Is there any reason why Brooks and Landry shouldn't start?

I do not get the deal of saying AB is small. CP3 is at the same size, and he is one of the best in the NBA.

All stars. Iverson
Starter of a decent team. Tj Ford(raptors), Nelson(magic).
And starters for crap teams. Robinson(knicks), lowry(griz), Telfair(twolf).

Used to be starters who are still around the league. Stoudamire, Chucky Atkins, Darrell Armstrong, Brevin Knight, Tyronn Lou,

This are some of the players who is at the same size or smaller. So if you want to say AB's skills is not good enough as a PG, okay, its a matter of opinion.
But if all you want to say is he is too small to be a starter. Then i say you better watch more basketball.

p.s. if anyone is going to say, when there is a starting PG for a champion team is shorter than 6"0? Then can i say, when is there a starting center who is taller than 7"6 that win the prize?

Answer to the above would be Avery Johnson(99) and Yao will do it this year.

Its skills not size that matters.

 

Agree with you mathloom to a certain extent about Scola, but in the Jazz series he had alot of problems finishing passes around the bucket cuz of his lack of athletism and I love Scola. Scola is your consumate warrior and a necessay piece to the big puzzle.

 

The stats say TOs would go down with Brooks and Landry replacing Alston and Scola.

Turnovers per 48 min from last season:

Alston: 3.0
Scola: 2.5
Total: 5.5

Brooks: 3.5
Landry: 1.8
Total: 5.3

The least TO prone combo would be Alston and Landry but Brooks/Landry turnover the ball less than Alston/Scola.

 

is there any reason why anyone should read this thread?

 

Chill, Phil.

Apparently, about 50 people have found a reason so far.

leebigez offers some of the better insight/analysis around here.

 

I dunno about that, he sounds like a disgruntled ex-ballplayer that never made it. His opinions to me are like when Larry Bird (me) commented one time on M.L. Carr's (leebigez) observations of the same game they watched, "Did we just watch the same game?"

He also needs to remember to use paragraphs sometimes.

It's all in fun though, at least he has objective opinions and he's way better then the blind Francis lovers or the sensitive about any criticism on that very tall center members.

 

I think Landry is going to make a huge jump this year. I was scared he would not have much after his contract was inked but he is a beast in this preseason. Looks like he has massive hunger.

AB is also looking good but I think preseason is kinder to PG's because of less defensive pressure. He has incredible ball handling skills though and with the improved IQ could be contributing much sooner than we all thought.

I hope he can give rafer a reliable backup so if Rafer's shot is off we can sit him.

 

Landry gets his contract and loses focus..... Brooks height gets him exposed........ Not only shouldn't these guys start but I still wonder if they can help as much as everyone thinks.

I worry about both of their ball handling and jump shots.

 

Yeah... exactly.

AB is not as skill as CP3... not even close. That's why CP3 is starting and AB is not.

 

Shouldnt you be comparing someone on the team with AB for comparing whom is starting? I am not saying AB is even close to Paul but still. Maybe say why Rafer is starting instead of AB because of so and so.

Rafer is a better defender. I would think Rafer knows Adelmans offense better? I think AB has better penetration skills and tag that with drawing in the big men and passing off. AB has speed on his side. They are both great dribblers. I honestly think whoever has the better 3 point shooting percent and more assist per game through out the season will end up with more time on court and if thats AB then so be it, turn your jets on *****'es!

 

Landry's explosive of the bench

Brooks if he keeps playing like he did in preseason, will just be awesome of the bench

 

Yeah... exactly.

Rafer is not as skill as CP3... not even close. That's why CP3 is starting and Rafer should not.

Errr. that logic seems flaw.

 

Rafer and Scola are much better,they have much experence

 

The per 48 minute stat can't really be applied effectively since Brooks never played even close to 48 minutes (or Landry for that matter). For the most part Landry got to finish plays, so he wasn't really in a position to turn the ball over (didn't play many games either). Scola played more minutes and was a bigger part of the offense, especially when Yao went down. It makes sense he'd have more turnovers.

The current starting lineup we're using is the most effective one on multiple levels, and that's why it is what it is.

 

AB and Landry may be starters one day, but right now is not the time for several reasons.

Rarely are rooking PG given a starting role on good, experienced teams. Yes, Parker started early and the Spurs won, but they had a history of playoff success, unlike this team. Despite flashes of what he brings, AB has also looked lost and struggled mightily at times this preseason. Let him get more comfortable with this offense and this league and eventually his mins will go up.

Having experienced players come off the bench is a plus mainly when your starters are young. A team like the Hawks would benefit from vets off the bench, but the Rox are heavy with vets on this team so they dont need to have that steady presence come from the bench.

Both Landry and AB have good players in front of them. Say what you want about Rafer but he has proven he is a steady NBA player. He is not phenomenal but he is undoubtedly an NBA starting caliber PG. Im excited to see how he does this year assuming everyone stays/gets healthy and his scoring is not needed at all. As for Scola, he too has the ability to play with the best PF in the world during international play. Now as he gets comfortable with the NBA and this team, his play should get better as well.

Lastly, its not like entire units sub out at the same time. Landry and AB will be on the floor with Yao, Tmac, Artest, Battier, and Barry at different times during games. Whether they start or not doesnt mean they only play with subs so whatever they do to supplement the stars, they will still get to do.

 

Whether or not AB and Landry deserve to be starters (and don't get me wrong, they might), they won't be. Adelman started Hayes over Scola at the beginning of the season when Scola was clearly the better player from the get go, and he SAID that he wanted to start Battier but probably won't be able to now because of the injury. Adelman is going to go with what has been winning him games.

But for those of you that still wanna talk about what he SHOULD do, here's an aspect that probably hasn't been said yet that NEEDS to be said: Think about how the change will effect the players, specifically Alston and Brooks. If you bench Alston, he will feel like Adelman has lost confidence in him and his play will get worse. With Brooks, you make him the starter and you are taking away reasons for him to play hard. Thats one less thing he has to achieve. Its a similar theory to how a person plays in a contract year compared to the first year of a contract.

With Landry and Scola this theory doesn't really hold because Scola has only been the starter for 30 odd games, but then again I'm not exactly anti-"start Landry".

 

Yes but you shouldn't measure turnovers without assists.

I understand that you were responding to a comment about turnovers only, but it's obviously important that assists be counted as well.

 

I wouldn't want then to start, because then coaches might start gameplanning for them, when they come of the bench i feel like there a great spark that the opposing coach can't handle it...especially Brooks, i bet there aren't to many coaches out there worried about him, but once we put him in they will be