Exactly. If he starts coming off the bench you can bet he won't be a Rocket next season through his own fault. The bad news for him is with his attitude his play will almost certainly fall off once his ego is bruised which is going to cost him on that next contract he thought he deserved last summer. The best bet is for the Rockets to return him as the starter, let him pump his stats back up and then trade him while his value is high. I think Morey has intended to do that since at least this summer. He's just waiting for the right time. Lowry is proving he is the better all-around player and PG so now it's all systems go for Operations Ship Brooks Out of Houston.
It's a risk, but I'd tell Brooks to start thinking about being Jason Terry (and also show him the contract Terry got). In context, if Lee is sliding over to play more point guard in the rotation, it makes even more sense. Let Brooks wreak havoc off the bench with Lee covering the better guards.
Agreed Disagreed, this is just something this board has grabbed onto, he is more like Tony Parker than Jason Terry. He is, but just as Morey said on 610, players are usually not as bad as their worst days and not as good as their best, and he expects Kyle's shooting to go back to it's normal level. And it is at that level that I think Brooks gives us the better option as he is a more consistent threat. DD
How is Lowry is the one who complained about a starting role and being appreciated over the summer during contract negotiations, yet Brooks is labeled the one with a bad attitude and not being able to accept a role?
I don't really see either Brooks or Lowry as expendable at this point, I think we need both players. When both players are healthy and playing well, we are a much better team.
Lowry is just a smart negotiator. He was probably playing Call of Duty at the same time, too. I'm impressed.
You have it the other way around Lars. Lowry was a restrict free agent. no longer under contract. He could say what he wanted. Brooks was under contract and complaining. Brooks unhappy he's not cashing in http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/bk/bkn/7222730.html
Absolutely incorrect. All open shots are not created equally. An open spot up 3 for Kevin Martin is not the same as an open step back 18 footer by Ish. "Whom" is shooting it and where they are shooting it and how they are shooting it absolutely matters. Even if they are all open shots. Like I said, it is not an opinion of mine, but simple arithmetic. I don't care if Brooks shoots everytime down the floor, as long as if that is the most efficient shot, which is measured by points per possession. Unfortunately it is not. On the pick and roll Lowry simply generates higher efficiency for the team. This is not to say Brooks is useless. He has one skillset that noone else on the team has: generate a shot out of nothing. On those bailout situations, a shot from Brooks is more efficient than anyone else. However that shot is still LESS efficient than a simple pick and roll by Lowry and Scola. The problem is at the end of a game, for one possession(or short stretch), the opponent can take that play away. That's where Brooks comes in. However for the majority of the game it is still better to simply run the offense.
Yeah, we were at our best last year when Lowry ran the point and Brooks was the two. That combo is great. Move Martin to the three. And when Lowry penetrates he can just waltz into the lane.
Go listen to the PodCast of Jason and Craig, they are telling you EXACTLY what the team is going to do, and what they are thinking.... And it is a great listen. http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?t=197230 DD
All open shots are equal. But it's what players do with those shots that makes the difference. Hitting a shot is one thing. But hitting a shot and creating a foul is another and going to the FT line, and shooting 85% from the FT line is the equivalent of shooting over 90% from inside the 3-point line and the equivalent of shooting over 60% from the 3-point line. This is what makes Lowry so valuable. He gets guys shots that they make a high percentage of, a percentage that is very close if not better than what Brooks makes, and he also gets them the ball and they get to the FT line. The more Brooks shoots, the lower the percentage is and the less everybody else gets high percentage shots and gets to the free throw line. This is where the difference in our offensive efficiency comes from between Lowry and Brooks. What we ideally need is Brooks taking the shots off the bench that would normally be given to Battier, and Chase, and some of Hill's shots.
What does that have to do with anything? Craig Ackerman is a radio host, not the definitive word in basketball knowledge. Jason was simply asking the question, not really giving his own opinion about it. Anyways, Craig thought it was a foregone conclusion because he feels Aaron is the better fit with Battier and Hayes, two non-scoring threats. They need a scorer like Aaron to balance out the lineup and take the tough shots. That makes a lot of sense except we have had no trouble scoring whatsoever with Lowry starting next to the two of them. What gives? The truth is, Lowry is running the team so efficiently, we are getting a lot LESS tough shots. In fact almost every time down the floor we at least get a good look or solid offensive possession. The truth is, Lowry is making the two non-scoring threats... scoring threats. Everyone is hailing Battier's 11 points in 60 seconds to beat the Lakers, but remember who got him the ball on each and every one of those possessions? Would Battier have gotten the same looks with Brooks? And then you have Martin and Scola who are good scorers to begin with. With Lowry they are scoring like allstars. Martin is shooting a career high in TS% and Scola is being spoon fed those 17 footers all day. The truth is, with Brooks, sometimes it is a self fulfilling prophecy. The offense bogs down so often that a tough shot is needed. And of course, we would need Brooks to take it since the rest of the lineup is so bad at creating for themselves. But nah, lets not watch the games and look at the data to analyze for ourselves when we have Craig Ackerman and DaDa to tell us whats up.
Jason is a Rocket's employee, and I believe Craig is as well....what they know is a lot more than we know about the team, they are INSIDE the organization. Why would you ignore something that the Rockets themselves are saying? Strange. DD
Come on now, no knock on Jason(love his work) but he wrote a fan blog and was hired to run their website. Craig... I don't even know what basketball background he has. They are just fans like the rest of us. EDIT: Um, they are not revealing insider information, nor are they channeling Adelman or Morey. They are simply having a Rockets discussion like you and I are at the moment. Otherwise, why the hell would two insiders be asking eachother questions on the radio?
