Gererally, a team's 2nd unit is worse defensively than a team's 1st unit. Which is better? Having the 1st unit defense being forced to honor Brooks, or the 2nd unit? Keep in mind that him being in the 2nd unit allows him to take more shots. If he's starting, the other team really wouldn't have to honor him, because Aaron is too busy trying to make sure he can make a post-entry pass to Yao without screwing up, or getting the ball to McGrady and then standing around the perimeter. Brooks only took 7 shots in the T-Wolves game.
I prefer the better players to play the majority of the game, and Brooks is better than Rafer. That being said, he only took 7 shots in the books but his EIGHT FT attempts means he took 11 shots. Look, I have said I don't mind Rafer starting, but Brooks is better, and will continue to get even better with more playing time. Rafer is left wide open by other teams on purpose and it limits the rest of the players effectiveness because they have to deal with double teams more often. Answer this honest question, whom would you rather have shooting a wide open shot, Brooks or Rafer? If the answer is Brooks, then IMO, he should be playing the most minutes...... DD
When was the last time you saw Alston score 18 points taking only 7 shots? In fact, has that ever happened in his career?
Rafer isn't a big steals guy. He'll get some deflections, but I don't think playing the passing lanes is his strength on the defensive end. He's bigger and stronger than Aaron, and he's more experienced. He's better at getting through screens, he has a better understanding of the angles on PnR defense, he's not as much of a liability if he gets caught in a cross-matchup, and he's a better double teamer (again, because of his superior size/length). I don't think its accurate to sum up the difference in their defense with "Rafer plays the passing lanes better".
bwahaha. Seriously? Anyway, back to a real conversation ... Rafer off the bench would be trash. I'm gonna assign some arbitrary #'s to make a point. Rafer as a starter = 1 point. Brooks as a backup = 1 point. Brooks as a starter = 1.5 points. Rafer as a backup = 0 points. The team as a whole loses out at the PG position if you bench Rafer. Yea, Brooks may play better but he can't play 48 minutes and his play won't be not enough to make up for the total crap we'll get from Rafer off the bench. Given that, since Rafer has proved he can lead this team and now that we have a viable backup to sit Rafer down when he's playing like crap ...I don't think we mess with the PG rotation right now.
Fair enough, but Rafer's man to man defense is not all that great either. I will give you the team defender bits, that makes sense, and it is kind of what I was implying by saying he plays the passing lanes better. I just do not believe that Rafer is a quality NBA PG, I think he is possibly the worst starting PG in the entire league. And I love the pressure that Brooks puts on the opposing teams with his speed and athleticism. I do agree with Krosfyah though, I don't think Rafer would handle his demotion well, and for that reason I would be ok with leaving him as the starter, but would increase Brooks PT to more than 30 mpg, and limit Rafer to around 20 unless he is hitting his shots. Honestly, Rafer always seems to respond to a challenge to his job, so I expect him to play better now that Brooks has made him expendable as a starter. He has always been Tmac's security blanket, but I think the rest of the team can see Brooks hitting those shots and getting the ball to the right teamate at the right time...he has grown immensly since last season. DD
Overrated by whom? Rafer is everybody's whipping boy. [Including myself at times] There's no such thing as a great defensive PG anymore due to the new rules. You simply don't see any Gary Payton's or Shane Battier's of the PG position. Now, i'm not saying Rafer is like that but in all fairness I think he's clearly established himself as a good defensive player. Just like Battier or Artest get lit up as often as they do shut somebody down, it's going to be even worse at the PG position yet I feel Rafer still manages to do a decent job defensively. Even though he's a hothead he still plays smart, he's experienced and has a small yet noticeable size advantage over Brooks. If you stopped watching the NBA for a couple years then somebody told you a 6'0", 160 lb player became a defensive stalwart. Would you believe it?
Ok, so agreeing with your premise about PG's not being able to play great D because of the rule changes, why do people complain about Brooks and his defense? The two games he has had against elite PGs he more than held his own....Paul and Billups. Size at the PG spot is overated...very few PGs post up. Give me speed and shot making ability at the PG spot any day of the week. I think Brooks is flat out a much better player. Again, I ask this question, who do you want shooting a wide open shot? Brooks or Rafer? DD
Everybody gets torched by elite players ...that's what makes them elite. Nobody is confusing Rafer as an elite PG. But the team is better off, right now, starting Rafer and letting AB suck up a lot of minutes off the bench.
A player that small is too easy to shoot over, post up and overpower. Wait until he plays Baron Davis, Deron Williams or any other type of "power PG". He's going to get shredded. I was impressed with how well he played Chris Paul. He was able to do that mainly because of his speed advantage. Not many people have the quickness to match Paul in that category. Plus, it doesn't hurt that they're roughly the same height. P.S. STEELERS TOUCHDOWN
But he will shred them on the other end with his speed. And those players SHRED Rafer already too...but Rafer can not SHRED back...that is the point. And how did Billups do against him? I think Brooks is growing, and is better, not by a little bit, but by a lot. Not one person has answered my question. Who do you want shooting a wide open shot, Rafer or Brooks? DD
Only playtime makes player better. Brooks is our hope in playoff this year unless you believe Artest will change everything. D Williams will still eat RA alive. Brooks can not be worse on defense, but offensively, we certainly have more weapon. Brooks can shoot and drive to the rim! Rafer only lives on his floaters. My honest warning is: If you have a cardiac disease, please consult your doctor for using Viagra or watching those floators.
If we had dominant interior defense, I would be less concerned about Brooks' defense. But after watching perimeter players blow by our entire frontcourt after they get past our perimeter game after game, I am not sure what to think. I did vote for Brooks, for the record, and that is only because I think perimeter defense is overrated with today's rules. I think we need to add an interior defensive presence with length and athleticism. Camby would be gold.
That is why I think he should be starting. But, I do think Rafer has ZERO value as a 2nd string PG, probably shoots too much in that role too.....so, I think he remains the starter, though not by his skillset. DD
I still rather have Brooks be a scorer than run the offense. So I'll keep him on the bench for that spark.
But Rafer doesn't run the offense either, Tmac does......so why not have your best players as options for Tmac? DD
You don't want to trade offense for offense and that's essentially what you are suggesting. I don't want concede anything defensively. Even though defending NBA PG's is difficult, you still want somebody in your rotation capable of slowing the other guy down, denying a post up or getting physical if necessary and Rafer can do that. Maybe Brooks will learn to do that over time and figure out how to compensate for his lack of size? Let's hope. In this example: Rafer played Deron well in the playoffs last year regardless of what some of the box scores indicate. He blew right by and played his type of game against B-Jax. Once Rafer returned Deron magically stopped getting to the FT line and instead relied on his hot & cold man-tit-jumper. I'll take that. He also helped make Baron look ordinary the other night in that despicable loss to the Clippers. He did well although Billups is primarily a shooter. If your shot isn't falling..... Brooks although their career shooting percentage from long range is nearly identical. Hopefully, Brooks stays at the 40% clip and possibly beyond.
I hear ya. Baller, I just don't agree. BTW. Brooks career FG% is 43.4% and from 3pt range it is 39.3% And Rafer's career FG% is .385% and his 3pt percentage is .357% Both significant increases for Brooks, and he is only in his 2nd year....Rafer is NOT going to get better, Brooks will. 4-5% better is a significant difference. DD
