you can call him inconsistent but your standards just aren't actually that realistic for what you expect in a shooter who is nothing more than a role player. His %'s are as good as they are because he really is a good shooter. And all good shooters go through up and down spells I mean being the one trick pony he is, is the reason why he hasn't surpassed the G-league since he left. He's improved since by extending his range but time will tell how the rest of his game can be seen on an actual nba floor. Which this is the very first time ever
Okay, a couple points. First, 37.5% is pretty solid as it is a TS% of nearly 57%. Second, you have to look at the number of attempts Brooks was taking and the difficulty of the shots. Brooks was taking 10 3-point shots a game in only 3 minutes a game. In the G-League Brooks led the league in three point field goals attempts, taking nearly 25% more than anyone else. In college Brooks was a career 39% three point shooter on high volume. Brooks is also not someone that only takes set three point shots, he takes pull ups, he takes shots 5 feet behind the line.
I based my initial comments of his UH numbers where he wasn't a role player. I have acknowledged that I haven't seen him in the G-League, only at UH (somehow that offended you). Do you agree that he wasn't a role player at UH? He was a starter and played consistent minutes so I doubt that you'd disagree. Do you agree that he was very inconsistent at UH? I posted his numbers, he was very up and down. Do you dispute the numbers? If you disagree with either of those then show me something factual to disprove either one. If you agree with both then you're agreeing with exactly what I said. He shot a good percentage overall but he was inconsistent from game to game. As I said, I didn't see him play a single game in the G-League. Maybe he's improved on the consistency over the last 2 years. I've said in most every post on the matter that he hasn't played enough in the NBA to make a determination on him long term. I'm not sure what exactly you're disagreeing with.
he was still a role player at UH up until his last year. His soph year, the team featured rob gray, corey, and devin. He very much was nothing more than a compliment to how those guys played game to game. His jr year was the only season he played over half the game and being relied upon as your 2nd guy and had the ultimate green light I acknlowdge hes up and down. never said he wasn't. But I also know that's what life is as a shooter. There's no such thing as a 40% shooter every single night. The difference here is your expectations.
Nobody has said he should be 40% every night. If you feel I said that then please point out where I said it. As I've said multiple times, the issue is the amount of variance with Brooks. I posted numbers for the really good shooters showing the percentage of bad shooting games. Brooks had a history of having a high number of those bad shooting games. Do you not believe that consistency is important? Does that make sense? It's ok to have a bad shooting night, but not 3 out of every 10 games ( which is what he did his junior year...and his sophomore year...and his freshman year). Did he improve during his G-League days? I have no idea but I do hope he did.
yeah you posted the numbers of guys who are featured every night and are the teams best players in the NBA. That isn't nearly in the same realm of what Brooks is I could also name a bunch of Bmac's, Ryno's, PJ's who have ups and downs just like Armoni. There's way more of those guys on the bench in the NBA which is what he's looking at in the league. Like I said life of a shooter and understanding standards and expectations relative to who you're talking about
I did refer to those guys as "great shooters" , right? And many of those guys are taking a huge volume of 3s which makes it tougher to maintain your percentage. Great shooters are great shooters. Would you prefer that I quote numbers for guys like Desmond Bane? Again, my only observation was about Brooks at UH. I have repeatedly said that we can't draw judgement on what is now. In his 3 years at UH he was 4th, 2nd and 1st in 3 point attempts and in all three years he was inconsistent. Again I'll ask, what's your point? Are you saying that Brooks has now gained consistency? Or are you saying that it's ok for him to have 25% to 30% of games where he can't shoot?
37.5 would make him 4th best on the Rockets lol. Better even than Rockets legend/3 point shooting champion Eric "Splash" Gordon
I said from the beginning your expectations aren't exactly realistic for Armoni which is what we are talking about. The ups and downs or inconsistent which is what you seem to love to keep bringing up comes with the territory of being a shooter like so many of the NBA role players in the league Desmond Bane falls into that same line of Bmac's, PJ's I was referring to
BTW - GLeague is a terrible comparison, IMHO, they don't play defense in this ME ME ME league. Totally with you there, and at a much lower price, but Gordon is also a solid defender.... DD
I get your overall point. But in my opinion, a high percentage streaky shooter is better than a mediocre consistent shooter. 1. A streaky shooter can singlehandedly win you a game by his hot shooting. (A high percentage shooter with a lot of bad shooting nights means that he also has a lot of lights-out shooting games.) A mediocre consistent shooter is rarely a winning factor with his shooting. 2. A streaky shooter can disappear in a game when he is cold. But even then, he still commands defensive respect and helps spacing. Defense will always worry about a great shooter catching fire even in a bad shooting game.
Eric Gordon can get to the line and finish in traffic, although irregularly for the last 2-3 years with his injury history. It remains to be seen if Armoni Brooks will be able to do that.