Can they? Of course, but I don't think it will work. There's not enough offense. Both play a similar style which is to spot up for threes and unless the Rockets can get enough baskets in transition, the Rockets will really struggle with that lineup.
The thing that makes it possible is that Brooks can be a scorer. But you still don't have enough scoring in other places. I haven't read the thread. I still like the ability to shut down all the wings in the league, like the Rockets had last year. Knowing that Anthony, Bryant, Roy, etc. aren't going to have their best game going in is great. I love seeing those guys have to work for everything.
I voted 'yes' only because I think it could work....in stretches. Morey has clearly indicated he wants this team to run more and take advantage of a style of play we were otherwise unable to play with Yao on the floor. It makes sense because it's the best way to utilize Ariza on offense. Ariza is one of the best transition wings in the game. Scola is arguably just as good in transition. Brooks has the jets to hypothetically lead a break and QB this type of offense. Battier can be the spot up sniper, then just plug in whoever else on the court. This could be an effective second unit type of offense. Do you want these two starting in a perfect world? Absolutely not. Still, it remains unclear how this team is going to look going into October and DEFINITELY going into February's trade deadline whenever the phone's ringing off the hook with teams inquiring about how to get $23M worth of salary off their hands. I'm not sure what to think. I definitely suspect between Battier and McGrady that one of them is a goner. This team sorely lacks a second playmaker and scoring presence like McGrady so part of me thinks he'll be in the mix regardless of how much sense it may make to trade him. Then there's Battier -- a player Morey clearly thinks the world of yet doesn't necessarily fit in with our "rebuild on the fly" approach. Plus, with a team like Portland (that's wanted Battier for over two years) continuously calling it's going to be tough not to consider moving him.
Technically, most of the times the Rockets played with Ron at the two all he did was take jumpers. I think Ariza is good enough and part of the reason he is coming here is to improve his offense, so we will find open looks for him. Shane can still take his usual 3 from the corner, but I Ariza is able to create enough to be a number 3 option behind Scola and Brooks.
when you have a younger player like ariza, you can't just label him as a "scorer" or "defender". he's young and can develop into something that he may or may not be right now. maybe houston is just the place for him to step and and take a larger role
Having inter changeable players, ( position wise ) the most important thing is the familiarity of the players with Adelman's system. If the players like Ariza adopts instantly with the team's system then He could play most of the position except the point guard. Shane can and has proven He can play position 2, 3 and maybe 4.
No. Not if they are trying to be a playoff team. Brooks can't be the only guy on the squad who can dribble the ball up the court with any sort of pressure being applied by the defense. Or did we get a PF or C who can dribble like a guard?
it should be ok as long as ariza doesnt want to start taking whack shots like artest did, plus he is better at attacking the rack, it was so scary to watch ron drive last season but we had no choice
Artest was a great spot up shooter for us last year and that's all. He wasn't really good at attacking the basket and most of us (I think) were shocked how horrible he was on the post, even against smaller guys. We lost a few games because of him, but the bottomline is he pretty much took us to the 2nd round.
He helped with his defense but offensively he wasn't a game changer for more then one or two games our entire playoff run. It was more excellent scoring from Scola, Brooks, Yao and solid bench production which we didn't have in previous playoff appearances.
