As a PG, the most important character should be calmness, I don't think he has it. In 4th qt of the game vs Golden State, he lost two free throws at the clutch time, Rick must lose patience completely at that time and decide to get Bobby.
Probably not, he is too small. He is smaller that A.I. You never know, if he can get his shot to be consistent, he can contribute. Will he start? I don't think so. But then again, Rafer starts, think about it.
No, he hasn't proven anything on the NBA level yet but I think there's a fairly good chance he'll end up being a better pro than Brooks.
I love Augustin, but Brooks is a better athlete and shooter......to me this is a toss up as to who will be the better pro with maybe a slight edge to DJ because of his high bball IQ.... You guys are too down on Brooks, he has struggled but most of it lately is because of inconsistent playing time...he hit the rookie wall, he is not the first nor the last to hit it..... Give him another year, I think he is in the rotation permanently next year. DD
We'll have to see what happens. I don't really consider Brooks a true PG like Augustin, so that's one glaring difference between the two. In today's NBA a true PG is always considered more valuable than scoring, shoot-first PG's or combo guards like what Brooks is shaping up to be. That's no knock on Brooks either since those kind of players are always valuable, but poll every GM around the league and ask them who they would rather have: a T.J. Ford or Nate Robinson type player.
Sure, Scottie Brooks is getting up there in age but I see no reason why he can't be our starting PG after Rafer is gone.
Brooks has excellent court vision and is a very good shooter, most of the PGs today are able to score, gone are the primarily passing PGs and they are replaced by the scoring ones who can do both. Actually, I do think you are correct in that Brooks is a better scorer than passer, but I have seen great passes from Brooks as well....but what I can't remember is can he hit Scola on the flash, or the slip? Because right now, other than Tracy we need a PG that can hit the cutters.......especially on the PnR...because Rafer can't do it......EVER ! DD
You got it. I totally agree. Whoever said he can't play defense must not have watched the games. He drove opposing points crazy that tried to face him and get around him. I remember him giving Iverson fits on the ball one game. Iverson couldn't get by him even with help from a screen. He's got great quick feet. He can play very good on the ball defense. Think about it this way. What does Luther Head do better than Aaron Brooks? Well, honestly, Luther's defense is horrid, he's too slow to defend small points and he's to small/weak to defend bigger players. He's a defensive sieve. I'd take Brooks over him defensively. Playmaking/passing/handle, Brooks or Head? Is this even a fair question? Ahhh, shooting? Sorry, it's just a matter of time before Brooks gets his confidence and is a better shooter. His form is better and he has a quicker release. Head is better right now, just because of his confidence level. But once Brooks starts knocking them down, what use is there for Luther? Brooks will have him beat in every basketball skill category. Brooks' defensive skill weakness is his lack of strength against the bigger points like Chauncey, DWill, BDiddy, and Jamal, who can take him down low and post him up. But that's not a big deal to me. Those guys can take any other point guard in the league down low and post them up including each other and definitely including Luther Head. Where the jury is still out on Brooks is: 1. Does he have a work ethic and will he work the summers to improve? 2. Does he have mental capacity to learn HOW to play? And question #2 applies mostly to the defensive side of the ball. This team, simply put, is going to have to make more adjustments offensively and quit having everybody rotating and playing off McGrady. And Brooks is exactly the kind of player that can do it. Brooks has the ability to create for himself and others..............even McGrady. He's the kind of scorer we've all been ranting about on this board for at least 2 years now. He's a scoring point guard that can use his scoring to create for others. And he can still hit the spot up J. This is why I kept HOPING Adelman would go ahead and commit to the kid and run him out there for major minutes with McGrady in the lineup. When McGrady is in, the whole offense is McGradycentric. How hard is it to go out there and hand McGrady the ball then go stand at the 3 point stripe and wait for the pass off so you can shoot it or upfake and dribble drive to the rim for either the finish or dish? Seems very, very simple to me. We've already got Rafer. We know what he is. And that is what he does about 75% of the time. And he has been highly effective for stretches of the season. Adelman, if he had committed to playing Brooks with McGrady, could have still brought the kid out if his shooting touch wasn't there. Hey, we have endured a couple seasons now of Rafer throwing up clunkers so why couldn't we endure the kid throwing up one now and then? With