(CHRONIC) Point guard wishes Rockets would extend contract to match his growing value

Its not a claim its my opinion. Did you actually watch any the Rockets games last year?

 

aelliott, the only problem with your comparison of lowry to those other players is he's not as good as those guys. If he were, he would be a starter. Its not that he's a bad shooter, just a reluctant one. Nor can he shoot contested shots. Even though rondo cant shoot, he's just a far better player. If lowry had parkers mid game or blow by ability,then thats another story.

 

Weird, Brooks is already being wished out of town by a few people for a simple comment.

Post 2004 we suffered through Moochie / Alston / JL3 / whoever else, wishing we had a decent point guard.

We get him, he proves to be a an effective team player who doesn't have an ego and wants nothing but to grow and help his team - both of which he does... then we slowly get tired of our shiny new toy and clamor to ship him out of town so our backup can start. We start throwing out meaningless things like "Brooks couldn't be a PG on a championship team" and have thread after thread berating him for being short and not guarding Chris Paul and DWill well enough.

People were bishing about Brooks not being clutch enough when he was dropping 30 points and hitting clutch shots right before their eyes.

My point? I hardly value anyone's current off-season valuation of Brooks vs. Lowry; the faults that Brooks is repeatedly cited for are legit but they aren't world-ending.

Even aelliot, who otherwise made a great, thoughtful post, ended with the worst part:

Brooks is more threatening on offense and forces more teams to account for him and coaches to draw up defensive plans for him by far; just his rep can be game-changing. To say what you said is to undersell Brooks enormously. Lowry and Brooks are sort of a yin and yang, I like them both, but I can't say with a good conscience that the Lowry love isn't just backup QB syndrome.

 

Napalm, pretty much about brooks. Its not really brooks vs lowry, but thats the comparison that always get thrown out. Brooks has more than held his own against every pg in the league. He had trouble guarding dwill,rose,and a couple others, but those guys have trouble with him also. People think a team has to always wheel and deal guys who are getting better. At some point, you have to pay players and see how good they can become.

 

I want to have aelliott's babies.

 

AB is not a "point guard". he is a SG. he does not have PG vision. he can not create for others.

Ariza hit clutch shots too.Ariza Ariza averaged 1 more assist per game last season. Nobody is missing him (except me )

 

So it's been what, about 22 months since you last posted?

 

Not as long as it has been for me to witness a 7 paragraph post by aelliott.

 

Welcome back heypartner

 

Agreed that Lowry isn't as good as those other guys (of course Brooks isn't eiher) but that's not the point. I was responding to the idea that our PG had to be able to shoot from distance or teams would simply pack it in the paint and stop both Lowry and Yao.

The fact that the likes of Rose, Westbook and Rondo are better than Lowry further demonstrates the point. If the way to stop a penetrating guard was to simply pack you defense in the paint then every team in the league would use that strategy. The problem is that the NBA rules don't let you play a straight zone so there's always going to be driving lanes.

If you have a guy that is a good penetrator but a poor outside shooter then the defender is going to play a step or two off of them. A step or two gives the defender a better chance to stay in front of the offensive player but in no way does it put the defender in position to double down on Yao as was previously suggested.

If you do pack your defense in to a point where you effect Yao, then Lowry is going to have too much space. Once he gets to full speed with that much distance between him and the defender then it's awfully hard for a defender to get in front of him. Kind of like trying to defend a fastbreak once the ballhandler is at full speed. You can try and guess where the ballhandler is gong and beat him to the spot but for a guy of even Lowry's skills that's hard to do consistently. You'll accumlate alot of fouls and allow alot of penetration when you guess wrong.

I just don't think that packing it is a sound defensive strategy based on today's NBA rules. I don't think that it would work against Lowry and I think it would work even less against the Roses or Rondos of the world (because they are better than Lowry).

 

I disagree. I don't think many teams scheme their defense to stop Brooks. I don't think that they did that last season and I'm positive that with Yao on the floor they certainly won't do it this year.

