Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
InboxChat RoomChat Room (0 fans in chatroom)
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 5  Next >

Did the Mavs Destroy the Rockets' Best-Laid Plans?

Posted: 8/13/2014 8:51 AM

Did the Mavs Destroy the Rockets' Best-Laid Plans? 


Did the Mavs take the Rockets out of championship contention?


Two Rockets articles consider the possibility.


Forrest Walker 

Is Houston a contender this season? The short answer is no. It takes three points to be a contender. Each star counts for one point, an elite coach counts one point, and an elite supporting cast counts one point. Houston has two points -- one for each of Howard and Harden. The supporting cast is good, but not elite. The coach may even be a slight minus. A two-point team is a sub-contender -- it's a playoff lock, and can conceivably win it all, but it would take a few major things to swing its way.

The Spurs have Tony Parker as their star, Pop as their elite coach, and a supporting cast that looks like advanced alien technology. If Duncan plays like a star, they have a four-point team, which is basically unstoppable.

The scary thing about this metric is it points to Dallas as a potential contender. Dirk is probably still a star, and Carlisle is an elite coach. It's a roll of the dice, but if Dirk and the supporting cast click really well, Houston could have a realistic shot at the conference finals and still be the worst team in Texas. Houston has a similar hope to Dallas -- that their role players just get it. And Morey could make an advantageous trade with Lin's trade exception. Who knows, this just might be the year that Houston gets out of the first round.

[Ouch.]

http://www.red94.net/contention/14528/#more-14528


Nate Duncan

We may never know for sure why Morey let Parsons out of his contract a year early. But once he had, when Bosh unexpectedly stayed in Miami, Morey had the decision of matching or not, which required him to take a hard look at the status of the Rockets.

Parsons would be 26 when the season started, and was thought unlikely to get significantly better over the next three years. He is also an awkward fit with Harden, who needs a defensive stopper alongside him. Howard will be 29 in December. Unlike a Shaq, he doesn't have elite size for a center. Relying on his athleticism, he probably has two more seasons as an elite player -- maybe only one. Harden is only 24, but he doesn't keep to much of a fitness regimen, and may therefore hit his prime earlier than normal. The next two years are the Rockets' best chance to contend.

Morey thought other teams would view Parsons' contract as a wild overpay for a guy whom he saw as a probable below-average third option for a contender.  Even if a team thought Parsons was worth the money, they could only count on having his services  through June 2016.  The contract, in Morey's mind, was untradeable. If he kept Parsons, the Rockets would have little ability to upgrade the team over the next two years, and if the team hasn't contended by then, Howard might well bolt. Morey decided not to match.

Houston recovered, to an extent, by signing Trevor Ariza. He's not nearly the passer or driver that Parsons is, but he's an equally good spot-up shooter, a far superior defender, and a better fit next to Harden. Ariza could be expected to decline a bit from a contract year, and Parsons might have gotten a little better, but it was still realistic to think that the Rockets' starting lineup was improved -- they could carve out an elite defense with three excellent defenders in Beverley,  Ariza and Howard, and some actual effort from Harden. The bench is clearly worse, but in the playoffs, that matters less. The Rockets still have Lin's $8M trade exception, and next summer they could (by trading Ariza and other moves) open up as much as $15M to acquire another star, or at least another good player who is a better fit and/or a more cost-effective option than Parsons.

Backed against the wall, Morey probably made the right decision. Letting Parsons walk for nothing seemed like a high-risk move. But perhaps the greater risk was counting on Parsons' improving enough at age 26 to form part of a championship core. Overall, the Rockets shouldn't be that much worse than they were last season, and they have preserved the chance, however remote, to add another star while Harden and Howard are still young enough to attract one.

We don't know if the Mavericks really thought they would get Parsons when they made their offer, or if they just wanted to mess with Morey. But as it turned out, they managed to weaken the Rockets at least temporarily, and may even have effectively taken Houston out of the Harden-Howard window of contention.  

http://www.basketballinsiders.com/the-rockets-decision-to-let-chandler-parsons-go/?

