aaron brooks is in the lead for most improved player

I'm glad you see that. Not everyone does.

 

How could you not? The guy is a game changer, so many games he has had to come in early in the first quarter when the team was down 10, and change the pace of it.

Honestly, he has been HUGE for this team. We are lucky to have him.

I don't think people are really arguing that Lowry is not good for the team, just a continuation of the Lowry should start over Brooks argument IMO.

I do think he may want to start though, and if I were him, I would sign the one year tender offer to be a complete free agent, because I doubt he gets that starting op here in Houston now that Brooks and Martin are entrenching themselves and are both around 26 years old.

DD

 

Sometimes what seems obvious to us, subjectively, is not obvious to others. That's why it is important to also have objective evidence to back up what we say. That's something all reasonable people should be able to agree on.

Brooks had more than justified his place as starter, and I don't think there's any way he's not back in that role (unless, of course, he gets traded). Brooks is rolling in a starting role, and Lowry is doing his thing with the reserves. Why break that up?

Now, if for whatever reason the Rockets decide to move Brooks for a player like Bosh, I would be comfortable with Lowry assuming a starting role on the team. I guess that's where we differ.

 

No doubt about it Durvasa, and you are one of the best at it. I just think some of the metrics are not as valuable as others.

My beef is the +/-.....I just think it is nice but I prefer others tied to efficiency.

Just personal preference.

As for others not seeing it, man....it is basketball, not rocket science, it is fairly easy to see if you are not using blinders.

It is why I get annoyed with the Lowry should start crowd that is putting down Aaron Brooks, I mean this is HIS thread....and we are talking about Lowry...how sad is that?

Brooks has been amazing in his first year as a starter, perfect? No, of course not...but 20.1ppg....are you kidding me? Wow....who would have thought that?

I loved the guy from the jump, but 20ppg....not sure anyone could see that.


DD

 

I would not differ there, if we have 4 other scorers and Kyle Lowry, I think he would be fine as a starter.

I would rather not give up Brooks though, as he is developing into an all star player, I would prefer we trade Scola for Bosh....

Actually, honestly, I hope we don't trade anyone other than either Shane or Trevor.......and get a healthy Yao back.

I think this team as constructed can contend NEXT year...with some tweaks.

No major changes needed, IMO.

DD

 

You said you see a lot of impact players in it. Was not you implying it was an ranking on "impact"? If it is just a list of numbers, why bother posting it?

I think that list missed at least 20 out of 30. I call it useless because any other simple stats in points, PER, efficiency would give a better ranking.
+/- is a team stat. It is useless for individual player evaluation. proof: that list.

 

The point is not to say: "These are the best 30 players in the league." The point is to show there is a correlation between what we subjectively consider "impact players" and what +/- stats indicate.

So what's the value in a +/- stat, if PER or whatever falls even more in line with our subjective evaluation? Simple: Because +/- is not directly measuring specific events on the floor, but rather team performance, it may indirectly pick up on important things a player can do that isn't reflected in the boxscore.

So, take a player who does not have a great PER. Lets say that player leads his team, by far, in the On/Off +/- stat and adjusted +/- and all sorts of other +/- stats, and he falls in the top 30 in general by these type of indicators. Lets say that, subjectively, about 70% of the players in that top 30 are typically considered "really good". As an analyst, what might you make of that?

Well, you would not conclude: "This player is in the top 30. He must be an all-star." Obviously that is dumb.

But what you would say is: "This is a player that may be underrated by the boxscore (since most players that would fall that high by this stat are really good). Let me take a closer look at what he's doing, what his coaches/teammates are saying about him. Perhaps I'm underappreciating what he brings to the table."

In other words, it is not worthless. You're arguing a false dichotomy -- it either tells you every you need to know or its worthless. That is not the case.

 

Agreed. It is a tool, like any other. Using it by itself and saying it's the end all/be all is just as bad as saying you can't tell anything by it. The point was it was introduced in this thread as the end all/be all as to why Aaron was NOT deserving of being in the MIP race, at least as far as a Rocket representative. I can't speak for Redao or any others, but I was going after its use as the end all be all in this thread.

