I haven't really followed this, but even if Brooks helped us more in 09/10 than Lowry did in 10/11.....so what? We deal with the reality of now, and that reality says that Brooks stunk it up and Lowry didn't. Now, it is possible that Brooks goes back to his 09/10 form and Lowry goes back to sucking like he did at the beginning of the year. But I don't believe for one minute the former will actually happen. Brooks's value, I think for that team, came because he provided offense for a team that with Battriza and Hayes not having really learned offense, didn't really have any. Martin's arrival and the departure of the offensively incompetent Ariza for Lee, changed all that, especially since Martin is even better at the offensive game than Brooks, and the two cannot work together with their defensive problems. Consequently, Lowry fit better with the 10/11 team, and thus is better for the team. It's similar to the fact that while Artest was awesome for us in the 08/09 season, the Rockets would have been completely r****ded to have continued to keep him.
The point of that is because an overwhelming amount of the posts on here are simply saying Lowry > Brooks at any point. I simply don't think that's the case.
Well, I’m not a “son”, but you’re pretty sensitive for someone who apparently is one, lol. And it’s nice you seemed to learn a little something from jordnnnn. He has a lot of patience.
It doesn't matter if Lowry > Brooks. I never got into that argument of who was the better player. My point here was simply for a few posters to recognize what Brooks did in 09-10 was pretty damn good, considering the role he was put in, and the circumstances surrounding the team (no Yao/TMAC/Artest - he was our playmaker/go-to player pretty much). But apparently, many think he was a "mediocre" player. There was a reason Brooks started again in 10-11 to start the season (for those who believed Lowry > Brooks that year), and he would continue to start had he not sulked/whined/and pouted and play like he did in 09-10. But he sucked in 10-11.
To be fair, my response was to Koj. i was stating in another post that I agreed with what you were saying earlier about what roles each had for the team.
Tell me when a team keyed in on Lowry like teams did on Brooks in 09-10. I've watched many games where Brooks simply was given the ball to bail out the teams, teams double him on the perimeter b/c they couldn't deal with his quickness. There is a reason Lowry gets wide open 3pt shots on a consistent basis (or jumpers in general). If you take PPS to determine a player's scoring ability, then I guess you would assume Kevin Martin is a better scorer than Kobe, BY FAR. But guess what? Kobe draws double/triple teams from all over, Kevin does not. Lowry's job isn't to be a top scorer on our team, never was and never will. His job is to create for others, and get shots when it's there. His role is completely different from AB in 09-10, who was asked to score (b/c we didn't have a Kevin Martin for most of the year; and Ariza shot a sub 40%) more to pick up the slack for the loss of Yao/TMAC/Artest. And he faced tougher defenses since he was our #1 perimeter option; he was the only guy on the perimeter who can draw multiple defenders. AND he was also asked to create, which he struggled with at times, but he was pretty adequate. Lowry is a better all-around player than Brooks, outside of scoring. Brooks is in the newer mold of PGs who used their ability to score to make plays for others. Hopefully he learns from Nash how to balance both, he'll regain his place in this league. No it's not. But it's a good start to any discussion when talking about a player, or comparing players. Advanced stats, among other handful of factors are then useful if you're comparing players who are so similar in their basic statline. What I have been saying for many posts isn't that advanced stats aren't useful. They are, when used appropriately. But the basic statline can also tell you a lot already about a player's ability, when you take into account their role on a team and what they are asked to do. Answer me this please, as I proposed to Cxbby and he still never responded to this. What statistic(s) did Morey use to justify him going after Bosh and offering him max money? If Brooks wasn't, he would not enter the next season as the starter, with Morey declaring him as championship-starting caliber PG.
