Super tough choices: Brooks - He can spread the floor with his 3 point shooting. That's puts him slightly ahead of Lowry for me. The dynamics of limited 3 point shooting PG's is a factor I'd rather not deal with. Alston and Andre Miller come to mind (and I'm a Miller fan from his Cleveland days). Landry - He gets the edge based on youth. Shane - Not crazy about Ariza so far. Shane offers the opposite attributes from Ariza that any team can use - veteran poise and chemistry. A young team can always use that.
i think with lowry's competitive fire that he can become an adequate shooter along side Yao. he wont be nearly as good as AB of course but Lowry's shooting mechanics are actually pretty good and he can improve his % with practice, he already is shooting the ball much better this year than he did last year. I think Kyle is a better passer and can set up Yao a lot better than brooks can Personally i feel Lowry is the better of the two PGs but thats just me, brooks' shooting and quickness are huge advantages over lowry but lowry does everything else better. and yes I do believe that a perimeter all-star is exactly what this team needs, someone who is a good shooter as well.
Brooks, Landry, and Ariza Brooks-He's running this team right now. The only thing that bothers me a bit is that I wouldn't say he a true play making point guard. Landry-This guys is hustle and excitement! He brings the energy off the bench. He never fails to disappoint and he's just a great guy. Ariza-This guy is young and has a lot of potential (despite him struggling atm). I see him being able contribute more of what the Rockets need, offensive spark. Despite Shane and Ariza being same height, Ariza seems a lot more lengthy and is able to finish off fast breaks. *No offense to Shane but I think his D is overrated and he hasn't really improved much as a player over the last few years imo. He's no doubt a great guy with a great attitude. And while every team could use a vet like him, you don't sign a guy 6 million mainly because of his "positive attitude." We can hire a cheerleader for $20 an hour for that, or even better, a vet (like Deke) for the vet minimum.
my prediction is that bosh will not promise a re-signing, so we will be to scared to trade for a 1/2 season rental in bosh i predict that since lowry can get a huge payday and we have conroy, that means lowry will be gone with tmac. now on battier and ariza, i wont say battier is gone because he is moreys boy, and no team wants ariza because of all the years on the contract. so they both stay, as far as scola and landry, i think landry is gone. gut feeling. i think scola will re-sign for alot less than what landry would resign for so i wonder what kind of package we can get for landrylowry tmac...if tmac can get us iggy/dalembert just by himself, i would imagine that a landry/lowry/tmac would get us iggy/thaddeus young/holiday or iggy/dalembert/#1 pick 2010
So far, the tallies for keepers are: Brooks: 386 Lowry: 93 Scola: 112 Landry: 367 Battier: 258 Ariza: 231 Obviously the closest battle in trade value is Battier/Ariza. Personally, I think Battier has a higher trade value because of his experience and vocal defensive leadership. A lot of teams could really use that (Toronto, I'm looking at you!).
Interesting, I picked the poll option with the least votes. Lowry, Scola, Ariza Picking Scola over Landry was the easiest one for me. Scola is a restricted free agent next season, we can match anything which scares most teams away. Scola will likely be paid less than his true value. Landry, is nice young player. He's improving, rapidly, but I think the isolation scoring opportunities he gets now will drop drastically when Yao comes back. His biggest weakness, defense, is an underrated quality anyway so he seems like a great trade chip. Ariza over Battier because Ariza's shooting percentages are awful and I would assume his trade value is as low as it will ever be. Lowry over Brooks for the same reasons I'd pick Scola over Landry. Lowry is productive in a variety of ways. Brooks is a great scorer. People always place such a high value on scoring and I think he is the player that has benefited the most from our current roster situation. People look at the Rockets' success this season and immediately think about Brooks and Landry. I think we have a group of solid rotation players that are on similar levels in overall production. If we can use the perception of Brooks and Landry as budding stars to land someone who's already a superstar I say we go for it.
Come on, do y'all even watch the games? I cringe whenever Ariza gets the ball, dribbles, or tries to make a play. He just can't do it right now. He may or may not be a playmaker in the future (I say no but that's just an opinion), but as of now can't. Worse, he thinks he should be that number one option, leading to chucking and frustration when he misses, turns the ball over, or passes to someone who is not in a position to make a play. Ariza has terrible body language, and I applaud brooks and lowry for ignoring him on the offensive end, even when he throws a hissy fit.
Ideally Brooks, Landry, Lowry. Move Scola, Ariza, and Battier and get a wing like Butler or Iguodala.
Boston and Lakers didn't become what they were from getting younger. IMO opinion this talk about a youth movement is overdone. Especially since Morey has said an All Star player with more tread than people think was also an option for the Rockets to improve. Persoanlly I'm hoping for the other guy in Phoenix, not Amare. I wouldn't be unhappy if Brooks and Landry were the cost of getting that done.
