Fisher is not garbage? (Man that hurts typing)....he plays good solid team ball and hits some important 3pters which (ehem) allow for spacing down low to Gasol and Bynum....and Kobe even when he posts up. You know...Spacing....like I have been talking about all day. DD
AB's numbered are skewed only by the fact that he was option #1 on this team last season.. If we sign Bosh, have Yao back, and have KM for a whole season his numbers would come down a bit. His PER is great only because the fact he was our #1 option.
Lakers won Championship last year too when Fisher shooting 3s worse than Lowry. 3 point shooting is not required for a PG to win chamionships. Ask Rondo and Parker. Rockets have Martin/Battier/Cbud/Ariza on the wing to take the shooting load.
You don't even have to compare PERs to tell that both are different players. Parker's game has been mostly inside the 3 point line throughout his career whereas Brooks' better perimeter shooting has him shooting more 3s than Parker could ever do in his lifetime.
It would be interesting to see their first 3 years as a comparison study, but more than just PER, as that is skewed by whom is on the floor with them. Not sure there is a real stat that breaks it down in a "TRUE" who is better manner. We are all arguing semantics. DD
I don't think anyone here is actively advocating for Brooks departure, we would definitely like to keep him if at all possible. I just think if it comes down to it, and I had to choose to keep one out of Brooks vs Scola (because you know those are the pieces that Toronto covets) then I would go with Brooks. Both LA and Boston demonstrated that you can never have too much depth inside; it's almost like pitching in baseball now. What do you do at the trade deadline if you're a contender with great pitching and decent hitting? You go out and get more pitching that's what. In basketball now the best teams have an endless string of big men ready to fight for loose balls and pick up no-layup type message-sending fouls. They are more of a commodity. Even at the highest end in the point guard position, Chris Paul and Deron Williams and Steve Nash are a delight to watch but they haven't won anything. They are just that--entertainers. You all saw Game 7. It was like the NCAA championships. Hand check fouls are out the window. It turns into football without the pads. It's all about who can manufacture their own shot through all the bumps and bruises. When it comes down to it, it's not the banger like Lowry who's overrated. It's the silky smooth, dare I say use the word, "finesse" types. And don't say PER undervalues three point shooting. All statistics by their nature overvalue three point shooting by assigning it a 150% value over normal shots, when the reality is that the higher variance associated with the lower percentage of three point shots that usually goes in means that in the crunch time it becomes critically important NOT to rely on it. What PER does overvalue is USAGE, not assists. Usage as in guys that have the ball in their hands every single time down the court, who either end up making an assist, a turnover, a missed shot, or a made shot as a result of dominating the ball. Allen Iverson. Tyreke Evans. Tracy McGrady. These are examples of players whose value was OVERrated by PER because they made sure that they would either be the last or second to last person to touch the ball before the play ended. Unfortunately, Brooks is headed down this road too. His best stat last year was his 3PT%. His worst stat was his assists/40min. And not all is as bad as it's made out to be. In the decade or so since Hollinger debuted his PER on ESPN, I'm positive that we had never had a PG play significant minutes and get over a 15 (supposedly the number for the league average, although more players end up below this level than above, meaning that the median is lower than 15). Last year we had TWO. Two above average point guards on the same team is fantastic for us, even thoguh many teams achieve this feat with regularity and with much less heralded names (Luke Ridnour???). Next year with diminished touches it's likely that these numbers will decline. You can say that Brooks was better than Lowry and that he was still 24th overall (which is behind a lot of bench players with smaller sample sizes that I honestly would not count), but here's what I take out of it: last year he was the MAN. He had the keys to the car. And even with all that he still only beat our backup PG, someone who had many more factors in play against him, by 0.5. And he was still only mildly above average at that. What this tells me is not that he is bad, but rather that he is overrated by the people that swear by the eyeball test. So yes, he is good. We want to keep him. He almost shot 40% from three last year. But how much should we sacrifice to keep him? His value might not ever be higher. His points scored certainly won't next year. If he's the barrier between you and Bosh you pull the trigger. Easily.
Even more concerning, is that with the return of Yao and Martin for the season, I do not want AB dominating the ball or shooting as much as he did last year.