Last edited 8/13/2014 8:57 AM by mavsluvr

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/13/2014 9:21 AM

Re: Did the Mavs Destroy the Rockets' Best-Laid Plans? 


If Nate Duncan is correct that Parsons is a "probable below-average third option on a contender," then the Mavs are hosed. Hope he's wrong.
There are two kinds of fans of the '14-'15 Mavs - Wright fans, and wrong fans. ************* Give CP hate a rest and enjoy this ride.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/13/2014 9:44 AM

Re: Did the Mavs Destroy the Rockets' Best-Laid Plans? 


Nate Duncan article is a head-in-the-sand type, where it is slanted to cater to the HOU reader. I don't know if he is a HOU homer, hates the Mavs, or simply tried too hard to say something that grabs the casual reader.

In any event, it is what it is.

His article opens with a startling gem of stupidity - - his speculative angle that the Mavs may have signed Parsons to a deal they didn't really want, using all of their cap room, simply to mess up the Rox plans. In Duncan's view, it wasn't a case of Dallas overpaying a bit because of the RFA angle, but may have been a case of grabbing a player they didn't really see as special, just to thwart Morey.

Let me say that again: in his world view, the Mavs main focus in the summer of 2014 very well may have been not to build the best roster available, for Dirk's remaining years, but instead it was a quest to spoil the plans of HOU, even at the cost of their own future.

You buying? I'm not.

My suspicion is that his future articles will work to bolster that unique and completely irrational thesis, which will depend on him finding some way to talk down Parsons, so beware.
DL
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/13/2014 9:47 AM

Re: Did the Mavs Destroy the Rockets' Best-Laid Plans? 



DLordOfBasketball wrote:

My suspicion is that his future articles will work to bolster that unique and completely irrational thesis, which will depend on him finding some way to talk down Parsons, so beware.
popcorn.gif
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/13/2014 9:48 AM

Re: Did the Mavs Destroy the Rockets' Best-Laid Plans? 



Scott4theMavs wrote: If Nate Duncan is correct that Parsons is a "probable below-average third option on a contender," then the Mavs are hosed. Hope he's wrong.
Even just mentioning that Parsons was a below average 3rd option is ridiculous. He may be a 3rd option, but he's far from below average. He also mentioned that Dwight Howard may only have one more really good year in him left, which is even more ridiculous.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/13/2014 9:59 AM

Re: Did the Mavs Destroy the Rockets' Best-Laid Plans? 



Scott4theMavs wrote: If Nate Duncan is correct that Parsons is a "probable below-average third option on a contender," then the Mavs are hosed. Hope he's wrong.
He wasn't a great fit in Houston, so he may well have been a below-average third option there.

Otherwise, I guess we could think about how he compares to other third options on contenders. How does he compare to Manu? Kyrie Irving? Serge Ibaka? Pau Gasol? The pre-summer Heat's Chris Bosh? 

I guess we'll find out.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/13/2014 10:01 AM

Re: Did the Mavs Destroy the Rockets' Best-Laid Plans? 



themanallen wrote:
Scott4theMavs wrote: If Nate Duncan is correct that Parsons is a "probable below-average third option on a contender," then the Mavs are hosed. Hope he's wrong.
Even just mentioning that Parsons was a below average 3rd option is ridiculous. He may be a 3rd option, but he's far from below average. He also mentioned that Dwight Howard may only have one more really good year in him left, which is even more ridiculous.
As a third option on a contender, it's a little hard to say how Parsons measures up, since he hasn't really played that role for more than one season and the competition is pretty stiff. And Duncan  said that Howard could possibly have one more year as an elite player -- a prospect I find quite satisfying, lol.

Last edited 8/13/2014 10:02 AM by mavsluvr

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/13/2014 10:05 AM

Re: Did the Mavs Destroy the Rockets' Best-Laid Plans? 



mavsluvr wrote:

Houston recovered, to an extent, by signing Trevor Ariza. He's not nearly the passer or driver that Parsons is, but he's an equally good spot-up shooter, a far superior defender, and a better fit next to Harden. 
Just not even remotely true. Tired of this garbage.

