THIS IS NOT A "WHO IS BETTER" THREAD. The Rockets are building a team for the future, starting next year. In an ironic twist, the Rockets had a star center and shooting guard for years and needed help at every other position. Now? They're loaded at depth at every other position and desperately need help where they once had diamonds in place. Take into consideration trade value, opportunity cost, player age, salary, the eventual return of Yao Ming (and how he'll change and impact the team) -- all factors. As an example, I'm sure keeping Brooks over Lowry would seem like a no-brainer... but at the same time, Brooks trade value could be sky high. Who would you keep on the Rockets at each of these positions if you could only keep one? Point Guard Aaron Brooks vs. Kyle Lowry Power Forward Luis Scola vs. Carl Landry Small Forward Trevor Ariza vs. Shane Battier
Brooks, Landry, and Ariza easily. All young and Brooks/Landry have a ton of upside, still. Ariza will be better when he goes back to the same role he had in LA.
I'd say Lowry, Landry, Ariza. Lowry would be a better pure point guard on a team with enough established scorers in place. Plus, as Clutch eluded to, Brooks trade value might be artificially high right now.
Basing it solely on value in a trade: I've been a proponent of selling high on Scola since last season. I love the guy but he's at peak value now and the rest is all downslope. Same with Battier, though I think his value peaked last season. Brooks or Lowry is a toss up, each has different skills. Brooks would probably fetch more value in a trade as I feel Lowry is severely undervalued, so I'd go with Lowry.
Brooks/Landry/Battier They all stay together could cover all the spots of those positions on the court, good offense along with superb defense, that would do us good for years.
excellent question lowry over brooks i think brooks' inability to be a passer first hurts the team, his turnovers are another down side landry over scola simply for athleticism ariza over battier mainly cause of the age i think this is a no lose situation depending on of course what value the rockets get in any trade scenario
Voted for Brooks / Scola / Ariza Brooks: with Yao back and more trades coming, we'll need his outside shooting even more than his scoring. Scola: I assume Landry would be gone as he's our best (or 2nd best) trade asset. As such, I'd hope we retain Scola next year. Ariza: He's 26 and at worst, he's already shown he can be a legit contributor to a championship team.
Lowry - Brook's trade value is sky high right now. I think: Brooks' Trade Value + Lowry's Playmaking Value > Brooks' Scoring Value + Lowry's Trade Value Scola - Landry's trade value is also sky high right now. So therefore I think: Landry's Trade Value + Scola's Experience Value > Landry's Explosive Scoring + Scola's Trade Value Ariza - I still sort of equate Ariza as a younger version of Battier minus the leadership but plus the ability to take on a slightly higher scoring load (not the primary scorer, but better than what Battier is giving us now). Though this one is VERY close, I'd have to say: Ariza's Defensive Value + Battier's Trade Value > Battier's Leadership + Ariza's Trade Value.
Keep Brooks, landry, and ariza. They fit the bill fir our new move: young and run-gun offense. Battier, detrimental to our system, but he isn't getting any younger and we could use the cap space since we have a similar player in ariza, although I believe battier is better for the team ATM. Trade him to a contender. Scola, same as battier. A really good player and will be around for awhile, bc he doesn't rely on his athletic ability(bc it's not there? ) but his trade value is at a high ATM too, and someone will be looking to overpay him. Lowry. More of a true pg, hard nosed, and good defensively. But he can't spread the floor, but he can drawl the foul and find the open player. But Brooks fits the offense well, he opens things up bc of his speed and ability to spread the floor. But all this depends on who we are trading for ultimately.
Lowry over Brooks -I see major upside in Lowry along with Brooks, but for the Rockets, I see Lowry being a better fit... Brooks needs the ball to be effective. His defense is average and he doesn't get after the boards like Lowry does.. Lowry affects the game in more ways than Brooks does. Yeah, don't expect Lowry to hit the big shot at the end of the game, but we won't ever need that from him with Yao/Star player we hope to attain through trade, free agency.. Landry over Scola -Age, athleticism, flexibility. Battier over Ariza -Battier is one of those players you almost never come across... Although he doesn't bring much offense to the equation, he's the variable that balances the equation out. He's a leader on and off the floor, a great role model and teacher for the younger players, and symbolizes everything the Rockets are about: Heart, Hustle, Passion. I see Ariza as simply an above average role player. He's not showing heavy signs that he can develop into anything more, therefore I believe Battier can offer more, even with only 5 or so years left. *I trust that Morey can easily find other players that could develop into what Ariza can offer.. Not all that Battier can.
IMO you have to trade Landry. Yes he is having an AMAZING season but at the end of the day he's still an undersized PF that has to over achieve night in and night out. Hard work and grit can only take you so far. Sooner or later (Playoffs) you're going to need height. As we saw last year against the Lakers. Landry's stock is really high now, I say move him along with Tmac and bring in players who need to hustle and play hard to put the team over the top, and not just to compete.
I voted Brooks/Landry/Battier but I didn't read the OP that mentioned taking value into consideration. I would say keep Lowry/Landry/Battier because Brooks is going to net you twice what Lowry would in a trade. I also believe Lowry is and will always be better at distributing the ball, playing defense and basically doing all the little things. Any big deal we pull of will bring in at least one big time scorer so that makes Brooks strength (scoring) less valuable and his weaknesses (everything else) that much more glaring.
Brooks/Landry/Battier I love Lowry but in our current system Brooks has a lot of potential. If we reverted back a few years it would be Lowry no doubt. Landry mostly based on age, and Battier because there is just something about Trevor Ariza that screams "this is not going to end well" to me. I fully believe the guy is capable of being a very good role player, but his demeanor and decision-making raises questions. And I think our team-defense would suffer substantially losing Shane. EDIT: Taking in all of the considerations of the OP, I would consider taking Lowry over Brooks if we could bring in a star with Brooks- but this is assuming Yao will be 100% of what he used to be, and that is another question.
