...as grateful as I am that he was on our roster in this year's playoffs, I'm just not seeing the high ceiling the rest of you are. Nice guy, plays with lots of heart, and a tough matchup for opposing PGs because of his speed, but the fact he can't finish because of his size(and likely never will be able to), doesn't "see" the floor like a true PG, and will never likely be a very good defender(especially at fighting through pick n roll screens) says to me that his ceiling is more related to his role as a scorer which doesn't leave him a lot of room to grow. He shoots a good clip on his outside shots(if wildly inconsistent at this point in his career), but statistically how much more can he grow with his outside shot? He already shoots a "good" percentage - do you really expect him to improve significantly in this area? He also doesn't see the floor like a PG and that's just not something that can be taught. His speed gets him in the paint but his size prevents him from making a lot of those shots and his passing skills when the defense is closing in on him is just not great because he locates his teammates when he is already in trouble on the drive rather than knowing where his teammates are long before that. ...now, I'm not saying AB is garbage - he is perfectly suited as a 6th man spark plug off the bench and occasional fill in starter, but I wouldn't want to rely on him as our young long term starting PG.
I give Brooks until next trade deadline to show he's truly for real as a starter. Thats around 50 games to really prove himself as not an every 4th game flash but a consistent contributor That would be wonderful. However its not often a point guard scores the actual 20 a game. Nash or Kidd have NEVER scored 20 PPG in any season in their career. If he can do a Mo Willimas/Jameer Nelson type solid 16-17 PPG with shooting good percentages thats all you could ever ask of Brooks.
I don't believe that stats mean everything, but I almost always find them useful. That shows that Aaron Brooks is very close to the bottom of the league in net production (his production - the opposing PG's production). Again, stats aren't the whole story...but looking at that list it seems fairly accurate based solely on this past season. A player like Aaron who is very good but not great on offense should at least be able to break even with his opponent, but he's in the negative by a considerable amount. Doesn't help us much if he's giving all his point back on defense.
CCR, How many of those guys in that list have less than half a season starting under their belts? 2 or 3? Even if those numbers represent the entire season for those players, you are comparing Brooks for the most part to other PGs who have more experience. Brooks' net production may or may not improve with more experience under his belt but you did see a marked improvement from his 1st to 2nd playoff experience. Experience matters. Lowry will tell you that. After being consistently productive from the time he joined the Rockets, Lowry took a nosedive, statistically, in the playoffs. Lowry is much better than that and will show it next time he gets to the postseason. I understand Lowry did much more than what shows up in the boxscore but this is a response to your statistical argument after all. I think Brooks' real value will be more clear by the end of next season, whether he's with us or another team.
Actually, I think that stat DOES tell the whole story, or pretty much of it. Aaron was incredibly inconsistent on offense last year, to the point where he had some horrendous Alston-like games. As fans we like to remember his good games, but even in the playoffs he had a bunch of cringe-worthy performances. So inconsistent offense plus bad defense equals bad point differential. To me fans care more about his potential right now more than his production. Because his production has been very mediocre. And one of the reasons why I'm personally a huge fan of bringing in Rubio assuming we don't give up half the team.
When I saw you were the last reply to this thread, I somehow knew your post would be aimed at downplaying those stats Experience does matter, and we did see a significant improvement in Aaron from last year's playoffs. But how much of that can be attributed to the fact that last year was his first season and his first playoff series? I imagine if you look back through the history of the NBA, I'll bet that a second year increase is fairly consistent...more so than in any other year of a player's career. And how much of Aaron's leap forward in the playoffs can be attributed to the fact that in his first playoffs he faced Deron Williams (#3 on this list and possibly his worst match up in the entire league), and in this year's playoffs he faced Steve Blake (#20) and Derek Fisher (#27)? I actually like Aaron and would love to see him grow here as a Rocket. That's something we've rarely seen in recent years, with the roster constantly transforming around Yao and Tracy. But as you said, he had a marked improvement in this year's playoffs and with that he created a buzz throughout the league. And while I also believe that he might get better with experience, I think you absolutely have to sell high if the right deal comes along. His height and body size will always limit him defensively and as the chart seems to indicate, his offensive game isn't exactly making up for it.
Top 5 Yao = +9.1 Ron = +5.4 Tracy = +4.2 Carl = +3.1 Luis = +1.6 and then all the way at the bottom... Cook = -22.0
Aaron's biggest downfall is his inconsistency. Not his lack of size or inability to create for others which are true as well however.
We just talking about contribution and income for team . He is a good player. In fact . He just get a little bit money then someone. Can we ask him how do more ?
Interesting thing in that list CCR put up is that Aaron got big numbers in the playoffs against Derek Fisher and Steve Blake who are also low on the list and possibly against Jordan Farmar who can't even displace Derek Fisher. Aaron's offense has never been what I've been worried about. I'm not even worried about his assists as history has shown the PG doesn't need to be some 10 assists per game guy under Adelman. I'm only worried that the guy has problems being posted up and stopping opposing players from scoring.
I'll say this much: Brooks doesn't fit with Yao beyond the fact that he can hit the outside shot. Since Yao is our best player, if Brooks somehow remains a Rocket, his ideal role would be one that gets him all the minutes where Yao is on the bench. I don't say this because I think Brooks has no chance to be a starter in this league. I say this because Brooks is an open court type of player. He doesn't fit an offense that is EXTREMELY geared toward static halfcourt sets. It takes away his best attributes which are speed and looking for his shot before the defense is completely set. I honestly don't think he is as bad of a passer/playmaker as he appeared to be so often with us. He just doesn't fit the type of offense required to maximize Yao's abilities. It's not even that I don't think he could do the Rafer thing. It's just completely against his nature to play so deliberately and mechanically. If we kept driving it into him, I think he could do OK in the halfcourt, even when it comes to making post entry passes. I just think that takes away from his best attributes. I have no problem with Lowry as our starter. I don't even think his long-range shooting is an issue. It may even be better to have a PG that isn't so willing to bomb 3s for a change, even with Yao in the game. Lowry plays well in the halfcourt and Brooks can come in and do his thing off the bench. I think that will pay dividends in the long run for the entire team, assuming we come into next season with Brooks and Lowry as our options. As far as Rubio, I'm not that high on him, overall. I do think he's a genius of a passer. Unfortunately, that's his only real NBA skill that I see. I don't think his highly touted defense will translate to the NBA and I don't think he'll ever be an above average scorer, possibly never even an average scorer. I could be wrong but what will ultimately separate him from a guy like Nash is that he'll never come close to being as dangerous of a scorer. He may not even be as successful as somebody like Calderon. That may seem ridiculous but nobody knows for sure until we see how he develops and how much of his game translates to a more athletic, physically-imposing league.
Is that for the whole season or only for the time he started. Net production would be lower, before Rafer got traded. He didn't have starter minutes at the beginning of the season.
I am pretty sure it is for the whole season. It should favor Brooks' number because when he was a bench player, he had more time facing the other team's backup rather than starter.
