Wait did you watch the Jazz game and the Celtics game. With Brooks we closed and won. Without Brooks we lost
No, we won with great defense in the last minutes not because Brooks. We stopped Boston and Scola was no where near Millsap when he was hitting his jumpers time after time.
You know nothing about basketball if you think Rockets lost to Utah because of AB. We missed Hayes a lot more than him. The only guy who could stop Milsap in that game was Hayes.
The team D deserves some kudos in this game. Watching the 4th qtr, I noticed something different about the interior defense (and the perimeter d for that matter) - the rotations and movement were quick and decisive. It seemed like the Rockets owned the paint in the 4th qtr. Anytime there was a low post move by amare or others, the Rockets rotated quickly to cut the opponent off, plus the weakside help was there as well to take the cutter out. And don't get me started on how well they were stripping the ball or blocking shots. Someone slipped them the defense koolaid - I hope they keep drinking it. I know that CH had a big part in that, but he seemed to inspire the others around him to tighten up their D as well.
It's kind of funny to me, because the two games the rockets won against above 500 teams Brooks played down the stretch.
All I know is when I checked the other day - couldn't remember if it was before or after the Bucks game - it was 6.9 to 7.1, maybe 7.2. Regardless, the difference was miniscule. This, while Brooks has been playing at obviously less than 100% and working the rust off. Not saying he's a BETTER "playmaker" or assist man than Kyle, but it's MUCH closer than Lowry Lovers claim it to be. Kyle does an excellent job in transition of finding the open shooter. AB is effective in the half court sets - especially the pick and pop plays. He gets Brad Miller and Scola excellent shots due to the defenders having to play him more honestly (for the drive or pull up J).
It seemed like everybody played great defense last night, but I'm share part of that is because Chuck shut down a major point of the offense. Without Amar'e, the knicks are reduced to a bunch of jump shooters.
So the other 4 players don't count? It was all Brooks? You have to be ****ing kidding me. Martin scored 46 points yet its his fault we lost? Brooks scores 24 points , which is Martin's average, yet we won because of him? wow.......just wow.....Gettin key stops don't count? Millsap and Aldrige scorching Scola have nothing to due with the loss?
