I suppose I did mistake your intentions but I see no need to indirectly invite people to that discussion instead of going right into it. One result of not being more direct was several posts (not just from me) questioning your intentions instead of more posts with substance directed toward what you state is your real area of interest. I think the poll's shock value deterred you from more efficiently discussing Brooks' strengths/weaknesses as a scorer. I posted my thoughts just above on a few areas where improvement would likely make Brooks a better scorer.
Steve Nash is arguably the best late bloomer the NBA has ever seen. And part of his slow development was cause by the fact that in phoenix, he was was never given a real shot. Are you really comparing Brooks' ceiling to Steve Nash? Really?
we might as well compare budinger and Kobe's first season too...nash did not take a typcial road to superstar status....it's like trying to compare the trips of two men going to the mid U.S. and one is coming from the Seattle area and the other from Miami. Even if they needed to cover the same distance, is it fair to compare their progression when they're traveling across different terrain, climate, surroundings?
Can you give me an NBA team that you think would maximize Aaron's scoring ability, and an NBA team that you think would minimize Nash's scoring ability?
Nash is money with his pullup jumper, get in his way to the rim he'll hit a midrange shot. Brooks in this situation loses his head, he's one dimensional, can't change on the fly.
That's also a good point. As far as his moves, he's pretty good in isolated 1-on-1 situations but, in general, he needs to improve his use of change of speed and deception. He's not literally full speed or nothing but he does get into that mode occasionally. He should rarely be breaking into a full sprint with the ball in halfcourt situations. He should almost always be going at about 50-75% until he catches his defender flat-footed. Paul and Nash are both amazing with their use of change of speed and deception. Paul, in particular, almost never goes full speed in a halfcourt setting. When he does, the defender is toast because he's not expecting it. Both Nash and Paul are constantly using deception in everything they do. That is a big missing ingredient in Brooks' overall game. Brooks will never reach Nash's or Paul's level in these areas but I seen no reason why he can't make some kind of improvement.
Which player do you think will be a better player 2 years from now? 3 years from now? 5 years from now?
I do not consider "who's the better scorer?" an indirect invitation to discussing what makes one player better/worse than the other. Perhaps I should have tacked on "... and why?" but I thought that's generally understood.
from any aspects,nash is far better than AB ,but u can;t predict the future,since it is only the 2nd year for AB to be a starting PG. AB has very very excellent scoring ability ,but I really hope he could develop more about his passing skill,as a decent PG he would know how to get more teammates involved in the game just like what nash do in the suns.
just have them switch teams lol...if brooks was playing with more aggressive finishers/shooters who hit a decent % he'd become a more effiicent scorer. Now whether he became a better scorer numbers-wise would depend on how many shots he wanted to put up, but i think he'd score better if he took the same amount. Nash on this team wouldn't score as well for obvious reasons, scola isn't a threat to shove the ball down a defender's throat and battier isn't going to shoot a fadeaway three from the corner. No reason for defenders to leave the paint as often because our 4s and 5s dont shoot from the outside as well as guys like Frye, diaw, marion, Nowitzki, tim thomas,...now that i think of it, has nash ever not had a dependable outside shooting 4 or 5 during his "all-star" years? Seems like he's always had one...this may just be a coincidence, but his scoring took a hit last season, i believe mostly in the second half, which was also when Diw was traded and when he no longer had a real outside threat at the 4 or 5....then this year they got Frye and Nash is back to scoring.....it's alos possible this is his best scoring season because it's the first time he's had a true center who can shoot...the others were mostly 4s..so Frye this year is taking his man away from the rim like those 4s did, the difference is Frye's man is the biggest man on the court, or shouldbe anyway...that opens up the paint like never before for Nash.....another coincidence? Nash's stats shot up to stud Pg status the year Dirk became a 20ppg scorer, AKA a legit threat.
I apologize. It's really none of my business what your intentions were anyway. I do think the discussion of where Brooks can improve as a scorer is an interesting one.
Nash has been averaging a ridiculous .500+ from field and .400+ from 3 for like the past 4-5 years. and he averages 10+ assists. If he wanted, he can turn on scoring mode and drop 25 a night. But he only takes over in scoring when everyone else is struggling.
Just look at the hot spots, that should tell you all you need to know. Nash is so good almost every panel is blazing red lol. Even your analysis shows Nash is consistenly better when it comes to scoring, he has a higher FG% while being assisted less. The 28% who voted are either looking at the future or have some misguided loyalty.
huh? how's nash going to pull up with a defender in his face? We're not exactly talking about a Tmac-like jumper where he rises above everyone..if you stick to nash it wont be easy for him to get it off...in the NBA the threat of a pick or passmakes defenders give him extra room. In my one on one scenario there's no need for that. Brooks on the other hand, can dribble pretty much anyone out of their shoes. With no help defenders, how will you stay in front of him? Maybe i should have been more clear...i meant playing them one on one, as in a pick up game, not if i'm defending them by myself within a game.
The term "scorer" can involve a lot of different things, but generally it involves putting the ball in the basket. Nash puts the ball in the basket more times AND more effectively than Brooks. Even your notion that Brooks is a better slasher than Nash is wrong, if you look at the hotspots Durvasa posted Nash has been converting inside the paint at a far higher clip than Brooks has been. Simply put, Nash is better at every facet of the game than Brooks, except maybe on D. These are the kind of things people who don't check stats first and just rely on "rep" miss out on.
He doesn't need to pull up for a jumper close to the basket, he has this awkward looking flip shot that apparently goes in 0.735% of the time. Check out his hotspots when inside the rim, even when the space is clogged up and he has 7-ft guys in the way he converts at a percentage that would make a postman envious.
my point was there's no reason to back off of him in a pick up on on one game. He's not going to throw up his flip shot from farther than 10 feet out....i've already agreed that within a team game he'd scorer better because he'd be able to use his teammates to create space and therefore opportunities for himself and others.
nope.. fixed Nash will still be an elite point guard in 1-2 years, and if he still doesn't age, he will never retire
I didnt miss out on anything. I specificed how i took Durvasa's question and it wasnt within a team context. Under that definition stats inside the NBA dont mean as much. I've been pretty consistent within my posts in separating team play and individual play. In the world of teammates, pick and rolls and plays, Nash gets the nod, but that's just not how i took the question. Maybe i should have since Durvasa used NBA numbers as evidence, but it's possible he just used it because that's the only evidence. We don't have numbers showing their effectiveness playing without teammates.
