Please lock if this has been posted. I think against quick PGs, Brooks is the solution. In tonight's game again Suns, Brooks should be given a shot while reducing Alston's minutes. Nash is the engine of the fast paced Suns. Shutting down Nash will shut down Suns. We all know that, but we have to give a try. Article link: http://rockets.realgm.com/articles/85/20071123/point_guard_solution_rests_on_bench/ Point Guard Solution Rests On Bench? Authored by Dennis Silva II - November 23, 2007 - 3:12 pm The Houston Rockets have problems. Not as many problems as some have suggested, but surely more problems than a team who was considered by many to be a title contender would like to have. As of Thursday, Nov. 22, the Rockets are 6-6. They have lost five straight games, and only half of their wins have come against elite teams – Utah, San Antonio and the LA Lakers. They are 0-3 with Tracy McGrady out of the lineup (surprise, surprise), and they still seem to have the same issues as last season. Offensive inefficiency, a lack of production and the power forward spot, and even less production from the point guards. Rockets loyalists are confident that the offense will come around sooner or later under first-year coach Rick Adelman, whose motion, fluid sets that were so successful in Sacramento have been the basis of a lifeless, mundane offense in Houston. For the benefit of the doubt, fine. After all, it’s yet to have been even a month, though the Rockets will learn eventually that their lack of scoring punch (94.8 points per game, 23rd in the NBA; 43 percent field goal shooting; 30 percent 3-point shooting) is courtesy of a lack of playmakers and shot-makers than anything time can solve. The power forward quandary is also hopeless at this point as well. Luis Scola was a fine addition, but he has proven to be far from the answer at the “4” spot, which should have been known. Apparently, Adelman and new GM Daryl Morey were content to pair Scola with the one-dimensional and undersized Chuck Hayes, whose effort and determination is admirable, but also is someone who is clearly not starter material for a team expected to be amongst the league’s best. But, the fact remains that there is no immediate help available, barring a trade that is unlikely to occur when a team has yet to even put together a complete game. The point guard problem, however, is perfectly solvable. The Rockets desired point guard help in the offseason to reduce Rafer Alston’s minutes. Alston is an above-average playmaker and controls the ball well, but his shooting is porous and his shot selection is questionable, particularly for a floor leader. Mike James was acquired to bring some of the offensive punch to the spot, but he has been a disappointment. James has done nothing to squelch “rumors” of his selfishness and penchant for going one-on-one at the most inopportune of times. His 36 percent shooting from the floor (not to mention 24 assists compared to 14 turnovers) has been disappointing, and he does little to help the team elsewhere. But, lo and behold, the Rockets’ answer to the lack of play at the point is buried deep on their bench. With James and Alston severe underachievers at this point, and the hyped return of Steve Francis running out of fumes with each DNP-CD (Did Not Play-Coach’s Decision), it might be wise for Adelman to give rookie dynamo Aaron Brooks a look. In Adelman’s offense, the point guard needs to be able to create for himself and others, hit open shots, lead a break, and stay in front of his man. All of which are attributes that Brooks boasts. The 6-0, 160-pounder had a brilliant collegiate career at Oregon, averaging 13 points and 4.1 assists while proving himself to be one of the best 3-point marksmen in the game. Yes, the NBA game is vastly different from college, but that’s not the point. The point, no pun intended, is that Brooks has a reputation as a scoring floor leader who can shoot for a high percentage and has been a winner. Why not test those traits on the pro level, especially this early in the season when experiments can afford to be executed? Brooks would thrive against teams like Phoenix and Dallas; clubs that embrace an open floor attack and whose speed and elusiveness at the point positions often end up overwhelming that of the Rockets’. If nothing else, take five minutes apiece from James’ (23.7 minutes per game) and Alston’s (28.5) floor time, and award Brooks the opportunity to see what he can do. He has the potential to be an offensive sparkplug for an improved bench corps that includes the inside prowess of players like Scola and Bonzi Wells. What Brooks has to offer certainly couldn’t be worse than the Rockets have now. And while the fact that it’s still early in the season proves to be in the Rockets’ favor in regards to their slow start, they also have another advantage. The solution to at least one of their primary problems resides on their very own bench.
