55 replies to this topic

[Mario Peña]

Asik played about 15 meaningful games during the regular season and the Rockets offseason approach with him didn't work. He turned out to be expendable, he didn't fit and his worth as a team player didn't move the needle.

Also, there is a topic for World Cup.

Who cares about Parsons guys, really. His fame chasing has got to make for good jokes on the court. He leaves himself open to ridicule.

[adonneus]

New user here. I haven't really commented much since I'm probably more of a basketball newb than anyone else here, but I'm really grateful for this article. It has been stated over and over that the Spurs strategy cannot be replicated, but I didn't understand why until now. Re-shaped my view of the Rockets' current situation and of the economics of the league. Thanks!

[Buckko]

The best PF in the game and top 5 player ever along with arguably the best coach ever don't grow on trees. It makes things much easier when you do have them. Unfortunately if you don't you're stuck with the other 28 teams in the same boat 

[Dusty]

I agree with the articles and most of the posts here. It was good for the team to let Parsons walk. I also don't blame Parsons for walking either.

 

That being said, the fact that players are treated like assets is probably the worst aspect of professional sports to me. I hate it. College sports has their share of problems, but professional sports is so impersonal. I came to this team when it was Harden, Lin, Asik, and Parsons. I loved their youth and team play. Asik with his floppy hair, Lin with his crazy un-controlled drives, Parsons looking beautiful, and Harden just tearing up the court. I mean, that was the core and I got attached to these players. Now, the team is completely different. I think it's easier to deal with larger teams like in Baseball and Football, because each year, the team retains a certain number of players, but Basketball has 5 players starting. I love the sport, but it's just ... what team is this? I need time to adjust...

[thejohnnygold]

I agree with the articles and most of the posts here. It was good for the team to let Parsons walk. I also don't blame Parsons for walking either.

 

That being said, the fact that players are treated like assets is probably the worst aspect of professional sports to me. I hate it. College sports has their share of problems, but professional sports is so impersonal. I came to this team when it was Harden, Lin, Asik, and Parsons. I loved their youth and team play. Asik with his floppy hair, Lin with his crazy un-controlled drives, Parsons looking beautiful, and Harden just tearing up the court. I mean, that was the core and I got attached to these players. Now, the team is completely different. I think it's easier to deal with larger teams like in Baseball and Football, because each year, the team retains a certain number of players, but Basketball has 5 players starting. I love the sport, but it's just ... what team is this? I need time to adjust...

 

I understand your perspective, but it is important to view things from the other side.  Imagine a world, an NBA, without trades.  The NBA has worked hard to give players a modicum of power in determining their own fates through free agency, opt-out clauses, the players' association, and other things.  Teams have had to react to this in kind--they have a job and a goal to achieve.

 

In the scenario you somewhat allude to, a player could very well be drafted out of college and wind up living the next 15-20 years of their lives in a place they are not happy, on a team with poor management, and, ultimately, in a career that is squandered.  Look no further than Kevin Love as exhibit A.

 

Having but one place to truly ply their trade, they must accept certain aspects of this.  Yet, the majority of us can choose to accept or decline a job if it requires us to move to an undesirable place--not so much in the NBA.

 

The players have been given the ability to maximize their income by leveraging teams against one another.  What is an NBA team to do?

 

"Assets" has become a buzz word wielded to vilify NBA ownership.  All the while, the majority of players snatch up every cent they can, hold teams hostage forcing trades, blatantly collude (against NBA rules) to join forces, and "magically" seem to play better in contract years.  This is a two way street and viewing GM's negatively for doing their jobs is nothing more than fashionable right now--it lacks much merit.

 

If NBA GM's are guilty of viewing players as "assets" then it must be said that NBA players are guilty of viewing the teams they play for as ATM's.  To compare NBA players to "gold-diggers" is not a big stretch.  A mercenary is also an apt description.

 

A simple cure would be to pay every player the same amount--regardless of status--and let them use the fame their success and TV exposure provide to market themselves in other ways.  It's not like making $4,000,000 a year to play basketball professionally is a bad thing.

 

The money is too big.  The entitlement is out of control.  The fans are left on the outside looking in trying to figure out a way to be emotionally invested in a corporation.  Really, nothing has changed--it has just sped up.  Teams were always going to cycle through players over time as no one can play forever.  What used to be a 8-12 year cycle is now often a 4-6 year cycle.

 

Also, it must be noted that fans are somewhat to blame.  The "only 'chips matter" mantra that has become common throughout nearly all teams' fan-bases forces management to operate this way.  Putting a solid team on the floor, built through the draft, that works hard, competes well, and is a model for its community both on and off the court is not enough if they don't win a championship.

