(CHRONIC) Point guard wishes Rockets would extend contract to match his growing value

I'm not trying to convince you that Lowry is in those guys class. In fact, how many times in my prior posts do I explicitly say that those guys are better than Lowry? What I am pointing out is that you can't stop a penetrator by ignoring them and doubling on a big man. That strategy won't work. The fact that it works even less against Rose, Rondo an such isn't the point (did you notice that I again mentioned that those guys are better than Lowry?).

Who said that Lowry would bulldoze his way to the hoop every time? All he has to do is to keep the defense honest and distribute the ball. If you don't play him then he will indeed go to the hoop every time, but nobody is foolish enough to do that.

I'd rather have the ball go inside to a guy shooting a high percentage than I would have Brooks taking a lot of shots. The problem is that Brooks doesn't do a very good job of getting the ball to Yao or Martin who are our two best options.

I'll say it one more time, Brooks is a good offensive player. The problem is that he only scores, he does very little to make life easier for the guys around him. With the current make up of the team I don't believe that Brooks is going to get nearly as many shots as he did last season and if he's not shooting the ball then he isn't of much use on the court.

 

It's not just a simple case of Brooks having problems with big physical guards. That would be an exception and you could make adjustments. The problem is that Brooks has problems with all types of guards not just big ones. His defense is bad. Steve Nash's defense is also bad but he's more than makes up for it by being one of the greatest shooters and passers that ever played.


Again,I disagree that teams can sag off of Lowry to the extent that they'll pevent Yao from getting the ball. If a team backs off that far then Lowry simply drives the ball. Guys will play a step or two off of Lowry to prevent him from going past them but that's not far enough to hinder Yao.

I hear what you are saying about spacing but does Brooks give us that? Brooks doesn't get the ball to the inside guys very effectively and that's the issue. If the ball doesn't go inside then the spacing isn't a factor. If the ball does go inside then teams are forced to sell out and collapse on Yao. If that happens I'm perfectly fine with Martin, Lee , Battier or Budinger spotting up for jumpers. If the ball goes into Yao then everyone will collapse on him not just the PG.

Agreed about Ray Allen. Boston lost the series for lots of reason and Rondo wasn't very high on that list.

 

Brooks is just as good at getting the ball to Yao as Lowry is. Nowhere is it written that the PG has to make the entry pass to the post player. In fact, often in the past they will swing it around to a wing to dump it down to Yao by the baseline, then clear out so its more difficult for the opposing team to double.

Brooks is fine at getting the ball to Martin. They both play off of each other extremely well.

This is a fallacy, which keeps getting repeated as fact.

Keeping extra defenders off of Yao makes his life a TON easier.

Keeping Battier from having to try and create off the dribble after 20 seconds of failing to get Yao the ballm due to fronting, makes mine and every Rockets fans life easier.

Brooks doesnt have to take shots, its the threat of his shot that matters.

 

Read his reply to leebigez. People always freak out when someone use extreme cases to prove a point and say, "Do you really believe X is as good as Y?" They just don't understand the logic of reductio ad absurdum

There's a reason why Lowry is one of the top foul-drawers in the league.

 

LA's whole defensive approach was to stop Rondo Their bigs helped out on the penetration and made him shoot over 7 footers. Game 1 was a good example, Rondo was 6-13 from the floor for 13pts. He was 4-6 on jump shots but only shot 2-7 on layup attempts. Further LA controlled the boards which prevented Rondo from getting out in transition where he thrives.

It's wasn't as simplistic as Kobe Bryant playing off of him, it was an entire defensive effort on the Lakers part. The tradeoff was that they allowed a lot of open outside shots that unfortunately Ray Allen and others couldn't knock down.

Hopefully we reach the level where a team like the Lakers has to scheme to stop our PG. Let's face it, the primary reason that Boston even made the finals last year was Rondo. If we can have that kind of success then I'm ok with it.

 

Brooks isn't nearly as good at getting the ball to Yao..sorry. In general we suck at getting the ball to Yao. Sorry, but a PG swinging the ball around the perimeter certainly doesn't make him good at getting the ball to a big man. Anyone on the team can swing the ball on the perimeter.

Once again, I don't believe that Brooks is any more effective at keeping guys off of Yao than Lowry is. Yao is far and away the biggest offensive threat that we have and teams will still skew their defense to try and stop Yao. I know that isn't a popular idea amongst the people that have convinced themselves that Yao is going to be nothing more than a 7'6" role player from now on, but it's the truth.

Doubling with a PG isn't the way you attack Yao. The most effective way to attack Yao is to double with a big. After Portland got torched by Yao in the first half of game 1, what did they do? They put Pryzbill or Oden behind Yao and they fronted him with Aldridge. This allowed Scola to get open looks from the FT line which he knocked down.

Until we can beat the tactic of fronting Yao with a big, nobody is going to do much different. They're not going to double You with a PG or even Battier's man, they'll put both of their big guys on Yao and deny him the ball.

So, I agree that life would be easier for Yao if he get less attention from the defense, I just disagree that Brooks have any effect on that.

 

I whole heartedly disagree.

There was a reason Lowry was so inneffective in the playoffs.

 

Does anyone else think it's an insult to Coach to say Brooks can't run the offense properly? Brooks is my starting PG ,and Lowry is my backup, because that's what we see happening. Game on!

we can only dream.

Hey Aelliott, what? I wrote a spider bot to report writings from my fav posters. Made it much easier to keep up.

