I'm not sure who you are scoreboarding, I said Brooks should start. Besides, sometimes better players come off the bench. But lowry is not overpaid. Simple fact is Morey matched the market. ROFLCOPTER
The problem is instead of saying something, Morey acted on it. He acted by paying Lowry his market price, which many considered to be overpaying. Obviously, Morey views Lowry as important enough to the team that he is willing to overpay to keep him (if he even views it as overpaying at all). Hence, Brooks could be the player ahead on the trade block simply because we paid so much to keep Lowry. Yes, Lowry is tradable, we all agree on that, but considering the fact that we've been freeing up cap room, and the fact that we just paid big to keep Lowry, we could assume that Lowry is part of the bigger plan. And like you said, we can't trade Lowry without his permission. If part of Morey's trade plans is to hope Lowry approves of a trade that includes him, Morey isn't very calculating at all.
Nut hugging is thinking a player can do no wrong and there is plenty wrong with Brook's game. Brooks is a flawed player but his strengths play well into our system, moreso than Lowry's, specifically with the starting group. Not sure how saying we overpaid Lowry is Brooks nut hugging, but whatever. People with no real basis in thier arguments or that get too emotionally tied into players spout out this kind of dribble.
Yes, and that is the point. It's a bad move. Which is why Morey wouldn't overpay someone. The Knicks have been trying to move Jeffries for a few years now, and couldn't. The finally did, and it cost them their freshly selected lotto pick, a swap of first rounders, and another first rounder.... And what did that get them? It got his contract off the books and broken down pile of McGrady. I'm done feeding the troll.
There are various stages of being overpaid, you can argue that Lowry is not overpaid, that is fine. I think he is......certainly not to Jeffries stage, but as a backup PG, yes. We are arguing semantics here. How very nice of you NIKEstrad....name calling.....not very classy. If you can't sway a discussion, bail and name call. If you can't disagree like gentleman, what is the point? Unbelievable, seriously a difference of opinion makes someone a troll? If you disagree fine.....doesn't mean I think you are a troll. DD
Does that mean Scola is also part of the 'bigger plan'? He's been mentioned in trade rumors for Amare, Bosh, etc.
We know what nut hugging is and you're definitely guilty of it. Acknowledging the fact that you hug a certain player's nuts in particular (see my signature) is half the battle in realizing that you have a problem.
Why is there a debate over Kyle and Aaron? I personally think Kyle Brooks is way better than Aaron Lowry! Seriously though, in Adelman's system, it really doesn't matter who starts but who finishes games. Some games it might be Lowry, some it might be Brooks. They both compliment each other. Its like complaining about what car you should drive today, your BMW or your Mercedes. Who cares, you have both!
Why is it that we have to keep one or the other? I say keep em both. They both are a great PG combo. If the left one don't get ya, the right one will!
Holy Damn. DD, you trolled this thread up. 1. Contradicting yourself, admitting it and then contradicting yourself some more? Check 2. Resorting to personal attacks? Check 3. Throwing in a stupid catch phrase to end posts? Check You owned bro.
It should be obvious to any true Rocket's Fan who watches the games with a power of observation that Brooks is mainly a shooting guard and not a leader. He is more suited to being a starter with the more mature players. Lowry is a take control Guy, not a playmaker, but a hands on guy who makes the second five work like a second starting five.( Brooks could not replace Lowery in this position) Both point Guards are playing in a position which is most suited to their best talents.
Like you said, Scola was in the talks for players of the same position. Keeping Scola is a must, just like Lowry, but if we have a chance to acquire a PF like Bosh or Amare, there wouldn't be a need for Scola. If we go after a player like Melo (someone of a different position), then Brooks is a nice trade piece. Of course, Lowry is also a trade piece, but knowing that Morey just paid big to keep him, we have reason to believe he was part of the bigger plan. Now if we are going after a PG like Paul, then it's a toss up between Lowry and Brooks. Save your lecture on class DD, you haven't been showing any.
Brooks could make a great 6th man, but he's probably going to be our starter until he's traded. Oh well.
