quote:
It looks bad, but we would have otherwise had a disgruntled Parsons next season anyways and would have lost him in free agency anyway. It was worth the gamble. It just didn't work
The part of this I don't buy is that:
A. That he would have been disgruntled in any obvious way, shape, or form.... His career would be on the line in his first contract year. He'd play balls to the freaking wall. The rest of his financial life would be on the line. If he wants someone to pay him the next year, he would be the model teammate and player.
B. Similar to 1st point, why the hell would someone so concerned with their financial situation (and not super rich like some mega-stars) leave the team that can offer them significantly more MILLIONS of dollars to stay? That just doesn't make financial sense if you're him. His next contract will probably be the biggest of his life. No way he passes on the kind of cash Houston would have been able to give him, if he in fact went out and earned it.
I can see the point you're making about taking a chance now to lock him up long term at a lower rate. But the time constraints it put on them to move their bad contracts really put them in a bad spot to negotiate for other players. If this was their "going for broke" offseason, then putting Parsons on the RFA market was a rather dumb move, at best. It put them behind the 8 ball.
[This message has been edited by aggie_2001_2005 (edited 7/13/2014 8:35p).]
[This message has been edited by aggie_2001_2005 (edited 7/13/2014 8:36p).]