So, yeah I'm here; I just learned to read more, write less (or none). But just when you think you're out; they pull you back in. I've been hanging out at Feigen's blog as well. Then a month ago Jonathan emailed me out of the blue to ask if I wanted to do the chron Rockets Fan Blog. crap...can't turn that down, and Clutch gave me his blessing, so I gots to stay on top of what guys like TheFreak and Easy are saying around here...oh, and SamFisher....haha. didn't think i'd come out of the weeds this soon, but seeing your post so vigorously made it all nostalgic ... three articles a week, they said. uhhhh...ok....

 

I don't know. I believe that Adelman would be as happy to start Lowry as to start Brooks. We all know that these two guys bring very different things to the table.

To me, it's not so much which of them is better overall. (I tend to think that they are about the same overall. But it's a lot easier to appreciate Brooks than Lowry because in general it's a lot easier to appreciate scoring than other stuff.) It's whether one of them is expendable. And I think yes, with the depth we have. And Brooks is more expendable because (1) he tends to be more overvalued on the market, and (2) we now have a lot more offensive weapons than we did just a year ago.

 

Our strongest position vs the league is PG...I'm saying this while really wanting to say another position, but I'm too superstitious to mention it....knock on wood.

So, can we just keep it that way, unless we are talking about Melo.

 

Your wrong. You can definitely get away with sagging off a weak shooter. The Lakers did it to Rondo and won a championship. With Yao clogging the paint those lanes wont as free like they are with the 2nd unit. If your bigmans standing under the rim, the penetration will be less effective. Simply basketball

Bulldozing his way to the rim with a 7footer waiting for him will be his only way to be effective after being exposed for not being able to shoot. Especially with Yao. They did it to Rafer and he's a better shooter than Lowry.

First off, Martin is a shooting guard, its not Brooks job to feed Martin. Secondly, Brooks doesn't need to be the one who feeds Yao everytime. You ignore the fact we have four other capable players on the court that can feed Yao as well. Its more important Brooks knock down shots to loosen up the defense off Yao (which lowry wont do)

Your missing the point entirely. Nobody cares about Brooks "getting his shots". Its the type of shots he'll get with Yao and Martin spacing the floor on the perimeter. I don't think you fully comprehend how powerful the west is. You have teams like Dallas who have 4 or 5 capable 20 pt scorers. Why would we trade our best scorer to get a conventional point who can't knock down shots or create his own shot?

Unless you getting Chris Paul, or Deron Williams we are downgrading by moving him

 

Say what?? With all due respect, that statement is simply rediculous.

 

So you're saying if we trade Brooks straight up for either Nash, Rose, Rondo. Westbrook, Billups, or Curry we are downgrading?

GTHO!

 

Hey rock4ever, you are getting beyond ridiculous as the discussion goes on... Please stop using such a name so similar to mine. I am worried people will get confused and think we are the same person...

Hey guys!!! rock4ever NOT = RocketForever!!! Please take note!!!!!

 

...if we can afford keeping both. But I doubt it long term. That's the curse of having a GM like Morey who can stockpile young talents like bottled water.

Maybe not Melo, but I am still hoping Morey will do some magic and get us a real star. And Brooks is probably the most logical piece.

 

Lets just hope for a Phoenix Suns collapse or Bobcats collapse.

 

Actually, if you agree with me that our PG position is our strongest position (I'm sure Coach thinks so), then we really have no evidence of what Morey would do...ie consider one expendable or keep them to crush opponents 2nd team.

Of course, we can quickly say that Battier and what's his name was our strongest position last year and Morey traded one of them...but I just flat out disagree. PG was our strongest position last year, and Morey made a huge statement this summer to make sure Coach retains that.

Your most expendable player has to measured against your strongest position. Often we think the most expendable person is one of two in a so-called logjam position. btw: no camp members or Lee should be in this discussion, except as 3rd PGs not true backups to our best position. Do we really want to be mediocre to above average at every position, or do we want Brooks and Lowry to destroy the competition as a team.

Then again, every is expendable for Melo, imo. haha

 

btw aelliott,

you depressed me with your Larry Coon reference. So, do you think the CBA dispute with stop underclassmen from coming out. I'm thinking that is a agent and Union strategy/ploy. If I'm a freshman this year, and wins the title like Melo did at Syracuse, I'm going pro to lock in my rookie contract to this CBA. But I don't know. Can you say why a draft pick would want to rely on the next CBA's rookie scale? All I'm hearing from Larry is they would refrain due to a possible lock-out. Lock out is not a sure bet. The more sure bet is the current rookie scale will be better than the next,,,like extensions.

 

The only way that makes sense to me is that the talk is that rookie contracts are going to be more favorable in the CBA. And I can't imagine that.

Otherwise, wouldn't a lockout season just essentially shorten the length of their rookie contract and decrease the likelihood of sustaining an injury during that contract? Isn't that a good thing? It isn't like one cannot easily live incredibly well off 1/6th of a year's salary from a lottery pick rookie contract if need be. Meanwhile, it's not exactly like returning to College for another year is going to pay better.

 

That's exactly what I'm thinking. Lock-in to a guaranteed pro contract and don't risk injury in college. It is that simple.

I know Larry Coon from helping edit the last CBA FAQ...I'm almost thinking he is pushing the Union line for ulterior motives, which is all about contacts. I just don't understand why he'd say underclassmen would drop out of the 2011 draft for fear of the next CBA, when all these pros like Brooks are trying to lock-in extensions under the current CBA.