Definitely NOT true. Rafer may be a pass first point guard, but he's as chuck happy as the rest of them. The fact of the matter is Rafer sees himself the as the 4rth best player in the team, and was chucking up 12.5 shots per game for december before he went down. After the Big 3, he has the most shot attempts in the team, and the next scorer is not even close, Arron Brooks at 8.6. The thing that most people don't understand in real game situations you can't look at the roster and say "Well Yao and Mac are already in the starting line up, we don't need more scorers". More often than not Yao Ming and/or Tmac gets double teamed and the ball ends up in the weakest link because he's the only guy left open. That's why AB has to be with the starters, because you NEED someone who can capitalize on the open looks from Tmac and Yao Ming. Rather than having Rafer Alston chucking up 12.5 attempts and making roughly around 30% of them, I'd rather have Ab0 driving to the hoop or taking spot up 3's. On the other hand, we don't need Ab0 as instant offense of the bench. We already have an inside outside combination off the bench with Artest and Landry. Rafer will set them up nicely, and hopefully he'll have his floaters go in more frequently against the bench of the opposing team instead of against their best players. Adelman please don't fix what isn't broken and bench Ab once Alston starts. Let Alston come off the bench first and see the difference in production before you start Alston again.
Brooks gives a whole new look with his penetration and consistent (more than Reefers) shooting. Brooks is playing more under control now, passing into Yao, giving it to mcgrady. Reefer thinks hes at rucker park sometimes. WIth all that being said, I will go with the darkhorse and vote for Luther Head to start! Who's with me?
We know size isn't teachable, but I could live with that. Next question: Is entry passing teachable? Can Brooks quickly learn to get the ball to Yao? And if he does, would that be enough to sway you toward starting Brooks?
Brooks had the benefit of having everyone healthy these past 3 games. What can Rafer do with everyone healthy? The Rockets need their starting PG to bring up the ball, set up the offense, and play defense on the opponents starting PG. The Rockets need their bench to score in order in order to give the starters some rest and keep the team in the game. Rafer starts (with limited minutes), Brooks backs him up, and Rafer is the closer.
Yeah, just ask Chauncey Billups. Brooks is better than Rafer, and will continue to improve, Rafer is what he is, and will continue to decline. I agree that Rafer is a better defender, but he is not all that great to begin with... The starting unit with Brooks is lethal at every single position, but I am not sure that Rafer would be all that good off the bench....with Landry and Artest.... The question is, has Rafer been Wally Pipped? I guess we shall see. DD
I made the case against Brooks starting in another thread, but now I'll build on that sentiment in the proper topic... first though, I must say that the poll is a lot closer than I thought it would be. How quick you all are to forget the end of last season where a healthy Alston may have given us that extra lift we needed. Anyhow, I agree Brooks is quite a special player, and he has shown himself to be a good scorer, a good shooter, good at imposing a fast tempo, and he has also shown the signs of becoming a good defender in the near future... but let's all not get carried away. Yeah, Brooks is the future PG of this team, and he may rightfully take the starting spot from Alston as soon as next season, but right now he is just too raw to consistantly be starting. As good as the team has looked with Brooks starting at PG the past three games, the team could very well have looked just as good with Skip starting. Really, how are we to know? Last season, and into this one, Alston has become a capable leader at PG; last year with no alternative during his injury we lacked something important that was a big factor in our playoff loss. Alston brings better D, a better basketball IQ, better ball distribution, and due to his experience he is better able to manage the tempo of the offense(whereas Brooks can get a little too anxious due to his youth). Skip is not gonna wow anyone with his scoring, but that's not what he's on the court for-although there have been plenty of nights where him missing 8 in a row gives way to several clutch 3s. Point is, I think his inability to score consistantly will be magnified off the bench. I'm not here to argue that Brooks hasn't looked good; he's looked genuinely great, not only starting the past few games, but really the entire season in general. With his speed, scoring prowess, natural ability, and tenacity he's a possible star in waiting; I think he only needs time in which to develop better D and basketball IQ... and when that really starts to take shape I'll be all for him starting. Until then, what he has now is best suited coming off the bench-similar to Landry. Brooks helps foster a nice change of pace, he can score while the usual scorers rest, he can keep the opponent on its toes, and if he gets hot he can simply get extended minutes. Like Landry, though, Brooks is still raw; both players have awesome potential, but I think what is best for them is to be the real backbone of the 2nd team-both serving important roles while gaining valueable experience to help improve upon their rawness. For an extended period, who's to say Brooks wouldn't falter for any number of reasons? Alston knows how to be the starting PG, and the way he does it works well... because do we really need another scorer starting when we have Yao, T-Mac, Scola, and Artest all capable of putting up points? I don't think so, I think Brooks's scoring spark would work best coming off the bench-for now anyways.
The key to look at is the team's record and efficiency when Brooks is starting vs Rafer. The funny thing is that Rafer is great a couple games a year, average a couple and flat out horrid in a majority- at least offensively - I honestly think that people have gotten so used to his level of play that they forgive him more than they should. The guy is not improving, he is declining, just look at his stats, maybe he continues to start, I don't know, but I see his minutes going the way of the dodo, and for good reason. DD
Declining? Are you kidding? I wouldn't say he's improving exactly, but he's learned to fill a role in the system well. To me, last year was the year Rafer came into his own, before that I was also an Alston detractor. Yeah, his offense is mostly atrocious, and he's good for a few bad bricks a game, but like i mentioned... even in games where he plays terrible he has a knack for hitting clutch shots. The occasional clutch shooting doesn't make up for his bad offense, but everything else about Rafer is ideal for our starting unit and team philosophy. And you and I both know he's not taking so many shots that it costs us the game one way or the other. Brooks will eventually displace Alston at PG, rightfully so I might add, but I really don't think it should be this season-Brooks is still too raw.
not on topic but did you guys see Ron Artest giving the rebound to AB at the end of the game to give AB the double double. That was some cool stuff Artest!! nice double double AB!!
