Parsons vs Layman

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Sinobas

Sinobas

Banned User
BANNED
Joined
Feb 15, 2009
Messages
14,608
Likes
5,486
Points
113
It's interesting how similar Jake Layman and Chandler Parsons are. Both were taken in the 2nd round, both played a full 4 years, same size and very similar athletically (good athletes for their size), Layman's veritical is actually 8 inches higher though, and so is his penis.


Neither lit up the scoreboard in college, Layman averaged 11.6 ppg and Chandler 11.3 as a senior, but they were both very efficient. Layman shot 61/40/83 as a senior, and Parsons 54/37/56.
 
Sinobas said:
It's interesting how similar Jake Layman and Chandler Parsons are. Both were taken in the 2nd round, both played a full 4 years, same size and very similar athletically (good athletes for their size), Layman's veritical is actually 8 inches higher though, and so is his penis.


Neither lit up the scoreboard in college, Layman averaged 11.6 ppg and Chandler 11.3 as a senior, but they were both very efficient. Layman shot 61/40/83 as a senior, and Parsons 54/37/56.
Click to expand...
:cheers:
 
Here is a video of Jake's older brother, Ray, at a city council meeting in Scranton, OH.
 
i think that Layman will become a very good player. he will be a mix of gordon hayward and parson. He seem to be a team-first player. i think he can become a 3rd scoring option in the future with vonleh and montero if they live up to their potential. man this team is gonna win forever. #lotterynomore
 
damianlillard said:
i think that Layman will become a very good player. he will be a mix of gordon hayward and parson. He seem to be a team-first player. i think he can become a 3rd scoring option in the future with vonleh and montero if they live up to their potential. man this team is gonna win forever. #lotterynomore
Click to expand...

Fear the 2020 big 3 Montero/Vonleh/Layman !
 
Ever since summer league I thought layman was the perfect role player for this team, and specifically the starters. He just compliments them well and gives a more consistent outside shot than either aminu or Harkless, and has more size and slashing ability than crabbe. He will be one of those guys, like parsons for example, that will be better in the NBA than he was in college.
 
Start him. For real... We need shooters around Dame and CJ and the only one we have is Crabbe.. For all the talk about Harkless, I haven't seen improvement. Aminu had a fluke year last year and he has been awful this year (and he isn't even that good of defender).

We can't defend teams, so we have to outscore them, which we can't even do if we have bricklayers like Harkless and Aminu on the perimeter. Layman hit more threes in 7 minutes this game then the other two have all season..
 
BonesJones said:
Start him. For real... We need shooters around Dame and CJ and the only one we have is Crabbe.. For all the talk about Harkless, I haven't seen improvement. Aminu had a fluke year last year and he has been awful this year (and he isn't even that good of defender).

We can't defend teams, so we have to outscore them, which we can't even do if we have bricklayers like Harkless and Aminu on the perimeter. Layman hit more threes in 7 minutes this game then the other two have all season..
Click to expand...

It would probably hurt us in the short run, but if we stuck with it I bet it would pay off in the long run.
 
I would atleast start Layman over Harkless

Even tho Aminu is pretty trash offensively atleast he'll play defense and rebound somewhat

I really really really believe the open shots Harkless gets replace those with Layman would make a huuuge difference
 
BonesJones said:
Start him. For real... We need shooters around Dame and CJ and the only one we have is Crabbe.. For all the talk about Harkless, I haven't seen improvement. Aminu had a fluke year last year and he has been awful this year (and he isn't even that good of defender).

We can't defend teams, so we have to outscore them, which we can't even do if we have bricklayers like Harkless and Aminu on the perimeter. Layman hit more threes in 7 minutes this game then the other two have all season..
Click to expand...
I agree with most, but guys have off nights. It just so happened that hark and aminu had an abysmal shooting night at the same time. I feel as though hark has improved his 3pt shot from last year, not a lot but still improved. It was the Fourth game of the season, so let's not dismiss the guy completely.
 
Nhawz said:
I agree with most, but guys have off nights. It just so happened that hark and aminu had an abysmal shooting night at the same time. I feel as though hark has improved his 3pt shot from last year, not a lot but still improved. It was the Fourth game of the season, so let's not dismiss the guy completely.
Click to expand...

Regardless if he improved it or not it's not enough to be relied on. Aminu and Harkless are just not shooters you can count on. We need a natural born shooter at either those spots. Atleast one

So since Aminu is bigger and the lesser of the two evils, reluctantly Aminu needs to keep his starting spot. Layman would space the floor and be really deadly with the amount of good looks he would get with the starters
 
For those who don't know why this thread was reawakened... Tonight in a 23-point loss, Layman first entered with 8 minutes left in the game, 33 points down, with the Warrior defense in sleep/laugher mode. He had an extraordinary box score line (per minute). So, he showed something, but let's see it in a real situation.

http://www.espn.com/nba/dailyleaders/_/gameId/400899504
 
It's kind of interesting how people on Twitter are kind of treating layman as a joke. I know he probably will never have a 8 minute stretch like that but his talent is for real. Not all white guys are scrubs lol. You can see the difference between him and someone like Meyers or Pat C. He actually looks natural playing the game.
 
I came back just to see what people where saying about Layman. I loved him out of the draft as a 2nd round sleeper, but I'm always appalled by how stupid his comparisons are. Every comp says "Hayward" or "Parsons".

The reason why I loved Layman was because he is an athletic and big wing who can shoot it. That's really all he is though. He doesn't have extremely dynamic athleticism (lateral foot-speed is still a question for me on him. I'd like to see him guard high level NBA wings), but he is explosive and powerful if he doesnt have the ball. The only thing I dislike about him as a prospect was that his wingspan wasn't great.

