Originally Posted by henrymakepeace
Jack is eight years younger and has better ball handling skills. His 3p percentage is only 35%.
Parker is more experienced and he has better 3 p percentage. He can also take and make the last shot. But he is 34 years old.
Would you rather give 4 Y, 20 M to Jack or match Cleveland's offer and sign Parker for 2 Y, 6M?
I'd rather keep Parker. It is less risky and even if Jack plays well, the difference will not be sunstential. I suppose Parker wants to move thinking he may win a championship there but keeping him could be a better option IMO. I applauded signing Jack at first but now I'm thinking Parker was the better choice. But he may already have expressed BC that he wants to go.
They're a lot different. Jack is going to provide the other fist in the one, two punch that was once the PG combo of TJ & Jose. The good thing about Jack is that he's big and tough enough to play minutes at the 2 without being a liability.