Stats in the NCAA are irrelevant. Most of the best players don't play for 4 years and consequently can't rack up all the numbers.
Since wehave Luther Head on the roster, we can draft Redick and have a Redick Head backcourt or Rudy Gay and have a Gay Head backcourt.
Just my opinion, but that trade might be the only thing WORSE than drafting Redick at #8. I do NOT want poor character guys like Stevenson representing the city of Houston. Then there's the fact you are forfeiting a potential* future all-star (the last we're likely to be able to draft for or trade for as long as T-Mac and Yao are on the payroll) for a mediocre journeyman and a one-dimensional deadeye shooter. Does the year we got Pike and Adrian Griffin ring a bell? *Potential - With the athleticism and smarts of the first 8 or 9 in the draft, there is a significant chance for this player to become an all-star. Doesn't mean it will, but what an enjoyable ride it will be to see it unfold. Hope for the future. Stevenson and Redick don't give you hope for the future. What you see with them is all they will ever be.
No. ... wait, yes. Wait, no. No is my final answer. College evaluation is so difficult because you have to consider more variables. Think about it. Carney, Brewer and Redick all played maybe one same opponent. That opponent is the only variable you can isolate and use to compare the three. That opponent ends up being variable too because college players are so hot and cold that you can't even get one consistent team in any given season. Also, the three players played in systems. The Rockets system is different than all of those. How will it translate offensively, defensively and overall? Will there be any personality issues? I think the way the decision comes down is a lot of communication between the Rockets coaches and Brass. You can't let a coach decide completely because a coach thinks about a plug. What will work immediately when plugged in? A GM thinks, what will work out in the long run to be the next big thing in the NBA as the years go by? The answer is somewhere inbetween. I think having communication amongst all those parties should be listened to and then one guy makes the answer. The village elder is usually wise. The coach is weak in this area unless you are trying to make a push to win one that season. It's all tricky, but I bet it's fun down there in rocket-land.
Considering Redick is supposed to be a "one-dimensional" player, how on earth does this thread get to be 39 pages.
i've really convinced myself that redick is the way to go but apparently in the deleted thread van gundy mentioned it probably wouldn't be him? anyone confirm that?
WHO KNOWS redick cant solve our problems we need a josh howard and his name is ronnie brewer! Redick is one dimensinal hes very good at that dimension but come on what if tmac misses games next season is redick going to step up and be a slasher Heck No he is not a bad player but pretty much ne Nba expert will tell you that the 8 is way to high for drunkie redick!
I think most agree that he is one-dimensional, but the difference in opinion predominately exists between people who think that one dimension (shooting) is enough to compensate for all other flaws and those who don't feel that way. The Redick Debate is a great argument on how important shooting is relative to other skills in basketball.
Van Gundy didn't say anything about Redick per se. He just reiterated the need for a big SG, and that being able to slash to the basket is just as (if not more) important than being able to shoot.
Well maybe for some it is, I think the guy is much more than a shooter, he is someone who passes well, has decent handles and plays with passion. DD
This thread has been going on longer than I have been a poster here (which isn't long, mind you!), but the Redick pick would seem a lot better last year than in this draft. I think Redick will be a very solid pro who has an unbelievable shot, is a better athlete and defender than most assume, and is pretty smart with the ball. He will be an even better shooter when the defense is not doubling him of the screens and picks as they did at Duke (primarily because no one else could hit a jumper). That being said, the Rox have way to many needs for such a situational player. While I would not be upset if we picked Redick, I think passing on a guy like Brewer (if available) would be major mistake. While Brewer's shot is below average, what he brings to the table defensively, in transition, in the lane, and on the boards, and in the locker room. The thing that remains so difficult about this draft is that we all want a Mo Peterson or Jason Richardson or even a Raja Bell, but there just aren't any at the level yet. A guy like Brewer can get there, while I am just not sure about some of the other prospects.