Why do you keep harping on this notion about Brooks having this huge responsibility as the playmaker of the team in 09-10 when people have proven you wrong with AST%’s? Anyone who watched the games can see Brooks is not a playmaker in any way, shape, or form. His assists usually come after he drives himself into trouble and is forced to pass the ball, not because he ran any kind of play. He had one responsibility only, to score. And he did it well, but also ended up giving up a ton of points on the defensive end as well. On the other hand you say Lowry’s offensive achievements last season aren’t as impressive because he was the third option and Brooks was the first. Well, what about the fact that on top of being a third option scorer Lowry created plays, busted his ass on the defensive end, AND hustled for every rebound, loose ball, or charge? I would argue that he gives himself more responsibility than Brooks had as a starter and his better all-around game is much more conducive to helping the team win. He did, after all lead the best offense in Rockets history last season. Morey may have said what he did about Brooks, but if he really valued him that much then he would have kept him and paid the dough for a championship level player. That is what Morey keeps saying he’s trying to do, build a championship caliber team. Let’s face it, Morey’s plan all along was to pimp Brooks’ trade value, and hope the 20/5 stat line and MIP award would make him the centerpiece in trading for a star last season. Didn’t quite happen that way because Brooks got hurt and then decided to be a douche, but it is what it is.
Based on his reputation and his army of statisticians, I would say that it is nothing short of fact to say that he based his evaluation of Chris Bosh on more than just PTS/REBS/ASTS/FG%. That's the point, isn't it? Advanced statistics paint a more complete picture of a player than your basic box score. Certainly, it is still developing, but it is already a much better tool in player evaluation than box scores could ever hope of being. You pointed out that box scores are good starting points. I agree with you completely. However, when has a complete analysis ever ended with a good starting point? When has an evaluation ever ended where it began, regardless of how amazing that beginning was? Based on advanced statistics, which offer a much stronger foundation on which players can be evaluated, Lowry is a more effective player than Brooks even when taking the latter's 09-10 season into account.
Chris Bosh is a decent rebounder, legitimate scorer, solid passer, and smooth jump shooter. This makes him a perfect complement to Kevin Martin or Yao Ming as he does not have to clog up the paint and can pull defenders out. Motion offense is basically built for a big man who can control the high post. He is also a definite upgrade to Scola and represents genuine star power at big. You may argue that he is not the caliber of true stars like Wade or LBJ, which is entirely true. However, he is still a legitimate star in his own right and would lure FA.
My response is.... why didn't Bosh deserve max money? He may be the biggest butt monkey in the league, but he is a significant upgrade over Scola, especially since Scola's not the greatest defender either. Furthermore, he would have been perhaps the perfect complement PF to Yao - a guy who can defend the P/R, Yao's biggest defensive weakness, and someone who can stretch things and give Yao room to operate. As we had said, the plan was to recreate the Kings. Bosh was going to be Webber, the guy who really put it together.
I'm just curious- how does being a guy who can defend the P/R help cover for Yao's inability to defend it? It's Yao's man who's the pick guy, not Bosh's.
Yao doesn't have to D up a PnR even if it is his man. Basketball is a team sport so Bosh can switch off with Yao being as he is quicker.
1) Iverson wasn't a playmaker? His ast% rate when he played PG for the Nuggets was similar to AB in 09-10. Just b/c you're not as great as the other playmakers doesn't mean you're not a playmaker. AB uses scoring to set up his passing, which is what a lot of playmakers do (again, AB isn't a pure PG by any stretch of the imagination). If you think scoring was AB's job only, then I suggest you watch the damn games over again. Just b/c you didn't think he suit the role he was given, didn't mean he didn't play that role. Using your logic, should I say Dirk isn't a big man b/c he plays like a guard? Should I judge him by the standards of a guard? He doesn't block shots, or defend the post well, and has to be hidden by zone defenses a lot of the time... Please. 2) I never said Lowry's accomplishments weren't impressive (don't put words in my mouth). In fact, it was. I'm very satisfied he is our current starting PG. I just disagree with people who claim Brooks was a mediocre player and what he did in 09-10 was "hollow" and didn't contribute much to our season that year, which is wrong. Furthermore, you have to take into account the role that Brooks played in 09-10, which was different than Lowry's role in 10-11. One was asked to be a scorer/playmaker, the other was asked to set up other guys and do the little things. And you would understand this if you know that AB played with freakin' Trevor Ariza AND Shane Battier AND Hayes on offense for most of his time on the floor. You really think that AB should be creating for Ariza and Battier???? Lowry spends most of his time with Kevin Martin AND Scola (and we added more talent than we had in 09-10 offensively--courtnee Lee for instance). 