Look at the playoffs against Portland and the Lakers for a better view of his role, and then think about him with the ball late in the shot clock, because no one else on the team can get their own shot late...he is it. DD
honestly i would trade Brooks in a heartbeart if it meant getting a Bosh or Amare as long as we keep Lowry as the replacement. you guys truly overrate brooks (who is a good player) here. Bosh and Amare are both top 15 players in the entire LEAGUE. Bosh is top 10 and could be the best at his position along with Gasol. Yet lets not get them because we'd have to give up a undersized scoring point guard who is at best a borderline all-star. Brooks may not even be a top 10 point guard in the west --parker, westbrook, billups, kidd, paul, williams, davis, nash I would rank over him-- and the case could be made that Tyreke Evans and Steph Curry are on par or just above him. Brooks' greatest asset is he is a scorer from the outside, a real good one that and that would help with Yao back for sure no doubt. But coming off a season where the rockets lose basically their top 3 scoring options from the previous year (yao, artest, mcgrady) of course his scoring stats will go up. But bottom line is that IF (a big IF) either Bosh or Amare comes here with the addition of Yao, Brooks' greatest asset, his scoring, is not as needed anymore since both Yao and MAX PF will take the majority of those touches and his weaknesses, passing (and he is a PG) and defense, will become far more glaring. Couple that with the fact that he won MIP he will look to get a big deal next offseason, one Morey most likely will not want to match if he feels he is being overpaid (even with the new CBA). The recipients of the MIP award historically have been overpaid after they have received it (Bobby Simmons, Arenas, McGrady, Jermaine O'Neal, Granger, Zach Randolph, Monta Ellis, Boris Diaw) The jury is still out on Granger and you could argue that Arenas, McGrady and O'Neal were worth their contracts at the team but all of those players were significantly more talented than Brooks is before their injuries. The rest of the guys? overpaid I am not saying Lowry is the sure fire replacement/man, but I value his strengths more than Brooks' strength if Yao and a MAX PF come to this team. His passing and defense and ability to draw fouls and get to the line will be huge assets. Ideally a young Derek Fisher would be perfect for this team if they get a Bosh or Amare but no one is like that out there that is attainable. Lowry is the closest to that and probably can improve his shooting. If anything has been shown in this league you can improve your shooting to go from bad to good its a lot harder to improve your passing or defense. Now Lowry will never be the shooter Brooks is but I believe he can become good enough to where they wont leave him on an island like in the 2009 series versus the lakers. I dont think Brooks will become a better passer nor does he have the physical tools to be a good defender at his size. I feel Lowry will get a deal more along his true market worth or if anything under his value and the Rockets will lock him up. Right now Brooks' value is at an all time high..you sell high and you get back something like a Bosh or Amare. edit: of course this is IF (a big IF again) we get either Bosh or Amare if we get neither of them I am more than happy to have the lineup we had last year with just Yao back and Brooks being the starting PG
A well reasoned argument for sure, but I value Brooks a bit higher and Bosh a bit lower than you do. But still a nice post. I guess we all are waiting on Bosh first.....probably all of this is moot anyway. DD
Really? By that token then we should see guys posting high PER's be surrounded by superstars right? Yet LeBron manages to post NBA-record PER's despite his only low-post threat being Anderson freaking Varejao. Tracy McGrady posted one of the highest PER's in recorded history in Orlando in 2003 being one of the few guys going over 30, by playing in a starting lineup which featured the immortal Pat Garrity as the next highest minute getter. And that's just the beginning. I could fiind literally thousands of players who played on far worse teams yet posted much player efficiency ratings than Brooks. Because it measures an individual player's efficiency, not the team. That's why the Rockets didn't lose any net team production when he went off the floor last year - something you probably couldn't say for Wilt, LeBron, Tracy etc. Basically you are full of garbage again by talking about something you don't understand and haven't bothered to research. It would be embarrassing but it's not.
Yeah, except that typically you are going by your normal garbage that everyone believes, like you do, that the PER is even meaningful. It is ONE GUYS ATTEMPT at developing a decent analysis...and it has holes in it a mile wide. The TMac example you just used....I mean a per over 30, LOL, how did his TEAM do, because honestly...wins and losses are all that really matter.... You know as well as I do, or you should, that statistics can be manipulated to give credence to any argument, everyone just cherry picks the ones that they like to support their argument. Let's go beyond that, if we traded Brooks for Bosh, would the team be better than it is now with Lowry starting instead of Brooks? Or, whom would you want the Rockets to go after to get a starting level caliber PG? Hey, maybe you can consult the Golden Chalice of PER and get back to me... DD
Rubio I like a lot, but he would be better as a backup in waiting because he could go from all timer to bust, you just don't know where he falls. I personally think he will be great. CP3, of course you trade Brooks for him...lol....... But I do not like him much......but his talent is unquestionably better. DD