 

That is where things got off track....everything else is a by-product of that.  We forgot what community sports were all about and I'm not sure we will ever get it back.  If we do, it will start with the fans--not the other way around.  Trust me when I say the NBA is giving the people exactly what they want--most of them, at least.  When the majority of people (meaning consumers) shift towards a different culture--the NBA will be quick to follow.  It is a big part of what has made them so successful.

[Losthief]

good points jg, but i disagree about paying them the same as a simple cure, cause then you run into the colluding and super teams and lack of competition due to all the players who could play together if they were all payed the same. These superteams would kill the chance of other teams winning the campionship.

 

Now, pay them the same, no free agency....*shrug* has its own set of problems with unequal drafts/talent.

[timetodienow1234567]

If everybody were paid the same the bigger markets would have a much bigger monopolization of talent.

[thejohnnygold]

If everybody were paid the same the bigger markets would have a much bigger monopolization of talent.

 

The collusion is already happening as is the bigger markets monopolizing talent (currently that is not the case, but I would say that is due to terrible management in LA and NY--that will rectify itself in due time).

 

I wasn't putting it forth as a panacea; rather, it was a solution to the free agency gold-digging that was being discussed.  If there is no financial incentive to leave then other factors become more important such as quality of life, chance of winning a championship, playing time, and team friendships.

 

GM's are forced to evaluate talent not only in the context of X's and O's but in dollars and cents.  If all pay was equal then only the X's and O's remain.

 

Again, this returns to assets.  Since only a championship will satisfy the blood-thirsty masses and championships (pretty much) require having star players and star players require max money teams are unable to hold onto their valuable role players.  Those guys want their slice of the pie too and will leave to go get it.  Does Parsons leave for Dallas if the money is the same?  Dragic?  Probably not.

 

The idea is, once you have constructed a team that is a true contender you can keep it together for the most part as players have little incentive to leave aside from a starting role for a bench player or a city with a better quality of life.  Let's be honest--would you rather be in Detroit, Minneapolis, or Miami?  Going back home would be an incentive (obviously), but chasing money would be out--and that would be huge.

 

Mo Williams is taking a lot of heat right now for "leaving" Portland.  It's unfair criticism.  He is a league vet who can still contribute solid minutes.  However, Portland has to consider their future and that future is LMA, Lillard, and Batum first and foremost.  They can't tie up their cap space in Williams.  He wanted to stay, but he also is looking for the best offer.  Someone will pay him what he wants--it just won't be Portland.

 

Other teams have been doing this---Houston, for whatever reason, is being bludgeoned to death for it.  OKC did it with Harden.  Miami did it with Mike Miller.  Boston did it with their Big 3.  Denver has done it.  Dallas and Chicago too.

 

It makes David Stern's famous "basketball reasons" line that much funnier.  More decisions get made for financial reasons these days than basketball reasons.  Jeremy Lin playing with the second unit: basketball reasons.  Jeremy Lin getting traded to the Lakers: financial reasons.  Omer Asik getting moved: basketball reasons.  Chandler Parsons: financial reasons.

 

Players are going to collude.  It is already illegal.  The writing is on the wall.  Players with shared agents conveniently seem to keep getting "scratch my back, I'll scratch yours deals".  The entire Miami Heat ordeal.  How can the league stop it?  The bigger question is: do they really want to?

[Dusty]

@thejohnnygold

I agree completely. The 'blame' (if it is a blame) goes out to the fans, the owners, and the GMs. We all share in this. I also agree that things have changed. The rate at which players change teams seems to be frequent. I'm not sure what the stats are on this, but it's getting increasing harder to associate teams with a few players.

Moving forward, I think the Houston Rockets are going to be Harden and Howard. They will be the two faces of the team. Everyone else will rotate in and out to support them. Sad to see Parsons, Lin, and Asik go regardless of whose fault it is. That being said, it's good knowing that they're human and all three were upset for not being part of Houston. They all wanted to stay in Houston (as starters), which is a nice sentiment.

[rockets best fan]

@JG

had to bump this thread. JG your post was on the money. I couldn't agree more. I expect for this to be one of the main issue to be addressed in the new CBA. right now it's more prosperous for a player to hit UFA than accept a contract extension.......I'm sure the owners will want to change that. also it may be address by letting the team with bird rights do 2 extra years instead of one and on more than one player. the plan was to keep one team from hoarding all the talent, but it has backfired. there will always be collusion, but right now it's near out of control

[Red94]

Parsons seemed to have really bulked up this offseason, based on last night, but not sure if it was in the good way.

