Since we know Sac wanted Brooks for Artest, could we possibly start a bidding war using Brooks as the bait? Maybe see if we can still get Sac to go for a deal for Artest involving Brooks then dangle Brooks in a multi-player trade with Toronto sending back Ford and some of their swingmen? Not to mention D'Antoni is now in NY looking for speed. Not to mention Phoenix really liked Brooks coming into the draft and were going to select him to backup Nash.
I would guess Brooks' value will be highest during the trade deadline when we could potentially package him with Jackson to a team trying to get a healthy cap outlook. Hopefully Francis can make them both expendable. But I don't think we could get something totally lopsided at the moment for Brooks alone. GMs do love him though don't they.
I suspect we may have already missed our chance with Sacramento. They are apparently very pleased with Udrih. As such, I can't imagine they're nearly as interested in Brooks at this point, but I could be wrong. As for TJ Ford, I would imagine the Raptors would be THRILLED to unload Ford's monstrous albatross of a contract for expiring contracts and a younger/cheaper/healthier point guard in a similar mold.
Sure they would. That's why that trade would require them sending us something else back besides Ford's albatross contract. If we were to structure a deal for Ford involving Brooks, BJax, and perhaps other expirings, I would expect to get Ford, a re-signed Brezec, and perhaps Joey Graham or Anthony Parker, along with an exchange of first rounders as well. Anybody that Toronto is able to cut a deal with should be able to get similar assets back for expirings and a young talent.
if so many teams want him then be happy we have him. i'd like to see what kind of player he becomes in his second year before deciding if he's worth trading. what if he becomes our version of tony parker (who was also a late first round pick)?
Tony Parker is 25 years old right now. Brooks is 24. I don't think those are very comparable situations.
Brooks is our best trade bait. We could end up getting somebody that can contribute right away. Package him in a deal and we could get a really good player.
The Rockets' biggest need is a point guard. Typically getting an upgrade at PG by trading a PG is impossible. If other teams see some value in Brooks the Rockets would probably be best served by hanging onto him and seeing what kind of player he develops into. I definitely would not trade him away for a forward or SG. The Rockets need all the help they can get at point, and if by some miracle Brooks develops into a starter and can replace Alston that will solve a whole bunch of problems.
i like to keep brooks, but, if we can package brooks with someone wlse and get someone really special like artest, i will do it...
why not? sure tony might be the better player when its all said and done but if brooks in his prime (lets say in 3 years when he's 27) can match what tony did in his 3rd or 4th year then why can't we compare them? their rookie stats per minute are pretty comparable. they play a comparable style (slashing) with only one difference between the two. tat being tony is a better defender and aaron is a better shooter.
Not so sure about the defense. I think that once Brooks finds his way around the league and knows the teams and players strengths that he could be a little PITB for all our opponents. Quickness is quickness. It can be used on both ends of the floor. Watching Brooks defend AI and totally time him up defensively earlier in this year was a thing of beauty. And I have never been that impressed watching Ford play D.
Brooks will never be better than just a backup PG, TRADE HIM NOW lol, after the luther head incident i don't trust undersized guards anymore
Do you really believe Brooks has a ceiling that high? I think if Brooks had the ability to match what Parker was capable of in his 3rd or 4th season then he'd have been in the NBA years ago. That's why youth is so prized by NBA teams. 4 year college players generally don't improve THAT much. They're generally pretty near their ceiling by the time they leave college already. There are those rare few players - Chauncey Billups and Steve Nash come to mind - who don't seem to reach their potential until their late 20's or early 30's, but that's incredibly rare. I also think it's strange that people are hoping Brooks will reach the level of Parker when I'm just hoping he'll be a quaility backup point guard.
This is right on. You guys that think he's going to turn into a Tony Parker or Monta Ellis are setting yourself up for dissapointment. Aside from lack of size and strength he is way to inconsistent. This is the way he's always been since his days at U of O. I was surprised he had his breakout year his senior year and made it to the NBA. I was ecstatic when the Rockets drafted him because I went to Oregon but to be real some of you guys are severely overrating him. Our best value in terms of return is to trade him in a package and get our legit 3rd option.
Tony began playing NBA ball at 20-21 and he is now 26. Brooks is a rookie and he turned 23 in Jan. Lastly, there is nothing that compares to NBA experience. Parker had a big jump in production in his second year. Before you judge Brooks and say that he is not comparable to Parker, why dont you wait and see how he plays in his second year. I think Brooks will be much better next year and will have a similar jump in production to what Parker had in his second season. For that reason I think the Rockets should hold on to him for at least one more season.
Actually, he started playing in 01-02 at age 19. You are right about his current age however. Tony Parker is 26. In fact, he turned 26 today! My bad. I didn't have it marked down on my calender. I didn't even send a card. Born: May 17, 1982 You are also correct about Brooks being 23. I must have mixed his age up with that of Carl Landry. Regardless, I stand by everything else I said. To expect the jump Tony Parker made after a year in the league at age 19 just seems absurd to me. I agree NBA experience is important, but historically, most All-Star level players (and Tony Parker is that) who play four years of college ball are impact players in their very first season. They do not usually need multiple years to develop into impact players. Do I expect improvement from Brooks next year? Absolutely. However, I'm just hoping that improvement will mean he's good enough to fill the role of the full time back-up point guard (which is more than we can say about him this year). Tony Parker started 72 games his rookie season at age 19. It's just a monumental difference and I can't believe we're even having this discussion.
Tony Parker is a top 5 PG in the NBA right now. I think its a bit premature to compare Brooks to him in any way.
You're not making any good sell points for somebody we to get rid of. If we have any chance to rid of him, Sacramento has to think he is a great player.
