Jump to content


Photo

Options For Parsons Injury?


  • Please log in to reply
60 replies to this topic

#41 GrizzTigerFan

GrizzTigerFan

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,665 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 March 2017 - 03:54 PM

Barnes can be a knockdown shooter and gets his shot off quickly from the corner, so he may have fit in better. 

Plus he actually gives effort on defense which was the main problem with Rudy.   Not to mention the pecking order was already in place with Conley and Gasol being the Max paid cornerstones.   

 

Barnes would have been an opportunity to show how Rudy should have been utilized.    Although his offensive game is similar to prime Rudy - his time with GSW has forced him to adapt more to the modern NBA.   

 

Barnes on the wing means that Tony isn't nearly as necessary.   So now if we still want someone to share duties with Mike then just start a combo-guard with him.   IE: develop Harrison or Baldwin as a combo guard.

 

Mike + Harrison + Barnes + JaMyke + Gasol (zbo and vince off the bench)  is the type of team that can go toe to toe with pretty much everyone in the West. 

 

Love affair with Tony Allen is why you sign a Chandler Parsons because you need a versatile offensive player to counter him.   I was always a fan of going acquiring Barnes as the Rudy successor.   

 

The Parsons gamble was too risky even with the skillset he brings knowing he wasn't healthy.   Barnes would've been just as high profile of a signing. 

 

hindsight is 20/20 tho



#42 MemphisX

MemphisX

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,715 posts
  • Location:M.E.M.P.H.I.S.

Posted 15 March 2017 - 04:25 PM

Without being privy to Parsons medicals, hard to call from outside. Pretty ballsy signing with both Mike and Marc coming off injuries though.

Not saying it was a good or bad SIGNING. However, it has turned out so bad that whoever is responsible should be fired.

#43 Allen

Allen

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,968 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The City Where I live in and the City Where im from

Posted 15 March 2017 - 04:33 PM

It was a desperation move to keep the core 4 competive for a couple more years but it back fired horribly



#44 lions

lions

    Starter

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 663 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:south carolina
  • Interests:sports

Posted 15 March 2017 - 05:13 PM

I think a lot of fans took Rudy for granted. Imagine the complaints you use to hear about him from a production standpoint. We would love to get that production out of one of our wings right now and over the last 3 seasons. 

 

He had his shortcomings, but I would take 18 and 6, an above average PER and decent outside shooting any day. Eventually, I'm sure he would've adjusted his game to cater more to Conley/Gasol.

 

Even if Parsons eventually gets right, there will be this unrealistic expectation out of him just like it was with Rudy. If fans thought the deal Rudy got was bad on 18 and 6, imagine what they will think when Parsons put up 16, 6 and 4 on good efficiency at $94M? Parsons is in a lose/lose situation here because fans will constantly have these unrealistic expectations out of him because of his contract. 

a smart grizzlies fan



#45 TimBC

TimBC

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,622 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Westminster, BC, Canada

Posted 15 March 2017 - 06:58 PM

 Parsons is in a lose/lose situation here because fans will constantly have these unrealistic expectations out of him because of his contract. 

 

Best hope is that 18 months from now a $94 million contract will be normal for a solid starter.  

We all accepted that Conley's contract will be caught and passed by many before it runs out.  



#46 Iron Mike

Iron Mike

    1st Team

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,918 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Philippines

Posted 16 March 2017 - 09:57 AM

I think a lot of fans took Rudy for granted. Imagine the complaints you use to hear about him from a production standpoint. We would love to get that production out of one of our wings right now and over the last 3 seasons. 

 

He had his shortcomings, but I would take 18 and 6, an above average PER and decent outside shooting any day. Eventually, I'm sure he would've adjusted his game to cater more to Conley/Gasol.

 

Even if Parsons eventually gets right, there will be this unrealistic expectation out of him just like it was with Rudy. If fans thought the deal Rudy got was bad on 18 and 6, imagine what they will think when Parsons put up 16, 6 and 4 on good efficiency at $94M? Parsons is in a lose/lose situation here because fans will constantly have these unrealistic expectations out of him because of his contract. 