Unintelligible jibberish. Brooks will get his chance... RA hand-picked him - so he will play down the line sometime. Scola looks better and better with the season progressing. He will be our answer at 4 and complements Yao beautifully. Of course Dwight Howard would complement Yao slightly better, but uhhhh.
No kidding. Let's see...Luis had to: -change his game -give up his BEST offensive weapon in posting up -adjust to a new set of basketball rules -adjust to a new country Yet, he's still improving. It's only been 12 games...you can even say it's only been 6 games for Scola considering how many times he's gotten in foul trouble. Scola still has the chance to be the PF of the future. We have yet to see him as a legit post OPTION, once we see that, sky's the limit for him. But to say he's PROVEN to fail as the future? Where do I apply as a RealGM writer
I don't agree either with the RealGM writer on the Scola part. Scola has been played better and better. He is a real deal.
Yeah. Didn't you know a rookie has reached his full potential by the 12th game of his career?! This dumba$$ article sounds like someone already had their Rockets story made up in their mind but they were a little short on legit examples so they just invented some. I wonder how many teams have added 4 new rotation players (Bonzi, Scola, James and Francis), a new coach and a brand new, complex offense and just exploded out of the gate with a great record? I doubt many if any have.
It may be a cruel thing to do, but I would throw Brooks in there tonight. Steve Nash is no defensive wizard, let's see what the youngster is made of. You never know until you try. The Rockets are going to get waxed anyway, send in Brooks and tell him to watch TMac, feed Yao, and take the open shot.
I am certainly in favor of developing brooks but not against nash. nash would destroy him. just because brooks is quick doesn't mean he will know how to defend him. nash is a pretty crafty vet and brooks is a rookie. I know brooks is a competitor but there is no reason to throw him out there to get slaughtered by nash. and if anything I think we should cut james' playing time in favor of brooks. granted rafer's shot sucks but at least he gets the ball up the court and gets it to our best players...something that cannot be said of james at times.
I totally hate articles from real gm. -They use horrible reasoning. -They are incorrect half the time. -They are purely either speculation or the writers opinion. -They use spewed facts. But yeah, Brooks has a shot next year, but the rookie isn't getting any minutes in our back-court.
While I agree that Brooks can offer us many answers, I don't think he is ready to slow down Steve Nash. Let's get real here. Maybe he could put some pressure on Nash to play defensive, but getting his feet wet should maybe come against some easier teams to build his confidence. With that said, I hear that he is an even better 3 pt shooter than Steve Novak (not that Novak ever showed us much in a real game; when he did get in). Steve Francis is still our answer right now at point. I like Mike James off the bench as scoring punch, but although I think he shot will get better over the season; I don't think he ability to lead the offense will when it comes to his decision making and ability to handle the ball-in say double teams. Steve is a more dangerous weapon offensively against smaller quicker guards like Nash, Parker, Terry, etc., because he can still penetrate on them as well as post them up. He can also get offensive rebounds against them. So while he may still get beat to the hole sometimes against them, I think he will be closer to them than Rafer would, and he will rebound and put more pressure on them from his offensive game. That dudes comments about Scola are a joke. Like some people on this forum, I think he may just be spouting something ridiculous to get attention to his article. That being said, he is right about Chuck Hayes. He can't be your starter on a team that expects to contend for a title. If Adelman keeps Chuck as the starter all season, don't expect us to do well in the playoffs if Chuck is getting the majority of the minutes.
It seems to me the writers at realgm tend to not know what they are talking about. Would you seriously say aaron brooks' collegiate career was BRILLIANT? I mean the guy seems to have the skills necessary to become an nba point guard but he is undersized. While that provides a great speed burst i think it is best saved for explosiveness off the bench. You would think you would want someone with more experience possibly commiting less turnovers running the big show which is why rafer alston is still starting(not that i love rafer or anything). I still think they need to go with steve at least once...
We are 8-7. This isn't time to give a rookie some minutes just for the sake of giving him minutes. It isn't out of line to say every game is a must win for this team if it wants to climb back toward home court advantage in the first round. That means no time to try to "season" rookies. Let's hope for a blowout so Brooks and Landry can get some minutes. Both guys look like they could be big contributors down the road.