Basically defenses aren't going to give Brooks open looks at 3pts. Teams will most certainly plan to do that but that doesn't require that they change their defense. Likewise teams might jump over and double Brooks when he crosses the midcourt line and force him to give up the ball. Forcing him to give the ball up early has been effective against us at times but again a quick double team at midcourt with 9 seconds gone off the shot clock doesn't require any major changes to the defense.

I keep hearing that Brooks should be on the floor because he can create his own shot. I'd agree that his speed allows him to create a shot it's just that it doesn't go in that often. Brooks is a horrible finisher near the rim so does it really matter if he can get into the lane if he not going to finish or create for others? How many game tying or game winning chances did Brooks get last season and end up either getting his shot blocked or throwing up a wild off balance layup attempt over a big guy?

If I'm defending the Rockets at the end of the game, I'm telling my guys to play up on Brooks and force him to the middle. I like my chances of Brooks trying to shoot over big guys. Since driving and dishing isn't really his forte then I can even double him because I can be pretty confident that once he starts for the hoop that he's going to try and get a shot off.

If you really believe that defenses are having to double Brooks then I'll ask the same question that I asked about Carmello: Does it really matter if you have to double team him if he isn't going to pass the ball to the open player? Most coaches would gladly settle for the opponent (no matter who it is) going 1 on 2 and trying to get a shot off.

I stick with what I said. Brooks is a talented scorer but not elite. He doesn't make the guys around him better and he's not productive at the end of games. Still he's a very good scorer. Likewise, Lowry is a very good defender. He's not a lockdown all-NBA defender but he's still a very good defender. He's quick, he's strong and he puts in the effort on defense.

The difference to me is that opposing PGs can flat out abuse Brooks' defense. You allow a guy like Derron Williams, Steve Nash or Chris Paul to consistently get into the lane then the Rockets have huge problems. They'll score but even more importantly they'll get everyone else on their team easy hoops. When those PGs can go to the hoop then that's big problems for Yao, he'll have to try to help out and he simply doesn't have the foot speed to get in front of them and he can't react fast enough when they dish to a teammate. Consistent penetration is a recipe for Yao being in constant foul trouble. To me, that's a much bigger problem than Lowry's offense.

I'm not underselling Brooks offense, I'm just not ignoring his glaring weaknesses on defense.

 

Thanks but that job has been filled.

How have you been? I didn't realize that you were still lurking around here. Good to hear from you.

 

Boston lost the championship due to Rondo's inability to shoot. Bryant didn't even guard him and was able to stay fresh as a result. So that killed Boston on both ends. Also, Brooks' offense impacts the game more than Lowry's defense does and I don't think it's close. Point guard is where defense matters the least.

 

I'm done arguing with you. Your assessment of Aaron Brooks is like one of those ESPN analyst who states theyre opinions but hasn't actually watched a damn Rockets game in they're life.

Lmao. And Kirk Hinrich is your replacement for Brooks

Bottom line, we will see how beneficial Brooks is when the season starts. I predict he will be the star player and will be more efficient. You will be backtracking on 95% on all your idiotic statements

 

Boston lost because of Rondo's inability to shoot? Really? It had nothing to do with the fact that LA's bigs dominated the inside? Ok, let's look at it.

How did Rondo do in the 4 games that LA won?

GM1: 13pts (6-14 Shooting), 8 Ast, 6 Reb
GM3: 11pts (5-10 Shooting), 8 Ast, 3 Reb
GM6: 10 pts (5-15 shooting), 6 Ast, 5 reb.
GM7: 14 pts (6-13 shooting), 10 Ast, 8 reb.

That's the reason that Boston lost? Right, because Kobe didn't have to play any defense so he could rest up to play offense. Ok, let's see how much that helped Kobe. Hmm...Kobe shot a cool 40% from the floor in the series. That's an incredibly low pct for a guy that was only playing one end of the floor.

