The clearest difference between the 09/10 and 10/11 teams is Brooks was at his peak in 09/10, while being complemented by one of the top backup PGs in the league. Meanwhile in 10/11, Lowry split time being backed by an undrafted rookie, one of the worst backup PGs in the league, and nobody. Yet as you've stated, we still performed better in 10/11 as measured by the more advanced metrics. Imagine if Lowry simply had an average backup, if Brooks could just play up to his mediocre self of yesteryears, the results would have been an even more drastic upgrade over 09/10.
1) We had KMART for an entire year, not 22 games, last year. 2) We had Ariza in 09-10, the worst SF in all of the league it seems like. Probably still is despite playing with the best PG in the league in Chris Paul. Basketball is a team sports. Everybody who plays significant minutes contribute to winning. Trevor Ariza and his 39% shooting while playing 37 minutes a game really didn't help with that.
How did we do in those 22 games? Yes, TA was our starting SF of that team and he played 37 minutes per game that year. Are you telling me he didn't "help" the team? Is it embarrassing when you start contradicting yourself?
Gosh, did you even watch that season? One player won Most Improved Player. The other player got trashed by his own fans and around the league. I'm not contradicting myself, maybe you don't even have a sense of reality around the league in that 09-10 season. Um yea, you expect a team to do well immediately after a trade. See the heat with 3 superstars and still got off to a .500 start. Really? I'm just going to stop right now. Guess the hate for Brooks on here is too strong to have any kind of discussion, when some people don't even admit the guy played well for us in 09-10.
Playing a PG position and dishing dimes does not make you an actual point guard, just someone trying to play that role. Brooks playing PG was always awkward to watch, kind of like watching your first son playing with Barbie dolls instead of catch. It is still my firm assertion that he is an undersized shooting guard playing out of position due to being too short. He played hard. I agree and recognize that for him. Which is is also why I have been nice about my words for him after he walked out on the team. To call him a good or even decent PG however, is a stretch. He was never a good PG, just a good scorer. I never mentioned anything about Lowry being our primary option and I agree that Brooks wasn't and shouldn't be. However, that did NOT stop him from trying to play like he was. He played a very selfish style of basketball. It is undeniable and of no surprise that the offense instantly looked better when Lowry was manning the reigns. My point here, however, was that saying he is a starting PG on a championship team is simply a feel good statement without any substance. You can put any halfway decent player into the PG role on a championship caliber team and still have them succeed. On the flip side, you can also argue that since the Rockets are obviously NOT a championship caliber team, there is no point in having AB as our starter. There is nothing productive that comes out of us hanging around together focusing about all the good things AB did, because everyone knows what his strengths are. It's not like it's that hard to summarize his strengths. They were speed and shooting. That was it. His weaknesses greatly affected the team much more than his strengths did, especially when our roster no longer needed his strengths. AB is like Franchise in mentality, only he did not have the athleticism to finish at the rim. Both were score first players quick on the trigger and eager to dribble out the shot clock. Both were not the same after injuries. Both never lacked heart usually, but lacked brains or at least discipline.
When your "sense of reality" is built on 20 POINTZ PER GAMEZ and Most Improved Player aka the Bobby Simmons award, you should know that you are on shaky ground.
I guess I shouldn't talk to a guy who guarantees that Marcus Morris will be the best player on a championship team. That's a great sense of reality isn't it?
I was going to post again to argue further with you further, t_mac1, but it seems like you have your hands full at this point. I'd just like to say that Brooks is/was overrated. We are not taking away from his 09/10 season - we are just appraising it as it is meant to be appraised. In this case, it was an overrated season. One more thing, the following players would like a word with you regarding your "worst small forward in the league comment" with respect to Ariza: Dorell Wright Travis Outlaw Shane Battier (yeah I said it) Omri Casspi Terrence Williams Jamario Moon Corey Maggette Ersan Ilyasova ...
Honestly, that makes more sense to me from a talent and potential perspective than one that involves Brooks in our starting PG spot for any long periods of time. Morris has the ability to create mismatches inside and outside against a ton of SF's and PF's and played good D in college. I will take more to heart with that, than the complete lack of effort on D that I usually saw from Brooks.
I do agree Brooks overachieved that year. He's overrated to those who think he's an all-star player, which he will never be. And yes, we overachieved in that 09-10 season. Ariza is the worst starting SF in the league that year primarily b/c of his responsibilities (he had a top 2 player for a team-type of responsibilities) and he failed so miserably at it. And it's also great to note that he still shoots 39% playing with Chris Paul, the best PG in the league. But I'm biased, and may not be fully objective in regards to this guy b/c I disliked him so much when he played for us. No it doesn't. Do you know what it takes to be the best player on a championship-winning team? Outside of the Detroit Pistons' fluke year, most if not all have been a certified superstar. AB was a starting PG, and probably will start for some team down the line.