Matt Bullard recently said in a game that Rafer has the highest +/- on the team. If that is true, game/set/match. Rafer is the starter. Maybe Rafer doesn't score the most points but if the team scores more with him on the court ...no-brainer.
You do know that his stats declined last year, people just remember that one Laker game, but he was his normal putrid self more often than not. = He does have that knack, I will give you that. Alston shoots too much, for his skill level, everytime he shoots it means that the other 4 starters that are ALL better shooters don't get that shot.....with Brooks, he is on par or a better shooter than the other 4, in fact the reason the team has gotten off to such fast starts lately, is that other teams are using the Rafer D and leaving Brooks wide open, and he is nailing them....thus teams have to honor all 5 positions on our starting unit, opening up the game for all of them. I do not like Rafer, that is a fact, but I don't hate the guy, I just think he is a flawed player who gets far too much credit for being able to dribble and play the passing lanes. He is at best a 2nd string PG, and probably would not be playing at all on over 50% of the NBA teams....he is just not that good. One more thing, Brooks would be undefeated as the starting PG if Tmac did not take the ball from him at the end of the San Antonio game and start chucking....Brooks had the team up 10, and then Tmac came in and the ball movement stopped....the new Tmac would have passed, but that TMac stopped AB's perfect starting record. As it is, I think Brooks as a starter is 4-1....with wins over Denver and New Orleans in that mix....... DD
He was essentially the same player. He just played 34 minutes instead of 37 minutes. He was actually better on his 2-point shots, and he dipped a bit with his 3-point shooting. His PER was virtually identical, at 13.
I was talking about his overall shooting percentages, which have continued to decline further this year. Never shot 40% from the field ever as a Rocket And isn't the median PER 15? Rafer is just not good, people are too forgiving of the guy, but with the wide open shots he gets, he should be a LOT better....many 2nd tier PGs would be much better than Rafer in this offense with Yao and Tmac.... Rafer missing wide open shots on the perimeter and at the rim, is a sign of a guy that has peaked and is on the way down in his career. DD
I agree in full that Brooks is better than rafer. But when you have tmac performing the way he is, yao dominating, scola and battier on the floor, you dont need ABs offense. You just need rafer to get it past half court and set up our offense. AB is so good starting or off the bench that you'd rather have his spark off the bench with ron, carl and whoever else is thrown in there. I agree that AB makes a great starting PG, but with our starting 5, we dont need a great PG with the bench we have.
His stats may have declined, but what he brought to the team starting last season was something not measurable in stats alone-sort of like the greatness of Battier. I can't disagree one bit with the notion that Alston shoots too much, and I wish he'd reel that in as much as anyone; I just happen to think it's an acceptable trade off to get at the bigger picture. The opponent D already has a lot to account for with our starting unit (plus I'd argue they don't ignore alston's shot any more than they do Battiers-but I digress), and though having to accont for Brooks and his offense might soften up the opponent's D a bit more I think Brooks is better served using that offensive prowess as a spark with the second unit. Plus, whose to say that with Brooks as the consistant starter teams wouldn't start to figure his style out and minimize the edge he has? I don't know that they would be able to neutralize his explosiveness, but certainly if teams were more familiar with him starting they'd gameplan his tendencies and take away at least a little edge. For awhile Alston was a journeyman because he indeed could not successfully start on many teams, and it wasn't til he got here that he matured and learned to fit into a role. I'm not gonna argue that he wouldn't start for half the NBA teams, but that just means to me he is not suitable or capable of fitting into those teams's systems. Doesn't mean he's some scrub of Stromile Swift proportions... For our team he is a good, reliable PG who deserves to keep starting until Brooks becomes simply too good not to start. He is not, "at best", a 2nd string PG; at worst he is a 2nd string PG on a team where he's a poor fit. At best, Alston is a top 12-15 PG who is a good starter and an ideal role player-nothing more, nothing less-brick laying issues aside.
According to 82games, Yao +/- is 18.2. Batter = 11.9 McGrady = 7.2 Rafer = 7.2 Artest = 6.5 ... ... ... Brooks = -8.6 I love what Brooks brings to the game and he's definately making a case to start ...but I think Rafer is still our starter. http://www.82games.com/0809/0809HOU.HTM
His overall shooting percentages have been steady the last couple years. For his career, it's at .494 TS%. Last 3 years (including this one), it's .496, .492, .491. We're talking differences of a fraction of a percentage point. I think that's insignificant, statistically. And, yeah, average PER is set to 15. But that's mean, not median. There are far more players with less than 15 PER than have more than 15. Rafer doesn't put up great stats in the box score, and we all recognize it. We forgive him because the team has simply played better with him at PG than any one else over the last 4 years. If a better option was available, I'd happily take it. But Brooks, a nice sparkplug of an offensive player, is not ready. If he had a favorable matchup, maybe Adelman chooses to let him finish the game, and I'd be perfectly fine with that. Generally speaking, though, I still think Alston is a better player. But Brooks is relatively young, and he'll get better with time.
Whether Rafer starts is irrelevent, at least we now have an option for when he is struggling. Brooks will probably go back to the bench because he would handle it better....as a 2nd year player he probably doesn't EXPECT to start. Rafer may not handle a demotion so easily...so let him start, and when he struggles...yank him. DD