I think Redick can develop into a Rip Hamilton type of scorer by constant moving and using the screens. The same can't be said of Brewer. Brewer is just another guy with the P tag without much to back it up. Redick has the P tag as well as current ability to back it up. Redick has the ability to launch all kinds of shots, long distance bombing, fadeaways, off balance shots sideways..., and he'll mix it up with fakes and dribble drives. He doesn't have to drive past defenders, he just need a little space to get his shot off. With his basketball IQ he can be like Rip or Sam Cassel, who is slow but keeps stabbing the opponents given just a little seperation. The thinking Brewer can develop into Josh Howard is based more on hope and less on reality. In the NBA Brewer is gonna have a harder time to drive to the basket. When his shot is suspect, the NBA defenders have the athleticism and size to keep a distance from him while preventing him from driving and still being able to disrupt his jumper. Brewer doesn't have the same one on one ability as Redick, simply because he isn't good at shooting. Josh Howard is different, he can slash as well as shoot. Take Brewer if he has this explosive first step against NBA defenders, but I dbout it, because if he has that kind of explosiveness in college, he'd be slashing his way to 25 points a game in college at 50 fg%.
Maybe this argument points at Carney. The two extremes are Redick and Brewer, but Carney is in the middle ground there. The highlights of Carney show him driving, shooting, but his dedication is the suspect. I think the TMac friendship is hurting Carney. Last player evaluation that TMac did ended up turning into Stromile. Of course, Stromile might improve and prove everyone wrong. Carney might be our guy in the draft. The right answer always seems to be in the middle. Carney just can't play point guard.
All that I've read here says that Brewer had the handles and Carney was the spot-up guy with suspect driving ability. How can folks not be intrigued by the athletic charts that just came out to back up the claims that were being made about Brewer? Excellent speed, and even better hops. As strong as a PF.
Believe me, I'd luv to have Brewer over Redick if it was not for his shot. It's not only that shooting is an important part of the game, but also its importance gets magnified on a team centered around T-mac and Yao. There's loads of guys that are off the charts in athleticism and size. Ya know Malick Badiane? Dude has great athleticism and size, but is now playing backup pf on a German team. Sure, Brewer is not as raw as Badiane, but like Badiane he doesn't do anything exceptionally well. The Mavericks don't only excel in athleticism and slashing. They also excel in shooting. It's the combo of both that makes them tough to defend. Mark Cuban bought both of those for them. The Rockets can only pick one edge to strengthen due to their thin wallet. As for me, I'd choose shooting over athleticism. A poor shooting team diminishes 111's dominance, a sharpshooting team enforces their dominance. A slashing team that can't shoot will diminish 111's dominance while the added individual ability - like the slashing of Brewer - isn't enough to dominate. Also, the current lookout is the Rockets can add great shooting and size as well as athleticism to the backcourt by getting Mike James and JJ Redick. It will be an upgrade in all aspects with the strategic goal of shooting particularly addressed.
IF TMac decides to turn brokeback again next season, we are screwed anyway no matter whether we have REDICK or BREWER. Heck, you can have GAY or MORRISON and you still go nowhere.
as i've posted before rockets shooting was bad but looked worse than it really was. rockets bad shooting was compounded by their lack of ability to get to the rack when shots weren't falling which in turn forced them to jack it up from the perimeter = ugly. opposing teams having 3p career nights which forced some catch up 3p attempts = even uglier.
People need to get off Josh Howard's d*** alrready. This guys a good a player but damn. He really doesn't do anything great. He does everything good. People talk about his defense, they act like he's some shut down defender and that Brewer will be too. Where was Josh Howard when D-Wade is going for 42 and 36 the last 2 games? Where was he when T-Mac was burning Dallas for 48 that night, where was he when TMac scored over 30 pts a game in the playoff series? He's still a good defender, but you put him on the Rockets, and what you go from 3rd in the league to where? Maybe 2nd or even 1st. Big deal. Defense is not the weakness on the team, they are #3 with friekin' old 6'1 Wesley at the 2. Our shooting is HORRIBLE. That is the main weakness on the team. You add the #4 3pt % in the NBA in Mike James to be the starting point, and add the NCAA's all time 3pt leader in JJ Redick and you drastically improve your offense, and probably improve on the 3rd best defense in the NBA. Redick is the obvious choice for the Rockets.
