Am I the only one who remembers at the beginning of the season how much our starters would struggle to open games and it was our bench that would get this team going? Not to mention that Bullard and Worrell would continuously say our 2nd team ran the offense better than the starters?
You can say that again! Harris was taken out because of foul trouble; nevertheless, Brooks played him well and the interior help came on the drives.
Easy. Teams won't have to. Adelman is going to go with Rafer (Yes, the same Rafer who is a notoriously bad marksman and has all sorts of trouble finishing in the lane)
I completely disagree. Offensive efficiency is about 5 to 10 percent better with Brooks. Rafer isn't a really a threat to score so other teams sag off of him. He also can't finish so he doesn't need to be taken as seriously when he drives. Also, he's a worse passer and decision maker on the run than Brooks.
Harris missed a couple of shots... he had a lot of good looks too... maybe he was more nervous about playing against AB... gotta give it up to AB though.. he came ready to play and showed why he could be a starter for the Rox's team!
I am with you. Brooks + Yao = opponent's headache. Alston + Yao = easy double team on Yao = More turnovers by Yao/ Miss shots by Rafer
The question is no longer is AB ready for _________? The question is now, "Is _________ ready for AB?"
Most of what you said has nothing to do with setting up offense. Setting up offense: calling plays, directing traffic, making sure everyone is where they're suppose to be on the offensive set.
Exactly right. Plus Brooks is a much better fit for Yao and T-Mac. The starting five come out and they look flat all the time. Brooks is instant energy and the starting lineup needs that.
The purpose of "setting up the offense" is to score. For some reason, we're doing that more often with Brooks at PG than with Alston at PG. The "offensive set" with Alston just isn't very efficient. If you want to fall in love with Rafer dribbling, passing to a posting TMac who then shoots a low percentage fade away, fine. Most coaches would rather have Brooks survey the D and drive into a gap for a layup or a kick out (both high percentage opportunities) as yet *another* option. Also, at the end of a set play especially to Yao or TMac, when the ball ends up in the PGs hands who is alone on the three point line, I'd much rather have AB shoot rather than Alston. Both of those scenarios add a few percentage points of efficiency which probably translates into 5 to 15 additional points per game.
I already said brooks is the better scorer which you have been saying all this time. You still don't get the concept of setting up the offense.
When the star PG, Alston sets up the offense, he waits for everyone to get to their spots and hands the ball off to TMac. That usually results in a sub 40% FG play. That's called setting up the offense. In that case, yes, Rafer does a better job in getting us LOW PERCENTAGE scoring opportunities. I'm sorry, but basketball is more dynamic than that. I'd rather have a PG that can PROBE before running the set play. If we can get a 60% FG right away, why not do it? If it isn't there, we go to the set play. Understand?
Is setting up the offense more important than offensive efficiency? Because Brooks runs a much more efficient offense, it may not be the same offense as the one Rafer tends to run, but it is better. So, which is more important, setting up an offense or efficiency? To me, it is clear that Brooks is not just a little bit better than Rafer but basically renders all the Rafer apologists points moot. Brooks does pretty much everything better than Rafer, maybe not the same way, but definitly effectively. DD
so you basically agree that rafer is the better one at setting up the offense and Aaron is better at looking for his own shot. Thanks that's all I needed you to say. End of my point.
He is not better at setting up the offense. He can't do anything else but set up the offense. AB can EITHER probe (which doesn't always mean looking for his own shot) or set up the offense if it isn't there. With Alston, you get one option; with AB you get two and I argue that AB is better at the set offense too because he is a better finisher which improves efficiency (if AB shoots) and spacing (because defenders *have* to guard him).
LOL - you declare victory, yet proved nothing...typical. Setting up an offense, let's see...dribble up, give it to Tmac....yep, Rafer is good at that...but Brooks is too.... Brooks is better than Rafer.......all Rafer has is bringing the ball up, passing to Tmac and hitting a wide open 3.....he doesn't set anyone else up for a pass...just passes on the perimeter. Meanwhile Brooks penetrates, dishes to Scola on the baseline for a shot jumper, or cuts after passing to Yao for the easy layup...Brooks runs the offense better, you just don't recognize it as the same offense because Rafer is simply risk averse. Brooks runs more of it, and more effectively, he is flat out a better player and proving it every single game....watch Rafer if he continues to start, watch the team continue to come out flat.....because Rafer calms down an already sleepy team. Brooks, he gets out and runs, pushes it.....forces Yao and Tmac to get with the program.....109.5 ppg the last 4.......says a lot, if you are truthful and not trying to argue just to argue. DD
in a tight ballgame where every posession counts, setting up the offense is more important. Need I point out that Aaron has had the luxury of tmac Yao ron and shane healthy which rafer has seldom had that luxury THI year. Kinda helps out Aaron when you got other weapons around you and you can just get your offense as a result from your 3 stars being healthy and contributing.
