Brooks current status and his future in Houston

Why? Because you have a selective memory about what he did?

He had some good games and he had some bad ones too. He played just like a guy who should get the rock when is hot and be benched when he isn't (since he is a liability in ever other aspect of the game). He's still that guy.

That's why he would be best suited as a 6th man, instant offense guy on a team looking to make a run at a Championship.

It doesn't matter anyway. This team, as currently assembled, isn't going to win a title. In order to get that elusive superstar that is necessary to contend, Morey will ship Brooks out.

 

Two words = Moo Chie

 

Agreed. Brooks would thrive in the 6th man role.

 

This, this and this!! Repped.

 

Who were the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd best "options" on the team during those playoffs?

Damn, tough to argue with those points.

 

What other options did Morey have? Let Lowry go for nothing? And look like a fool after talking up his importance to the team last year?

 

Yes. If he thought Lowry's offer was excessive, he should have let Lowry go for nothing. No one would have thought he was a fool.

Did you think Morey was a fool for trading Ariza one year after acquiring him?

 

Did Morey come out and say earlier in the off-season that he had instructions from the owner to do whatever it took to retain Trevor Ariza?

 

You can't trade Brooks if you don't keep Lowry. He had to be re-signed in order to have roster flexibility.

 

So when yao goes down in the playoffs and the series goes to seven with brooks as the best player on the court, I guess we are just a lottery team.

Yao is obviously the number one option as our whole system is built around his strengths. Beyond that, there are no defined options. The open player takes the shot. Brooks is merely a role player, just like everyone else that isn't yao, he just happens to be really good at his role.

In our system now that landry Is gone, there is no sixth man. There's a bench unit which comes in and executes a run and gun style led by lowry. He is a transition tempo player who is surrounded by finishes because it suits his style of play, not brooks. Swapping them would completely ruin the synergy of each unit.

The lowry lovers can b**** and moan all day but he is not starting for a reason. Brooks may very well be moved because he is one our best assets but it won't be because they want lowry to start.

Saying brooks is best suited as a sixth man is pure opinion based on nothing of substance. Brooks likely averages anywhere from 14 to 22 this year and this will not be a lottery team.

 

That's great. Let's sign a guy to a bunch of dollars, so that we can trade another guy who is more sought after and produces more than he gets paid. That sounds like a good way to do business.

 

Yao and Artest were options 1 and 2. I would say Brooks grew into the 3rd option role during the 2009 playoffs. How far did they advance that year? I can't remember. Refresh me since you seem to be the guy that remembers those playoffs so well.

I love this new strain of "discussion" on this forum. When someone posts their opinion (like I did) someone else (you) comes on and acts like they have totally busted them for posting that opinion.

What the hell do you think 90% of the GARM is if not opinions/predictions about the Rockets?

 

42-40. Please stop living in the past.

So Chuck Hayes will get as many shots as Kevin Martin? Cool.

Please show me where I advocated swapping them with this team constructed as it currently is.

I would say if Brooks is moved then it is partly because the Rockets do want him to start unless whatever deal Brooks is moved in also brings in another PG who is better than Lowry. I doubt Morey paid Lowry that much cash if he didn't see an expanded role for him.

No **** it's opinion. See my post to the guy above.

I have to say if Brooks averages over 18 this season the Rockets certainly are a lottery team. (that's my opinion again since you guys are having trouble with whole people posting their opinions thing).

Let me repeat my basic notions regarding Brooks and Lowry:

1. Brooks is a scorer, the Rockets needed that last season but he isn't the elite scorer some think he is and he is bad at everything else
2. If the Rockets bring in an elite player (like Melo) then Brooks skills become redundant and weaknesses become amplified
3. My prediction is that Brooks will be moved in any deal that brings in a superstar.
4. Lowry would be a better starter on a team of Yao, Scola, Melo and K. Martin than Brooks would

 

I don't see how you could say that Artest was the 2nd option if you actually watched those playoffs. Do you really think the Lakers were more concerned about containing Artest over Brooks? Do you think Portland was more worried about Artest than Brooks?

How far did they advance? How is that relevant to Brooks only being a 3rd option on a playoff team, as you so matter-of-factly stated (even though it was just your opinion)?

And if he's only a 6th man on a contender, were the Rockets not a contender that year before Yao went down? Orlando and Denver were more contender than the Rockets were?

 

I think the Rockets and Brooks took advantage of a fantastic mismatch in their favor against such fleet-footed guards as Derek Fisher and Steve Blake.

Uh, because I said Brooks as the 3rd option on a team means you are a playoff team and not a contender which is what the Rockets were that year.

The Rockets have never been a contender in the Yao Ming era and certainly not in the Aaron Brooks era.

 

In my opinion, 08-09 was the closest we've been to contender status. Had Yao not been injured, we may have very well beaten the Lakers. If we had, our next two opponents would have been Denver and Orlando, if nothing else changed. We would've easily won both match-ups and been crowned champions.

 

Morey must think so, because that's exactly what he did.

 

You're living in a fantasy world, there's never been an Aaron brooks era. We had an off year because our cornerstone was out all year.

And therockets were contenders in 07 they had a legit shot at the title that year.

 

Wait, but you said Brooks was only the 3rd option on a playoff team. Were the Rockets not a playoff team 2 years ago? Are you saying Brooks was only their 3rd option or not? Either you're saying he was only their 3rd option, in which case you are wrong, or the Rockets weren't a playoff team.

You still haven't defended the assertion that Brooks was only the 3rd option on the Rockets 2 years ago, a playoff team. What made Ron Artest a better option than Brooks? Who scared defenses more?

So who were the contenders that year, other than the Lakers? Or were the Lakers the only contender?

I'll ask again - who were the contenders 2 years ago, other than the Lakers?