What do you know about reality when you've admitted to hardly ever seeing the guy play? You are right, you should probably stop talking when you start pulling stuff out of your ass, which is right about now.
Many scouts saw him play, and see him in person. His coaches, scouts, nor Morey have ever made that claim, or anywhere close to that vicinity of belief. So no, I'll trust them instead.
Look you can try to argue this all you want, but you will be hard pressed to find many who will or still agree with you. History has proven you wrong about AB, so move on. If AB wants to become a good PG, he needs to realize the responsibilities of that position and the weaknesses and flaws of his own play. Lowry understood this. He realized he couldn't play human bowling ball full time as a starter and scaled that back. He realized (not much surprise here) that his shot was horrible and worked hard to improve it. Aside from his performance scaling with the increase of minutes (this was expected by Lowry supporters), AB actually improved very little from year to year. I will say it again and for the last year, as much as AB wants to play the PG role, he did not do good in that role and until he drastically changes the way he approaches the game, he will never be a good PG.
He was a good PG in 09-10, and Morey said that many times throughout that season that year, along with Adelman. Hell, a lot of the NBA landscape argued whether or not he should be included in the discussion of one of the "best" PGs in the league at the end of that year. So if he has his head on straight and works hard, he'll be a good starter again. What history does tell me is Brooks can't handle when times are tough, and will whine/pout/sulk. If he continues that attitude and thinks he "deserves" things, he'll be a bench player for a long time, and will be out of the league sooner than he anticipates. Disagreements are bound to happen. It's a discussion board. If people think what I'm saying is wrong, that's fine. I don't expect a lot of people to agree with me on this b/c many are still sour on what happened last year. And it's very understandable why people are on the Lowry bandwagon. I like him a lot too.
Right, that explains why plenty of people, some in this very thread, argued for Lowry to start even on the heels of a career year for Brooks over a year ago. Anyone who disagrees with you must be sour grapes, as opposed to because of your shallow arguments that hold little water for anyone with an ounce of actual basketball acumen. Very DDesque of you.
And I mentioned this earlier, and you failed to respond. Many people on here also clamored to start Deke over Yao a few years back. And it wasn't a few people either. So how would you respond to those people? Just b/c a group of people argued for one thing doesn't mean it's right, is it? I mean, many people also said CBud was going to blossom in his 2nd year, and be a future all-star. So does that mean they were right? You have been on this board long enough to understand we pick a scapegout every year (it was Stevie, to TMAC, to Yao, to Artest, then to Brooks). Next year, it'll be unfairly KMART or Lowry or one of our top players. I didn't say people who disagreed with me are sour grapes; I said those people may still be sour from what happened with Brooks last year and how he handled his situation. But Lowry is our PG now. And he's a very good one. Let's simply hope for the best.
He has the ability to be great. You can say that about most NBA players. Does he have the intelligence, maturity, and discipline to take it to the next step as a real PG? That is the real question. You argue that he was a good PG. I disagree strongly with that. 20/5 was a deceptive stat line. I feel he is a good, but undersized SG trying to play a PG role and his performance last year never did anything to prove me otherwise. He can either try to improve and expand his game like Curry has been trying to do, or resign himself to a spark off the bench role like Terry or Nate Robinson. Besides, any scorer that holds the ball as much and long as he does, should have 20 PPG and 5 dimes, especially on a team that had no "scorers" outside Scola and Ariza. That was the situation where he was putting up decent numbers; playing his own style of selfish basketball on a team devoid completely of true scorers.
I never said he has the ability to be great, b/c Brooks does not. He completely overachieved in 09-10. That statline is reserved for some of the better players in this league borderline all-star status, which Brooks isn't. Good is not great. There is a HUGE gap b/t good and great. If you did not think Brooks was a good PG that year, how would you rate him in that particular season of 09-10? I thought he was a little bit more than good that year. Stephen Curry has the ability to be an all-star player; he has more skills and talents and size that Brooks simply does not and will never have. AB's usage rating was 25.9 in 09-10. So no he didn't "ballhogged" if that is what you're trying to claim here. And if I remember correctly in 09-10, that team had great team chemistry--arguably the best in the league, so I don't think Brooks played his own "style of selfish" basketball that you're claiming. Brooks was a good player for us (take out that pathetic 10-11 season). Nothing more, nothing less. He wasn't a bad player for us at all.
Who said he was bad? He was mediocre. "Fool's gold". Befitting of his jersey number, he was as net zero as can be.
