pelicans to make the playoffs, Davis is on the precipice of superstardom and Asik is going to help them. They're hardly a lock to be in the lottery.

[gmoney411]

Originally Posted by jthig32

Who said anything about "blowing it"? They paid a couple million more than Parsons is worth because otherwise they wouldn't have gotten him. They're paying 22million for the combination of Dirk and Parsons, if you prefer to think of it that way. Seems like a steal now, no? If the Rockets could have signed Parsons and still fit another max player on their roster next season, they would have done it. Just so happens the Mavs are in that exact spot.

I can't get behind the coupling with Dirk thing because you don't have to do that. You could have used the $15MM in other ways.

And the Mavs Rockets situation isn't the same. The Rockets weren't going to be using cap space to sign Chandler. If they got bosh they were capped out. They were going to sign Chandler on almost 100% bird rights money. The Mavs used $15MM in actual cap space.

Originally Posted by jthig32

I don't think the Rockets are missing the playoffs, but I certainly don't agree that they're "likely" to be a top 4 seed. Not at all. 50 wins would've gotten you the 7 seed last year. That was the 22nd pick. The difference in value between the 13th pick and the 22nd pick is marginal. And while I wouldn't bet on the Pelicans to make the playoffs, Davis is on the precipice of superstardom and Asik is going to help them. They're hardly a lock to be in the lottery.

50 wins was the floor assuming they don't make any other upgrades. I think the Rockets starting 5 is going to be much better this year with Ariza+chemistry+experience. Their bench just wasn't very good last year. People like to think that they lost Asik from last year's team but as far as the regular season goes that guy wasn't a real positive for the Rockets. He was hurting the locker room and only played in half the games. They actually had a better winning percentage without him. So really the only major rotation player loss was Lin and I think he can be replaced quite easily. Canaan or Nick Johnson can get very close to filling his role.

[Five-ofan]

Originally Posted by gmoney411

I can't get behind the coupling with Dirk thing because you don't have to do that. You could have used the $15MM in other ways.

And the Mavs Rockets situation isn't the same. The Rockets weren't going to be using cap space to sign Chandler. If they got bosh they were capped out. They were going to sign Chandler on almost 100% bird rights money. The Mavs used $15MM in actual cap space.




50 wins was the floor assuming they don't make any other upgrades. I think the Rockets starting 5 is going to be much better this year with Ariza+chemistry+experience. Their bench just wasn't very good last year. People like to think that they lost Asik from last year's team but as far as the regular season goes that guy wasn't a real positive for the Rockets. He was hurting the locker room and only played in half the games. They actually had a better winning percentage without him. So really the only major rotation player loss was Lin and I think he can be replaced quite easily. Canaan or Nick Johnson can get very close to filling his role.

Parsons was your third best player and he wasn't a major loss?

[hayth.james.g]

Originally Posted by gmoney411

I can't get behind the coupling with Dirk thing because you don't have to do that. You could have used the $15MM in other ways.

Maybe. I guess we just come away with different takes. I don't know anyone that offers what Parsons does with the same or less risk. He isn't just a 1 year glove fit. He is the future for the Mavs. Whether its as a #1, #2, or #3 option. Your comeback to this is that "Not a single person, but 10+3+2 could". I just don't know. For the Mavs we are desperate for an injection of youth. Parsons was the best person on the market for that. Period. Stephenson could be, but ultimately MBT didn't like the risk. I'll side with my team on this one.

[gmoney411]

Originally Posted by Five-ofan

Parsons was your third best player and he wasn't a major loss?

I thought the Ariza being a better fit kinda addressed that loss but I guess not. IMO Ariza feels a bigger need for the Rockets and will be a better fit for the team. When you have Harden you need somebody next to him that is committed to playing good perimeter defense.

[Five-ofan]

Originally Posted by gmoney411

I thought the Ariza being a better fit kinda addressed that loss but I guess not. IMO Ariza feels a bigger need for the Rockets and will be a better fit for the team. When you have Harden you need somebody next to him that is committed to playing good perimeter defense.

I'm a huge ariza fan, and he fits better defensively, but houston still can't defend 4s or 2s and ariza is much worse than pardons at defending 4s(ariza flat out cant do it)

The problem is a lot of the Houston system offensively will struggle now. Harden and Howard is good enough to have a good offense but I doubt it's elite like it was. You don't have anyone besides harden on the entire roster who can handle/create. You guys will miss parsons offense alot more than you realize.

[gmoney411]

Originally Posted by hayth.james.g

Maybe. I guess we just come away with different takes. I don't know anyone that offers what Parsons does with the same or less risk. He isn't just a 1 year glove fit. He is the future for the Mavs. Whether its as a #1, #2, or #3 option. Your comeback to this is that "Not a single person, but 10+3+2 could". I just don't know. For the Mavs we are desperate for an injection of youth. Parsons was the best person on the market for that. Period. Stephenson could be, but ultimately MBT didn't like the risk. I'll side with my team on this one.