RC: "We've seen Parsons be a very effective defensive player."
Cuban: "I talk to NBA scorers and ask, ‘Who defended you the best? Who’s the top three?’ And Parsons was on a couple lists."
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/13/2014 10:09 AM

Re: Did the Mavs Destroy the Rockets' Best-Laid Plans? 



mavsluvr wrote:
Scott4theMavs wrote: If Nate Duncan is correct that Parsons is a "probable below-average third option on a contender," then the Mavs are hosed. Hope he's wrong.
He wasn't a great fit in Houston, so he may well have been a below-average third option there.

One could argue (as some HOU fans have) that Parsons was a GREAT fit in HOU because he covered up so many weaknesses of others with the little things he did. The argument is that he was the thankless third wheel that made HOU go and will be sorely missed in many ways.

RC: "We've seen Parsons be a very effective defensive player."
Cuban: "I talk to NBA scorers and ask, ‘Who defended you the best? Who’s the top three?’ And Parsons was on a couple lists."
Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/13/2014 10:10 AM

Re: Did the Mavs Destroy the Rockets' Best-Laid Plans? 



DLordOfBasketball wrote: Nate Duncan article is a head-in-the-sand type, where it is slanted to cater to the HOU reader. I don't know if he is a HOU homer, hates the Mavs, or simply tried too hard to say something that grabs the casual reader.

In any event, it is what it is.

His article opens with a startling gem of stupidity - - his speculative angle that the Mavs may have signed Parsons to a deal they didn't really want, using all of their cap room, simply to mess up the Rox plans. In Duncan's view, it wasn't a case of Dallas overpaying a bit because of the RFA angle, but may have been a case of grabbing a player they didn't really see as special, just to thwart Morey.

Let me say that again: in his world view, the Mavs main focus in the summer of 2014 very well may have been not to build the best roster available, for Dirk's remaining years, but instead it was a quest to spoil the plans of HOU, even at the cost of their own future.

You buying? I'm not.

My suspicion is that his future articles will work to bolster that unique and completely irrational thesis, which will depend on him finding some way to talk down Parsons, so beware.
Take your point, but if he's right that the Mavs have weakened or destroyed the Rockets' championship hopes, I don't really care whether he's right about their motivation, lol.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/13/2014 10:17 AM

Re: Did the Mavs Destroy the Rockets' Best-Laid Plans? 



kammrath wrote:
mavsluvr wrote:
Scott4theMavs wrote: If Nate Duncan is correct that Parsons is a "probable below-average third option on a contender," then the Mavs are hosed. Hope he's wrong.
He wasn't a great fit in Houston, so he may well have been a below-average third option there.

One could argue (as some HOU fans have) that Parsons was a GREAT fit in HOU because he covered up so many weaknesses of others with the little things he did. The argument is that he was the thankless third wheel that made HOU go and will be sorely missed in many ways.
Realize that's your point of view, but I think Parsons is actually a better fit in Dallas, and Ariza is a better fit in Houston, which relies heavily on Harden-Howard for offense and could use a 3 and D wing.

As far as Parsons being a better defender than Ariza, that's not what your gospel, DRPM, says.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/13/2014 10:22 AM

Re: Did the Mavs Destroy the Rockets' Best-Laid Plans? 



mavsluvr wrote:
kammrath wrote:
mavsluvr wrote:
Scott4theMavs wrote: If Nate Duncan is correct that Parsons is a "probable below-average third option on a contender," then the Mavs are hosed. Hope he's wrong.
He wasn't a great fit in Houston, so he may well have been a below-average third option there.

One could argue (as some HOU fans have) that Parsons was a GREAT fit in HOU because he covered up so many weaknesses of others with the little things he did. The argument is that he was the thankless third wheel that made HOU go and will be sorely missed in many ways.
Realize that's your point of view, but I think Parsons is actually a better fit in Dallas, and Ariza is a better fit in Houston, which relies heavily on Harden-Howard for offense and could use a 3 and D wing.

As far as Parsons being a better defender than Ariza, that's not what your gospel, DRPM, says.
1) Never claimed RPM was any sort of "gospel." Again, you are always putting arguments in people's mouths that are patently false.