3) So you're saying Morey is a liar? So if he comes out and says Lowry is a championship-caliber starter, I would assume he's lying? Really, that's your logic? It would be nice if you can tell me then why Bosh does deserve the max after what he did 2 years ago, when he was the #1 coveted big man. I would assume every team saw his basic production of 24/11/on 50%fg as the primary reasons why (since I don't believe anyone else produced close to that statline that season). If I'm wrong on that part, then give me an advanced stat that puts him as the #1 coveted big man. Look, I enjoy advanced stats. But a lot are very misleading (unless you know the role that player is in, and the 5-man unit that player often plays for). For instance, Lowry played vs the bench players in 09-10, not the starters of the opposing team. Secondly, his role was "smaller" than Brooks in 09-10 as he was a bench player. Therefore, a raw boxscore is great b/c most of the time, that's really all you need to know. For instance, a few pages ago: I put up 2 statlines of 2 superstars in this league playing the same position. Player A: 26ppg, 7rpg, 3apg, 46%fg, 42% 3s, 1spg Player B: 27ppg, 8rpg, 7apg, 51%fg, 33% 3s, 1.6spg Would it be wrong for me to say player B is better? Because he's a better playmaker (looking at the assist number), and defense (b/c of the steals number). It may not tell the entire story if you don't see them play, but I think it's more than adequate to determine who is the better player. Obviously, advanced stats can tell more, and I agree with that. But you should only use it if their stat-line are so similar. But my point is that the basic boxscore statline is a great tool to make comparisons (apparently people think it's useless), and often is more than enough. It's not "hollow" and useless statline that tells "nothing." Also, Brooks ast% with Phoenix last year was a whopping 35%. Should I claim he suddenly become this damn good PG (Lowry was 29%), or should I say it was a product of the Phoenix system? I still don't see the logic how you can compare a bench player, to a starter (on the same team, mind you), and say this bench player was more effective. And yet going into the next season, that bench player remains a bench player. AB still played big minutes for us to start the 10=11 season before his injuries, and we all know what happened from there (since he only played 4.5 games before getting injured). You and I don't know what would happen if AB didn't get injured, and see that his starting job was lost during the injury. I do think he deserved max money. Look at his STAT-LINE. In 09-10, his statline was: 24ppg, 11rpg, 52%fg. No need to go further. If you asked any GM why Bosh deserved max money, I'm more than certain those were the primary reasons why. But then, are those stats too "hollow?"
Wow, so GMs don't ever try to raise the trade value of their players by speaking highly of them. Tmac1 is a moron.
He said that BEFORE the season started, when trade rumors didn't happen (when things were still lovey dovey and AB was our starting PG). The Brooks hype didn't die down yet from his MIP season. Here's more to what Morey said BEFORE the season, when things were good in Rocketland with Brooks: "Aaron's a 25-year overnight success," Morey said. "If you look throughout his career, through Oregon and into the NBA, he's improved every single year. This year, he gets the recognition. "But what made us decide to draft him, was he was a guy who was counted out -- too small, doesn't pass the ball enough, won't make it in the NBA," Morey said. "We felt like he had the talent to do it. He's obviously shown that. We see great things for Aaron going forward." It'd be nice if you follow the Rockets a little bit, and less time worrying about what poster is a fan of what player.
Bottom line- We all know he is a great playmaker, and has improved in that aspect as we have seen last season. His shooting is getting better but still streaky at times WHAT is most appealing and most promising, is that he has started hitting those clutch shots. That is something this team needs almost more than a legit C.
Yeah, I'm not sure what to think of that when we all know how Morey is...Actions speaks louder than words. And not going to keep arguing with someone who keeps insisting Brooks had a huge weight on his shoulders as a playmaker like that makes his stats even more impressive. Talk about a huge reach. Brooks was okay for us as a starter, but what Kyle Lowry did as a starter had a lot bigger impact, plain and simple.
How can they switch off in time if Bosh's man and Yao's man are on opposite sides of the key- how can they possibly switch in time not to leave gaping holes in the defense or to have gigantic mismatches somewhere, like a point guard on a center?