 

The fans just didn't want Rudy stealing the spotlight from Z-Bo.

 

Trading Rudy was the biggest mistake the FO has ever made.



#47 New_Sacred_Cow

New_Sacred_Cow

    1st Team

  • Game Thread
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,738 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nashville

Posted 16 March 2017 - 10:25 AM

I think one of the biggest mistakes was not giving Rudy the 60 million contract when he asked for it. I believe it was an extension at the time but we declined. Instead we waited and gave him much much more.

 

I wasn't against trading him because he had vision issues and was terrible that final year in Memphis and the couple seasons after that. He was just like Jeff Green by putting up empty stats. He finally came around to playing within himself the past couple of seasons.

 

Had Rudy kept up the focus he had from the olympic team and not pouting about not becoming an All Star, then he would have meant much more to the Grizzlies and would probably still be here.



#48 MemphisX

MemphisX

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,715 posts
  • Location:M.E.M.P.H.I.S.

Posted 16 March 2017 - 10:49 AM

The fans just didn't want Rudy stealing the spotlight from Z-Bo.

Trading Rudy was the biggest mistake the FO has ever made.


Biggest?

Not even top 5.

#49 Wells

Wells

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,033 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Memphis

Posted 16 March 2017 - 10:55 AM

I think one of the biggest mistakes was not giving Rudy the 60 million contract when he asked for it. I believe it was an extension at the time but we declined. Instead we waited and gave him much much more.

 

Rudy was wanting $65 million, the money LaMarcus Aldridge got.

 

http://www.espn.com/...tory?id=4618764

 

http://upperdeckblog...orth-the-money/

 

http://www.memphisfl...e-danny-granger



#50 BHZMAFIA

BHZMAFIA

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,006 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Memphis

Posted 16 March 2017 - 12:15 PM

Barnes can be a knockdown shooter and gets his shot off quickly from the corner, so he may have fit in better. 

 

 

Plus he actually gives effort on defense which was the main problem with Rudy.   Not to mention the pecking order was already in place with Conley and Gasol being the Max paid cornerstones.   

 

Barnes would have been an opportunity to show how Rudy should have been utilized.    Although his offensive game is similar to prime Rudy - his time with GSW has forced him to adapt more to the modern NBA.   

 

 

 

 

If I'm not mistaken, Rudy Gay was a good 3 point shooter from the corner as well. The reality is that Barnes isn't a great shooter, but had two good seasons getting wide open looks at Golden State. Even then, he was Courtney Lee like and not taking many 3's to justify being a high level outside shooter. He's still not taking many 3's as a #1 option in Dallas. 

 

I just don't think there is a big difference between the two players. We see Harrison Barnes in a top 2 option role on a bad team and he turns into prime Rudy Gay pretty much. Surround him on a team like Golden State and he becomes a shooter. 

 
Whether or not Barnes gives effort on defense, his defensive numbers were no different than Rudy's. Rudy was a net positive defender for most of his career, although he didn't give the effort every night. 
 
So, I will remain with the same comments. Going after Barnes would've just been the FO looking for that Rudy replacement who they probably felt they should've kept around.

 

 

I would've been okay with Barnes just like I was okay with having Rudy. I think fans just gave Rudy a hard time because he wasn't Zbo or TA, the same reason why they give Conley a hard time til this day. Sure, he lacked the effort at times, but he still had good production for his position. Basically what Harrison Barnes is now for $94M. 

 

Fans here just don't like the lackadaisical approach. It wasn't until Conley broke his face and played in the playoffs that fans actually started to celebrate Conley as a player. Fans here loved Vasquez because of his swagger and he "looked" like he played tough defense. However, he was a poor defender and couldn't shoot. 