I would argue that Bledsoe would be the best injection of youth with star talent. Then I'd call it a toss up between Hayward and Parsons with Hayward having the advantage because of his defense but we saw that he was clearly untainable.

[hayth.james.g]

Originally Posted by gmoney411

I thought the Ariza being a better fit kinda addressed that loss but I guess not. IMO Ariza feels a bigger need for the Rockets and will be a better fit for the team. When you have Harden you need somebody next to him that is committed to playing good perimeter defense.

Assuming Ariza plays like he did this year I agree. I know you think that he has consistently improved at the 3. I am not saying your wrong. I am simply saying this season we will find out. The last two years he has been in a good situation. Let's see how it pans out. Either way he does play elite defense. He may be a better fit for the team than Parsons. Only question I have is on the chemistry/locker room side. Parsons seemed like the team leader.

[LonghornDub]

Listen, folks, there's only one psychological motivation for a Rockets fan to come here and say that Parsons's contract "isn't a good value," and it's not because he just wants to fill us in on his hot sports opinion.

[gmoney411]

Originally Posted by Five-ofan

I'm a huge ariza fan, and he fits better defensively, but houston still can't defend 4s or 2s and ariza is much worse than pardons at defending 4s(ariza flat out cant do it)

The problem is a lot of the Houston system offensively will struggle now. Harden and Howard is good enough to have a good offense but I doubt it's elite like it was. You don't have anyone besides harden on the entire roster who can handle/create. You guys will miss parsons offense alot more than you realize.

Ariza will guard the 2 or the 3 depending on who is the better player that night. Very few teams have an elite 2 and 3 in the league right now. And the Ariza guarding 4s worse than Parsons is incorrect. Ariza was actually pretty good at guarding 4s last year. He is stronger than Chandler with a bigger wingspan.

The Houston offense will be just fine. Chandler was a decent/good but not great creator and rarely ran the offense. Bev or Harden took care of that responsibility a majority of the time. Chandler's ballhandling and playmaking skills are definitely better than Ariza's but we actually have better floor spacing now because Ariza is a better 3 point shooter than Chandler. Our biggest offensive concern will be off the bench scoring. They need Johnson or Canaan to provide some sort of scoring punch or they will have to make a move.

[gmoney411]

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

Listen, folks, there's only one psychological motivation for a Rockets fan to come here and say that Parsons's contract "isn't a good value," and it's not because he just wants to fill us in on his hot sports opinion.

Or maybe I was having a conversation on what Morey was trying to say during his interview and my opinion on Chandler's contract eventually became part of the discussion.

[grndmstr_c]

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

Listen, folks, there's only one psychological motivation for a Rockets fan to come here and say that Parsons's contract "isn't a good value," and it's not because he just wants to fill us in on his hot sports opinion.

gmoney = Daryl Morey?

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by gmoney411

Or maybe I was having a conversation on what Morey was trying to say during his interview and my opinion on Chandler's contract eventually became part of the discussion.

Let me rephrase:

There is only one psychological reason for you to be here right now at all, and it's not to just "have a conversation."

Originally Posted by grndmstr_c

gmoney = Daryl Morey?

Hmmmm, well, he's admitted to scouring message boards for trade ideas. Would anyone be all that surprised?

(Reminds me of the scandal in 2007 when John Mackey, Whole Foods CEO, got busted for posting under a pseudonym on the Yahoo Finance boards so he could talk about how great the company was.)

[hayth.james.g]

Originally Posted by gmoney411

Chandler's ballhandling and playmaking skills are definitely better than Ariza's but we actually have better floor spacing now because Ariza is a better 3 point shooter than Chandler.

See here we go again. Ariza is not a better 3 pt shooter than Parsons. Maybe you can make the argument of equivalent. In 10 seasons he has eclipsed Parsons career average 1 time. Maybe he will continue his success, but Harden doesn't have the court vision or passing skill of John Wall. I would be very surprised if he gets close to the same numbers he got Washington. You automatically assume Ariza is going to continue to get better or be equal to what he has done in Washington with a phenomenal penetrating PG. How come it's such a given when we are talking about Ariza, but when we talk about Parsons further developing, or trending upwards it's unlikely or lukewarm at best?

Also with losing Parsons your floor spacing goes down. Hes an equivalent 3 point shooter, but you lose his passing ability, penetration, and fast break potential.

[DevinHarriswillstart]

I'd just like to chime in and say that a Richard Jefferson or Rashard Lewis wouldn't sign with us (for the min) unless they thought we were serious about contending. So we can argue whether Parsons and even T. Chandler are stars until we are blue in the face. I just know that you don't get Jefferson and Lewis unless they think you're serious about winning/contending. The ultimate "not interested in a rebuilding situation" type players. That is enough for me.