2) DRPM says Ariza was +1.04 and Parsons was +0.59 last year, putting them in the very same ballpark, especially when taking any noise in the data into account. The point being that people are making idiotic statements like "Ariza is the far superior defender." That just isn't true. Ariza MAY be the better defender, that is possible, but "far superior" is not.

RC: "We've seen Parsons be a very effective defensive player."
Cuban: "I talk to NBA scorers and ask, ‘Who defended you the best? Who’s the top three?’ And Parsons was on a couple lists."

Last edited 8/13/2014 10:23 AM by kammrath

Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/13/2014 10:35 AM

Re: Did the Mavs Destroy the Rockets' Best-Laid Plans? 



kammrath wrote:
mavsluvr wrote:
kammrath wrote:
mavsluvr wrote:
Scott4theMavs wrote: If Nate Duncan is correct that Parsons is a "probable below-average third option on a contender," then the Mavs are hosed. Hope he's wrong.
He wasn't a great fit in Houston, so he may well have been a below-average third option there.

One could argue (as some HOU fans have) that Parsons was a GREAT fit in HOU because he covered up so many weaknesses of others with the little things he did. The argument is that he was the thankless third wheel that made HOU go and will be sorely missed in many ways.
Realize that's your point of view, but I think Parsons is actually a better fit in Dallas, and Ariza is a better fit in Houston, which relies heavily on Harden-Howard for offense and could use a 3 and D wing.

As far as Parsons being a better defender than Ariza, that's not what your gospel, DRPM, says.
1) Never claimed RPM was any sort of "gospel." Again, you are always putting arguments in people's mouths that are patently false.

2) DRPM says Ariza was +1.04 and Parsons was +0.59 last year, putting them in the very same ballpark, especially when taking any noise in the data into account. The point being that people are making idiotic statements like "Ariza is the far superior defender." That just isn't true. Ariza MAY be the better defender, that is possible, but "far superior" is not.
I wouldn't say it's in the same ballpark. Ariza is seventh among shooting guards and Parsons is 22nd among small forwards (below Shawn Marion -- yikes!). 

You're the one who's always citing that stat as though it were authoritative, not me.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/13/2014 11:11 AM

Re: Did the Mavs Destroy the Rockets' Best-Laid Plans? 


Interesting 3 point system. IMO the Mavs score even higher than 3. Dirk, Monte, and Parsons are either stars or very near star status. 2.5 points . Elite Coach 1 point. Elite bench 0.5 or 1 (some here believe our bench to be very good and deep but not sure I buy all of that). 4-5 points depending on opinion total. If there is any weight to theory then we are not just a contender but a damn good one.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/13/2014 11:18 AM

Re: Did the Mavs Destroy the Rockets' Best-Laid Plans? 



sohaltang40 wrote: Interesting 3 point system. IMO the Mavs score even higher than 3. Dirk, Monte, and Parsons are either stars or very near star status. 2.5 points . Elite Coach 1 point. Elite bench 0.5 or 1 (some here believe our bench to be very good and deep but not sure I buy all of that). 4-5 points depending on opinion total. If there is any weight to theory then we are not just a contender but a damn good one.
Interesting observation. Although, if you're going to give points for Monta and Parsons, you have to award them for Manu and Kawhi too, I think.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/13/2014 11:36 AM

Re: Did the Mavs Destroy the Rockets' Best-Laid Plans? 



mavsluvr wrote:
sohaltang40 wrote: Interesting 3 point system. IMO the Mavs score even higher than 3. Dirk, Monte, and Parsons are either stars or very near star status. 2.5 points . Elite Coach 1 point. Elite bench 0.5 or 1 (some here believe our bench to be very good and deep but not sure I buy all of that). 4-5 points depending on opinion total. If there is any weight to theory then we are not just a contender but a damn good one.
Interesting observation. Although, if you're going to give points for Monta and Parsons, you have to award them for Manu and Kawhi too, I think.
Maybe.  There are a lot of Manu fans but his stats are pretty weak.  Leonard yeah.  He should improve and did put up good playoff stats. I think the Mavs border line stars are much closer to all stars than the Spurs. Not saying Spurs are not good.  They are likely the best team in the league again.