My comparison for him is Trevor Ariza. I don't think his defensive ceiling is as high as Ariza's, but they are similar players to me. If you ask either of them to be playmakers they are going to fail hard. Just ask them to run, finish, shoot 3's, and defend and you have a great role player. It's a complete joke to compare him to Parsons or Hayward because those are two very dynamic players who can playmake. To compare them is pretty obviously just a comparison based on being a tall white athletic wing player.

Could he develop his game further? Yes, I think it's very possible. Whenever I watched him in Maryland I always felt like he was more talented then he was willing to show, like he was shy and didnt want the pressure of being a creator. It would take a lot of work and a complete change in his mindset and approach to basketball.

Only thing that sucks is that I don't really see where you can play him. The focus of the Blazers development should still be giving Vonleh as many minutes as possible. Just such a pity y'all signed Evan Turner.
 
Last edited:
Scalma said:
It's kind of interesting how people on Twitter are kind of treating layman as a joke. I know he probably will never have a 8 minute stretch like that but his talent is for real. Not all white guys are scrubs lol. You can see the difference between him and someone like Meyers or Pat C. He actually looks natural playing the game.
Click to expand...

Well first of all he's white. Second it's kinda funny in a good way some no namer rookie like that just tears it up in his first game. Hopefully Layman is the truth tho
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
I came back just to see what people where saying about Layman. I loved him out of the draft as a 2nd round sleeper, but I'm always appalled by how stupid his comparisons are. Every comp says "Hayward" or "Parsons".

The reason why I loved Layman was because he is an athletic and big wing who can shoot it. That's really all he is though. He doesn't have extremely dynamic athleticism (lateral foot-speed is still a question for me on him. I'd like to see him guard high level NBA wings), but he is explosive and powerful if he doesnt have the ball. The only thing I dislike about him as a prospect was that his wingspan wasn't great.

My comparison for him is Trevor Ariza. I don't think his defensive ceiling is as high as Ariza's, but they are similar players to me. If you ask either of them to be playmakers they are going to fail hard. Just ask them to run, finish, shoot 3's, and defend and you have a great role player. It's a complete joke to compare him to Parsons or Hayward because those are two very dynamic players who can playmake. To compare them is pretty obviously just a comparison based on being a tall white athletic wing player.

Could he develop his game further? Yes, I think it's very possible. Whenever I watched him in Maryland I always felt like he was more talented then he was willing to show, like he was shy and didnt want the pressure of being a creator. It would take a lot of work and a complete change in his mindset and approach to basketball.
Click to expand...
I have to give you all of the props for this post. very nice take. I'm sure we'll see you around next time we play Utah.
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
I came back just to see what people where saying about Layman. I loved him out of the draft as a 2nd round sleeper, but I'm always appalled by how stupid his comparisons are. Every comp says "Hayward" or "Parsons".

The reason why I loved Layman was because he is an athletic and big wing who can shoot it. That's really all he is though. He doesn't have extremely dynamic athleticism (lateral foot-speed is still a question for me on him. I'd like to see him guard high level NBA wings), but he is explosive and powerful if he doesnt have the ball. The only thing I dislike about him as a prospect was that his wingspan wasn't great.

My comparison for him is Trevor Ariza. I don't think his defensive ceiling is as high as Ariza's, but they are similar players to me. If you ask either of them to be playmakers they are going to fail hard. Just ask them to run, finish, shoot 3's, and defend and you have a great role player. It's a complete joke to compare him to Parsons or Hayward because those are two very dynamic players who can playmake. To compare them is pretty obviously just a comparison based on being a tall white athletic wing player.

Could he develop his game further? Yes, I think it's very possible. Whenever I watched him in Maryland I always felt like he was more talented then he was willing to show, like he was shy and didnt want the pressure of being a creator. It would take a lot of work and a complete change in his mindset and approach to basketball.
Click to expand...
If you compared rookie Parsons to Parsons now, it wouldn't sound right.. Layman can dribble and has a good feel, that's the minimum. At least he has that.
 
BonesJones said:
If you compared rookie Parsons to Parsons now, it wouldn't sound right.. Layman can dribble and has a good feel, that's the minimum. At least he has that.
Click to expand...
Did you watch Parsons at Florida? He was a Point Forward and had the ball a lot as a primary playmaker on that team. I fully agree I wouldnt have expected Parsons to be what he is now, but his progression makes sense. Everyone knew he could create and be dynamic, but his shooting was a big question and his ability to score.
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
Did you watch Parsons at Florida? He was a Point Forward and had the ball a lot as a primary playmaker on that team. I fully agree I wouldnt have expected Parsons to be what he is now, but his progression makes sense. Everyone knew he could create and be dynamic, but his shooting was a big question and his ability to score.
Click to expand...
And like I said in the last paragraph in the first post, I think he has more ability than he regularly shows, but he his mindset and approach seems to limit that and he never looked comfortable being a playmaker when Maryland put him in those positions. That is kind of why I like comparing him to Ariza, because Ariza gives me the same feeling. He has a ton of potential with his ability, but for w/e reason it just never worked out as being a player with more responsibilities (remember when he was the man in Houston and New Orleans? It was terrible but he showed he could do stuff, but just not efficiently at all).

And just overall question his willingness to change his role into something more prominent and expand his skillset given that he was pretty much the same player in college from his Sophomore to Senior year. If Harkless continues being inconsistent I would start giving Layman some of his minutes.
 
Layman compares himself to Hayward and Ariza. I actually think he's more explosive than Ariza. The parsons comp make sense if were just talking about being a third option/better pro than college player.

As for lateral movement, he had one of the better shuttle times at the combine. I think what he needs to improve on is his strength, but he already looks bigger than he did in summer league.
 
Did we just see our future starting sf? Man, this eases the pain of losing a lot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top