 

Take Nick Calathes he was just as good of a playmaker as Vasquez and a much better defender, but he had no swagger. Fans didn't like him because they said he couldn't shoot and made too many mistakes.

 

I know I'm not the only one that sees this trend. 



#51 Dwash

Dwash

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,579 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 March 2017 - 01:47 PM

In any fan base, aren't the players who "go hard" in some type of way typically the favorites?  I don't see what the problem is with that.



#52 BHZMAFIA

BHZMAFIA

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,006 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Memphis

Posted 16 March 2017 - 01:59 PM

In any fan base, aren't the players who "go hard" in some type of way typically the favorites?  I don't see what the problem is with that.

 

 

I felt like a guy like Calathes played hard, but a lot of fans hated him and loved Vasquez. This is strictly based on a skill vs skill evaluation. I can understand if a player is much better than the other, but sometimes there just seems to be favoritism for whatever reason. 

 

What's funny is people use to talk about how Parsons is exactly the player we needed when he killed us night in and night out. But, its probably those same fans who are saying "he's not grit n grind". Just don't understand that.



#53 GrizzTigerFan

GrizzTigerFan

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,665 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 March 2017 - 05:53 PM

I felt like a guy like Calathes played hard, but a lot of fans hated him and loved Vasquez. This is strictly based on a skill vs skill evaluation. I can understand if a player is much better than the other, but sometimes there just seems to be favoritism for whatever reason.

What's funny is people use to talk about how Parsons is exactly the player we needed when he killed us night in and night out. But, its probably those same fans who are saying "he's not grit n grind". Just don't understand that.

I liked Calathes cuz he was legit a good passer and defender. nick butted heads with Tony so that was his death nail with the fanbase.

#54 Iron Mike

Iron Mike

    1st Team

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,918 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Philippines

Posted 17 March 2017 - 10:54 AM

Biggest?

Not even top 5.

 

With regards to our playoff chances, yes it is IMO.



#55 Iron Mike

Iron Mike

    1st Team

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,918 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Philippines

Posted 17 March 2017 - 10:54 AM

I felt like a guy like Calathes played hard, but a lot of fans hated him and loved Vasquez. This is strictly based on a skill vs skill evaluation. I can understand if a player is much better than the other, but sometimes there just seems to be favoritism for whatever reason. 

 

What's funny is people use to talk about how Parsons is exactly the player we needed when he killed us night in and night out. But, its probably those same fans who are saying "he's not grit n grind". Just don't understand that.

 

I would bet its because of the hair.  :lol:



#56 lions

lions

    Starter

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 663 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:south carolina
  • Interests:sports

Posted 17 March 2017 - 11:16 AM

once a player like chandler parson goes under the knife for the knee not once, i believe this is his third time it may be over for him . for a normal person who works 9-5 it hard but for a PRO player who need good knees he will never be the same. Memphis wasted 94 millions 



#57 lions

lions

    Starter

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 663 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:south carolina
  • Interests:sports

Posted 17 March 2017 - 11:20 AM

the 94 million dollar question who will be held accountable 



#58 VikingWarrior

VikingWarrior

    2nd Team

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 872 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:DraftHeaven

Posted 17 March 2017 - 11:21 AM

It's the meniscus it's not that big of a deal if that's all it is

#59 lions

lions

    Starter

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 663 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:south carolina
  • Interests:sports

Posted 17 March 2017 - 11:32 AM

the grizzlies players who set the grizzlies franchise back 1 BIG COUNTRY REEVES  2. MICHAEL DICKERSON and the new number 3. CHANDLER  PARSON



#60 TimBC

TimBC

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,622 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Westminster, BC, Canada

Posted 17 March 2017 - 03:54 PM

the grizzlies players who set the grizzlies franchise back 1 BIG COUNTRY REEVES  2. MICHAEL DICKERSON and the new number 3. CHANDLER  PARSON

 

Reeves gave us 4.5 decent years, Dickerson two.  Lots of players in NBA history have only managed that.