Manu 12.3 ppg 4.3 ast 3rpg
Leonard 14 ppg 7 rpg (play off numbers so benefit of the doubt)
vs
Ellis 19.0ppg  5.7 ast 3.6 rpg
Parsons 16.6ppg 5.5 rpg 4.0 ast

mavs substar stats 35.6 ppg 9.7 ast 9.1 rpg >
Spurs substar stats 26.3 pg 6.3 ast 10 rpg

Last edited 8/13/2014 11:38 AM by sohaltang40

Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/13/2014 11:59 AM

Re: Did the Mavs Destroy the Rockets' Best-Laid Plans? 



sohaltang40 wrote:
mavsluvr wrote:
sohaltang40 wrote: Interesting 3 point system. IMO the Mavs score even higher than 3. Dirk, Monte, and Parsons are either stars or very near star status. 2.5 points . Elite Coach 1 point. Elite bench 0.5 or 1 (some here believe our bench to be very good and deep but not sure I buy all of that). 4-5 points depending on opinion total. If there is any weight to theory then we are not just a contender but a damn good one.
Interesting observation. Although, if you're going to give points for Monta and Parsons, you have to award them for Manu and Kawhi too, I think.
Maybe.  There are a lot of Manu fans but his stats are pretty weak.  Leonard yeah.  He should improve and did put up good playoff stats. I think the Mavs border line stars are much closer to all stars than the Spurs. Not saying Spurs are not good.  They are likely the best team in the league again.

Manu 12.3 ppg 4.3 ast 3rpg
Leonard 14 ppg 7 rpg (play off numbers so benefit of the doubt)
vs
Ellis 19.0ppg  5.7 ast 3.6 rpg
Parsons 16.6ppg 5.5 rpg 4.0 ast

mavs substar stats 35.6 ppg 9.7 ast 9.1 rpg >
Spurs substar stats 26.3 pg 6.3 ast 10 rpg
Interesting data. Although, of course, points, rebounds and assists aren't the sole measure of a player's impact. I think, at this point, you would have to consider Manu a high-impact player for the Spurs, and I'm not sure you can anoint Parsons as better due to having higher points, rebounds and assists per game. For one thing, he  plays much longer minutes, and had a different role. 

But, it's all only a fun summer guessing game, anyway. If the season opener is really Mavs-Spurs, I guess we'll get an early view for ourselves!
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/13/2014 1:26 PM

Re: Did the Mavs Destroy the Rockets' Best-Laid Plans? 


In the comments of the Houston fans I saw they said when Parsons was injured the team fell apart. I suspect Parsons made Dwight look a lot better inside than he was because of he shooting ability. This is why I think Dirk and Parsons could work so well together.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/13/2014 1:41 PM

Re: Did the Mavs Destroy the Rockets' Best-Laid Plans? 



KarlPilkington2011 wrote: In the comments of the Houston fans I saw they said when Parsons was injured the team fell apart. I suspect Parsons made Dwight look a lot better inside than he was because of he shooting ability. This is why I think Dirk and Parsons could work so well together.
In 2013-14, HOU was 4-4 (0.500) without Parsons and 50-24 (0.676) with him.

In 2012-13, HOU was 3-3 (0.500) without Parsons and 42-34 (0.553) with him.

In 2011-12, HOU was 2-3 (0.400) without Parsons and 32-29 (0.525) with him.

RC: "We've seen Parsons be a very effective defensive player."
Cuban: "I talk to NBA scorers and ask, ‘Who defended you the best? Who’s the top three?’ And Parsons was on a couple lists."
Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/13/2014 1:45 PM

Re: Did the Mavs Destroy the Rockets' Best-Laid Plans? 


"In 2013-14, HOU was 4-4 (0.500) without Parsons and 50-24 (0.676) with him."

A team loses a key player, and they're not as good. Wow, what a revelation ;-)
DL
Reply | Quote
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 5  Next >