How about an alternate theory. Maybe Kobe Bryant, who is a good defender, worked really hard to try and limit Rondo's effectiveness. He limited Rondo but he certainly didn't shut him down. Kobe ended up getting his points but he had to hoist up and incredible 163 shots during the series to get his points while nobody else in the series took over 100 total shots. Maybe LA's length inside had more to do with LA winning the series than the idea that Kobe Bryant didn't have to play any defense. LA setup their entire defensive scheme to stop Rondo.

I also agree with your statement " Brooks' offense impacts the game more than Lowry's defense does and I don't think it's close". Of course I also believe that Brook's defense negatively impacts the game more than Lowry's offense does and I don't think that it's close either.

 

Rose, Westbrook & Rondo are in a elite class. You can't convince me Lowry is in the same league

If you think Lowry can just bulldoze his way to the hoop everytime your dreaming. Brooks should start based on his ability to knock down shots w/ Yao on the court. People underestimate this

 

Brooks is not a point guard in the vein of Isiah Thomas, CP3, Magic, Kidd, or other free-wheeling pass-happy PGs. There's no doubt about that. He lacks the vision of Lowry, etc. But the man can score.

Would I rather have a Magic/Isiah type of PG? Of course. But in the mean time, whom can we reasonably get at such a bargain price? Keep Brooks for now, let him score 20+ PPG, watch him get even more dangerous this year with Yao in the middle to draw double-teams, and then deal him if/when an upgrade becomes available.

I hear a lot of talk about Iggy this an Iggy that, but no real deal seems feasible or in the works right now. Brooks is good enough for the present, despite his lack of length, defensive ability, and propensity to draw fouls. With Yao's minutes and points at their lowest ebb ever, and with Shane unable to crack the double-digit scoring ceiling, we will need points from AB. Lowry provides a change of pace and great passing, but he can't go nuts from 3-land or hit the difficult shots. Brooks, I hate to say, is competent enough for right now. He's adequate.

(Wow, I can't believe I'm compromising like this. I, the man who will consider the season a complete failure if we don't reach at least WCF.)

 

Did you watch the games? Bryant didn't work hard at all to limit Rondo. In fact he worked harder to limit other players by sagging off of Rondo and helping out everyone else. Meanwhile Fisher chased Allen all over the court through screens. LA's length was important but not allowing them to play 5-on-4 defensively would have helped tremendously. The series went down to the final minutes after all.

I just disagree. I think guys like Nash, etc. are more worried about dealing with Brooks defensively than they are about Lowry shutting them down. In fact Lowry has little chance of limiting any of the 'elite' point guards in the league, especially when they do a lot of their damage off of screens. Another thing, I think Brooks' defense is more likely to improve than Lowry's shooting.

 

Alleiott, to address each guards weakness:

If Dwill or other big guard like Davis/Miller are abusing Brooks, there are counter measures such as switching Battier over to them (which has been VERY successful in the past) as well as guiding the penetrating guard into a rotating big. It doesn't matter if they can get past you, if you let them go where you want them. Thats what help defense is and that is what we excel at as a team. As for the Paul's and Nash's, I dont care about them because neither are likely on playoff teams. Its Fisher/Blake, Billups, Dwill, Kidd, Parker, Westbrook whom we need to worry about and Brooks matches up well against most of them.

However, with Lowry on the floor, the defense can sag off of him at the perimeter and double up Yao with a front, preventing the entry pass. With both bigs in the paint, Lowry has no lane to the basket and no open teamates to create for since HE is the open man. Our offense will break down more often than it has in the past and WITHOUT a single guy who can get his own shot to bail us out.

We tolerated Rafer's poor outside shooting, because McGrady could usually bail us out with his playmaking. That is no longer an option, since we have no playmakers. Go back and look at what the difference was in the 22 game win streak, or don't, I will tell you. The difference was Rafer picked a magical 2 month period where he was blazing from 3 point land @ 38% and 39%, sometimes taking 7 and 8 a game. You know why he was taking so many? Because thats what the defense was conceding to us. My point is, it is PIVOTAL, with our inside/outside offense to have spacing, ESPECIALLY with no elite playmakers who can create something out of nothing.

And Boston lost that series because Allen had one of the worst shooting games since Starks vs the Rockets.