 

What is the base for yo to say Lowry's impact would drop drastically？

Ab played Lowry's role last season before the Rafer trade, his impact wasn't nearly as big as Lowry against weaker opponents.

And AB's impact is bigger than his impact when he played off the bench.

I can't see how you just pull something out of nowhere and claim Lowry wouldn't do better with better players in the lineup.

 

Over a season, +/- means a lot. Of course it isn't the only thing needs to be considered, but if you only consider one thing, +/- is better than shooting percentage, which totally has nothing to do with defense, with rebounding, with flow controlling, with intangible etc.

Right now AB's shooting is real good, and if he shoots like that every game I'll agree his impact is bigger than Lowry. But how many games can he keep that up? How often can he shoot like that?

20ppg doesn't mean that much as the 1st option. Remember that heated argument I had with some well respected clutchfans members?

Mike James had 20+ on better shooting percentage and everybody was crying out loud to have him REPLACE Rafer. What happened? It turned out he couldn't even beat out Rafer,the guy who couldn't shoot and couldn't finish around the rim.

PPG is way overrated than +/-.

 

Because Lowry is a better change of pace guard than Brooks is? Do a poll on who is the better change of pace and Lowry should win that one in a landslide. He is the best in the league at coming in with the 2nd unit and changing the tempo. A guy who gets 1/3rd of his assists on the fast break would not be able to do that from the get go with players like Battier(his pullup 3 on the break last game not withstanding) and Hayes or Yao in the lineup. I think that's what DD is getting at. Not to mention it's a lot easier to maintain Lowry's torrid pace at 25 MPG as a backup than it would be to do it 36 MPG as a starter.

 

Except Brooks has been doing way more than just shooting.

 

Samuel Clemens said that, "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."

I like stats and I use stats all the time to support my arguments or discussions but at some point you have to believe your eyes. And what I am seeing with my eyes this season with Brooks is that he has been the teams MVP. He is clearly the leagues MIP in my opinion and as much as I love what Lowry brings to the Rockets I just think Brooks brings more.

I just love watching basketball the way I believe it's supposed to be played and Brooks is playing it that way now. To borrow a phrase from Bill Walton, "He is just a pure joy to watch." I know Brooks is not much on the offensive end but I seem to recall a player named Steve Nash winning a couple of NBA MVP's and leading his team to the WCF a couple of years ago. I have watched a lot of Steve Nash and have never seen him play a bit of defense... but damn he is sure fun to watch and he wins a lot.

 

Ugh, he is on my ignore for a reason....lol.....

It is funny how the AB detractors say...can he keep it up? Well it is 65 games into the season and he is getting BETTER.....

I mean that is saying a lot right there.

And he is the number 1 option, and will be again next year even with Yao....

But AB is not like an UBER 1...we have 3 number one options in AB, Yao and Martin, and then a solid number 2 in Scola...and a number 4 in Ariza/Battier.

That is pretty stout......

Then the bench we have solid players like Lowry, Budinger, and Hill, and spot players like Hayes and Andersen for offense or defense.

Man, I am getting GOOSE pimples just thinking about it.

DD

 

I think this list is much better than the list based on +/-.

 

16th in the entire NBA in scoring.....SIXTEENTH !!!

I mean this is his first year starting and he is already that good.

Come on folks give it the F... up !!

DD

 

Oh yeah, and the 20ppg Mike James that folks wanted to replace Rafer Alston was never here when Rafer was. What we got was an aging Mike James who had essentially a career year after he left the Rockets the first time.

 

What's funny is that individually, the +/- metric you're so quick to dismiss is a better valuation tool than ppg.

 

Not really, when used in conjunction with many other variables is where the +/- shines. Variables including other players, opponents, time on the floor, etc.

 

cannot believe someone is still thinking +/- a better individual valuation tool.

PER, EFF, PPG, FTA are all much better than +/-.