Lowry - because I think AB can fetch better deals Landry - Scola is older Ariza - Battier is older, just have to hope we land a superstar so Ariza can settle back to the supporting role player, but I'd deal Ariza also if Budinger progresses enough where Ariza would be expendable.
Brooks, Scola, Battier for me to make a championship run..and get a good all star in return for landry and ariza
I was about to post the same thing, though for different reasons. But I'm wondering if Lowry/Landry/Ariza would be enough to get back, say, an All-Star backcourt player. For a serious upgrade worth gutting the roster for, and not just a lateral move, Brooks might have to be included, and maybe even both Brooks and Landry would have to be traded. So, as a result: PG Lowry SF Battier PF Scola Basically because a trade of Brooks/Landry/Ariza would bring back the best value in trade, while the remaining trio of players can still be valuable to a competitive team. But if it's possible to get that All Star without trading both Brooks and Landry, then: PG Brooks SF Battier PF Scola
I love Scola and Battier. But for the future, it has to be Brooks, Landry and Ariza. Heck, even now I feel bad saying such because we will literally have to make that choice this off season, Scola's contract is up which means we might be losing the Argentinian Hustleman. Battier while an unquestioned leader and probably the best the team has had in a while, I can't help but realize the days of him being the premier defensive specialist (despite the All-star lists never giving him credit for it previously) are coming to an end soon.
Brooks / Scola / Ariza Brooks - The team needs a closer and Brooks can be the one. Scola - Everyone said Scola has peaked but Landry is also the player who he is now. Landry is athletic undersized PF who is suitable for bench role rather than starter. I will take Scola's rebounds and defense over Landry especially if Yao coming back healthy. Ariza - Young and athletic.
I would want to keep Brooks, Landry, and Shane. Realistically, after trading, I think it's more likely we will end up with Lowry, Scola, Ariza and or Shane, which is still fine by me. ...as long as we pick up a couple stars in the process. ie. Bosh and Iggy/Butler.
I pick Lowry, Ariza, and Landry because.... Ariza: Though he is struggling, his upside is high due to his age. At 24 years old, he is long, athletic and have a decent outside jump shot. Though at his position around the league are stack with great SF, given the right coaching, hard work, dedication, training, this guy can possibly become an all star one day. Landry: He is younger than Scola and not as good just yet. But his upside is his age and his athleticism including his will to learn the game and his love and passion for the game. Landry is a hard working player. He is a fast learner and in the three year period, he has developed faster than almost everyone in his class. Scouts around the league are beginning to recognized him. Lowry: This is a tough one but it makes more sense. Brooks is a very good PG. He can shoot the ball and is lightning fast. But why pick Lowry over him? Well Lowry indeed has trouble shooting the ball. But between the two, Lowry has something Brooks doesn't have. It is his size and strength to guard any PG in the NBA. Lowry is a very good rebounder for a PG and though he can't really shoot well, he has no fear in driving to the basket. He is a very good distributor and does not force things like Brooks. If he put more effort into his jump shot during the offseason, this kid can be hard to stop. Another advantage he has over Brooks is that he is younger by two years with an additional season to his belt. He plays tough, he is fast, good passer, and fearless in the paint. Most scouts around the league predicted Lowry to become a top 10 PG within the next few seasons.
I am assuming we are getting a go-to scorer in return. So Brooks' skills as a scorer is expendable while Lowry's other skills will still be sorely needed, not to mention Brooks has a better trade value. Landry and Scola is really a toss up. Landry has higher trade value, but Scola will come in more expensive next season and he is not going to get much better. So at the end I choose to keep Landry. I'd keep Battier over Ariza simply because there are similar players out there to be had at the MLE. Battier's intelligence and leadership are rare and still needed for a young team, and I believe he still have at least a couple more years left in his tank.
Brooks, Scola, Battier...and here is why. AB = no brainer he is playing just below all star level in only his 70th start at PG, and is only going to get better. PF = Scola, because he is a restricted free agent and we will be able to keep him more easily than an unrestricted Landry, AND, Scola is a much better overall player than Carl, and does not rely on his athleticism, but his wits.....so he will be cheaper and could last as long.... SF = Battier, because Morey swung and missed on Ariza and if you can dump his contract you do it, and ride Shane into his expiring contract year NEXT year, he can teach CBud everything he knows and then take on a much smaller bench role next season. So to me, thinking about the future, contracts, and performance it is Brooks, Scola and Battier. And I want to know what CLUTCH thinks.....Clutch, who would you keep? DD
