Let's assume for the moment that Lowry is putting up 25 ppg/12 apg/11 rpg/ 2 spg on 55%/45%/85% shooting. At the trade deadline, Brooks' trade value will be roughly 1/35 of Lowry's, due to Brooks' lackluster defense and poor foul-drawing.
Yao didnt dominate that series, your again spewing nonsense. Its not about me picking favorites, I just understand the significance of having a player who can get his own shot at will. He's the most aggressive player on our team and has proven to be the most clutch. YouR undervalue of him doesnt register after seeing him improve his game every year. Replacing him with a traditional pass first never shoot point guard is not what this team needs in a conference where other teams are LOADED at guard. We need a point guard that will bring it to his opponent every single night. This a new age of basketball, your John Stockton days are over
Portland tried to single-cover Yao in game 1, Yao dominated them so badly he won game 1 by halftime. Portland then doubled Yao before he even touched the ball for the rest of the series and Yao still dominated them for most of the other five games. I have no idea what series you are remembering. What I want to know is where the Brooks jockers got the notion that Brooks was suddenly the most clutch player on the Rockets team. If anything Brooks is the least clutch player on the Rockets. How quickly people forget the first-game-winner mini-celebration in the win over Denver late last season when Brooks hit the long range 2-point leaner with a hand in his face (a game in which Scola was hands-down the most valuable player). Brooks had never in his entire career hit a game-winner before he hit that shot late last season, and it was a horrendous shot fading away with a defender in his face where he just flat out rather take an ultra-low-percentage shot than pass. Literally every Rocket on the floor could have had a higher percentage shot than the shot Brooks took if only Brooks learned what "pass when you can't get a good shot" meant, but he wanted to break the "never hit a game winner" curse. It just goes to prove that, if you take enough bad shots which cost your team the game 90% of the time (and boy, did Brooks ever take and miss a lot of those), you will eventually get lucky once. For the record, Stockton had multiple seasons where he posted 17+ ppg/14+ apg. And the guy averaged 60.8 TS% over his career playing until he's 40. Brooks' career TS% is 53.8. If Brooks ever breaks 60 TS% for a season even once he'll be laughing in his sleep. There is this thing called knowing when to pass and when to shoot. Until Brooks learns that his true value will never be that high.
I think AB's new contract depends largely on what Yao's going price will be after the season. I don't think there is any possible way Les allows him leave (whether its best for the team or not) unless it is Yao's adamant decision to leave. He's making $17 million this year. I say we give each half of that, $8.5 million.
I think of AB as a smaller, quicker Jason Terry. He's not really a PG, in that he is not a natural play-maker, and much like Terry, I feel on a really good team his best fit is as instant offense off the bench. Dallas has been very successful using Terry this way for years by always pairing him with a big PG (DHarris, Kidd). On this team, and most teams, I feel his value is not quite the same as other PGs who score as easily as AB (18 PPG+) because his defensive and play-making liabilities cannot be masked by a truly complementary backcourt-mate. His size makes it impossible to play SG full-time unless he's paired with a very big PG, like Jason Kidd. The Rockets like to have Lowry fill that role for 8-10 minutes a game, but Lowry can't really guard most shooting guards (unlike Kidd), and is nowhere near the scorer AB and Martin are, so we lose something on offense and defense. When Brooks and Martin play together, there is not a true play-maker on the court, and both players are weak defensively, so to me, there is not an ideal lineup that maximizes Brooks' strengths and minimizes his weaknesses. I think most other NBA teams would view him similarly. However, as a centerpiece to a deal for Chris Paul, I think he would be very enticing to a Hornets team that would be starting from scratch by giving up their cornerstone player. While nowhere near the overall player and PG, he could instantly replace Paul's scoring and provide them with a building block towards starting over. Plus, with the Hornets financial limitations, having a young player they could lock up for several more seasons at a reasonable price ($7-9M per year) after the new CBA is in place could give AB more value in their eyes, as compared to other teams. With Collison moved to Pacers as part of New Orleans' effort to entice Paul into staying, they do not have a clear successor in place, and I think AB is about the best they could hope to acquire in a trade with anyone. Other than a deal for Paul, I would not be looking to move AB, but long term, I feel his best value for a true contender would be in a role off the bench similar to what Terry does for Dallas.
There's only one man in the entire league that Brooks humiliates more than Fisher, and his name is..............Steve Blake! :grin:
brooks is basically a glorified steve blake. he chucks a lot of 3's and hits them at a decent rate, but his midrange game is nonexistant, and for a guy with his quickness he should be able to get in the lane at will.
Unlike some, I don't think your need high assist #s from a PG under RA's system. M. Bibby in his 6 years under RA averaged right around 5.4 assists a game. T. Parker, a guy many compare Brooks to, averages 5.7 assists a game. If Brooks can duplicate those #s I would be just fine with that. With so much movement in our offense and assists piling up from various other positions, Brooks does not need to be a Nash, CP3, or Williams for us. I do think Brooks needs to be a better facilitator but its ludicrous to think his value to the team is not high just because he's not going to average 8-10 assists a game. As such, I do think he deserves, and will get, close to 8-10 mil a year, depending on the year he has.
While I agree that Brooks was no Parker when getting in the lane in finishing / passing, he was pretty darn good at getting there last year. And many games, he made it look easy. And his mid range game nonexistant? I actually remember that was the part of his game that showed me quite a bit of improvement, and a contributing factor to why he averaged almost 20 ppg and netted himself the most improved player award last year. In fact, I distinctly remember him knocking down a couple of game tying / winning mid range jumpers last year. And to compare his to a S. Blake, a career 7.5 ppg with a <i>career high of 11 points ppg </i> is just absurd.
So much idiocy from Brooks haters, and the YOFs haven't even come back yet. And they're really going to be on a mission this year, with Yao being limited and them having taken a full year off to rest up. I can't wait.
And to compare his to a S. Blake, a career 7.5 ppg with a <i>career high of 11 points ppg </i> is just absurd.[/QUOTE] Nice Ownage!
Look, I'm all for keeping Brooks because honestly it's hard not to root for him, but if a team like CHA, PHI or IND is struggling and are willing to part with their star wings, I wouldn't even hesitate to include Brooks in a package.
False. Talked with Morey this morning, he explained to me that decisions are never made without consulting the Clutchfan's pulse.