[Johnny Rocket]

I haven't seen the new Parson's yet, but  bulking up is an interesting strategy for him.  It seemed to me that a big part of Parson's value on the Rockets was on the break--he ran the floor really well, and the open floor displayed his athletic abilities and his strong court vision.  But Dallas isn't going to be a fast-break team with guys like Dirk, Felton, and T. Chandler playing big minutes, so Parson's needs to switch focus to a half-court game where he can post-up smaller wings or slide over and play "four" when the Mavs go small.  It is a big gamble if the extra bulk slows him down even a little bit. 

[rockets best fan]

did Parsons bulk up or is he getting fat enjoying the spoils of that fat contract?

[timetodienow1234567]

Lol at the parsons hate.

[rockets best fan]

@TTDN

what Parsons hate?  even though I hate the team Parsons plays for (and it's owner) I still like Parsons, however when his steps on that court against the Rockets I will only be able to see that D on his chest. he has defected to the enemy

[Johnny Rocket]

I don't hate Parsons, either, and I don't mind players taking some significant coin (however small in percentage terms) from a guy like Cuban.  I think it is fascinating to see what will happen. It could work out great for Parsons, but it could be a disaster.  It is one thing being the scrappy underdog/2nd round draft choice, but now with a near-max contract, there will be significant pressure to deliver well beyond what he did in Houston.  What happens if he can't deliver, or has more problems that he anticipated in adjusting to a new system and a new role?  What happens if Dallas fans to start to get on him a bit if he starts slowly?  I don't know the answer to these questions--for all I know, Parsons becomes an All-Star--but the adjustment he faces is a lot bigger than many ESPN writers acknowledge.  

[rockets best fan]

@Johnny Rocket

"the adjustment he faces is a lot bigger than many espn writers acknowledge" .................totally agree.

[txtdo1411]

@Johnny Rocket

"the adjustment he faces is a lot bigger than many espn writers acknowledge" .................totally agree.

 

I agree as well. Parsons' value was always in his contract. He produced more than anyone could have imagined for a 2nd round pick. That being said, he didn't produce up to what his current contract value is at. He now has, for the first time in his career, a lot  to live up to. That makes the need to produce up to expectations much higher. How he handles that pressure, and if he can increase his usg % without much of a drop in efficiency remains to be seen. I like Parsons as a player, but I would be lying if I said I hope he succeeds in Dallas. Dallas is my least favorite team in the league by far. It doesn't help that this whole off-season has made me even more of a spiteful person against the media and public perception. Both seem to think that Parsons is awesome and will take the Mavs to the next level. I'd love for both to be horribly wrong, and witness the Mavs come crashing down this year. 

[rockets best fan]

@txtdo1411

I'm with you on Dallas. it isn't that Parsons left. it's the fact he went to Dallas. I know the above board thing to say would be I wish him well, but.......  I too would be lying if I said it  I agree the media is acting like we loss Lebron. I think he has gone from being undervalued to being overvalued. his production will not reach star level. he's not that type of player. however he rode the pretty boy good locker room leader, all around indispensable glue image to a huge payday. good for him, but I still hate Dallas. I want them to fall flat on their faces. I admit it. I think Dallas will live to regret that contract. their expecting him to offset a lot of production the team lost during the summer. going from the #3 man to the #2 man is a bigger jump than many seem to acknowledge. when defenses turn their attention to him will he respond? he has a good coach so if it's possible Rick will get it out of him, but then again you can't get blood from a turnip..............we'll see.

[thejohnnygold]

I agree as well. Parsons' value was always in his contract. He produced more than anyone could have imagined for a 2nd round pick. That being said, he didn't produce up to what his current contract value is at. He now has, for the first time in his career, a lot  to live up to. That makes the need to produce up to expectations much higher. How he handles that pressure, and if he can increase his usg % without much of a drop in efficiency remains to be seen. I like Parsons as a player, but I would be lying if I said I hope he succeeds in Dallas. Dallas is my least favorite team in the league by far. It doesn't help that this whole off-season has made me even more of a spiteful person against the media and public perception. Both seem to think that Parsons is awesome and will take the Mavs to the next level. I'd love for both to be horribly wrong, and witness the Mavs come crashing down this year. 

 

I was actually bummed when Utah matched Gordon Hayward's contract from Charlotte.  I thought he would have been a great addition for them.  Going from #1 guy on a bad team to #3 guy on a playoff team is huge.  I think he would have made their offense exceptionally good---much like Parsons did for us.

 

Now, Parsons may wind up in the same boat in Dallas--Dirk and Monta are still the lead guys.  Parsons is a solid off-ball player and with Dirk/Monta drawing defensive attention he should get open looks from 3 and easy baskets cutting to the rim.  We'll find out.  It might be a great fit that allows him to excel and return fair value for his contract.  The important question is how it affects the win column.