Rafer, you can always bring Rafer in and let him play with McGrady and Head. Frankly, I thought the Rafer/Head backcourt was a great backcourt against opponents backup backcourts. They were fast and streaky shooters, could get hot and really knock a hole in the opponent if they both are on. And the easiest spot for Brooks would have been playing as McGrady's sidekick, not Rafer's sidekick. Because McGrady creates so many more open looks than Rafer does. To me, logically, this is where we should have started with Brooks this year. We should have given him a consistent 15-20 minutes a night alongside McGrady to kind of break him in and let him conquer step one of NBA offense, getting his points and creating his shots off McGrady. Then by next year, he would have been ready for Adelman to start creating offense designed to take advantage of his quickness and let him initiate it. I am firmly convinced that for this team to go to a championship level, it will have to involve someone else developing into a creator for this team. The success of Adelman's teams has been centered around the premise that he has multiple threats on the floor all the time that can get theirs and get some for somebody else, multiple players that have that ability. We've got two, and both of them are injury prone. We need two more. We need a prime time shooter/scorer and we need a primetime scorer/shooter/playmaker. That would give us 4 guys that could get their own and get some for somebody else. On this roster at least, Brooks, Scola, and Landry represent our best hopes of achieving that and I believe it is important that we have another scorer/creator in the backcourt to help space things out. So, the two questions I listed above remain to be answered. 1. Does Brooks have the right work ethic. 2. Does Brooks have the mental capacity to digest NBA play (Bball IQ)? The trade for BJax and BJax taking Brooks' rotation spot kinda caused me to wonder if indeed Brooks was struggling with the whole bball IQ thing. I have no idea the answers but the questions should be answered this summer. It's Brooks' make or break summer.
I know the team thinks they can win it this year, but I would love to see Brooks get a little bit of run here going forward....maybe give Rafer a bit more rest....say 5 minutes a night....that can expand if Brooks plays well? DD
We've got to remember that Aaron Brooks is just a rookie...a rookie with a ton of confidence. He was the man in Oregon, and that swagger stuck to him. He was out of control because he wants to prove that he belongs in the NBA. And not just one of those journeymen type players, but a player that deserves a home in the NBA. Honestly, I think Brooks can play. He can drive and shoot already. He's got to learn how to drive and kick, but I think he'll pick that up with more playing time for a better feel of his teammates. His defense is actually better than I expected from him. The guy can JUMP. He'll contest shots and grab a few boards. He's by no means a defensive guru, but at the same time, he's not a push over either. Of course, he will see more mismatches than usual because of his size. His size is what is going to keep him from being a starting point guard in this league. But his skillset, ability, and confidence is what's going to make him a good player. As far as the Artest rumor, I think there's more to it. Brooks was playing very well at the time. Why give up a gem in the draft for a guy the Rockets could get in the offseason? I truly believe that Artest becoming a free agent gave the Rockets control of the trade talks, which is why they didn't just give Brooks away. The Rockets probably feel they can sign Artest in the offseason because of Adelman and Artest's statements saying that he would love to play for Adelman again and that his priority is winning over money.
Aaron really can jump, I remember watching a summer league video of him blocking a shot ala Steve Francis style.
I think the specific questions are whether Brooks can play in a more structured system than he saw at Oregon and whether he can be effective without being the focal point of the offense. Brooks has Iverson qualities in the sense that his natural tendency is to dominate the ball and use his waterbug quickness to get a good look at the basket. Few coaches in the NBA will allow a player to play like that unless that player is a proven talent like Chris Paul or Allen Iverson. For now, Brooks will have to show that he can play in Adelman's system which requires plenty of passing and moving without the ball. I think Brooks' natural skillset actually makes him a better fit for a system like that of Phoenix, Golden State or Denver. At the same time, Brooks' speed and scoring abilities are too good to let go of at this point. He is a terrific shooter despite some of his low percentages to date. He is also a terrific ballhandler for those that have any doubts. He has made some shaky decisions on the court this season but those are mostly due to him going through the NBA/Adelman learning curve. He is also a very good passer with much better court vision than many scouts gave him credit for. He didn't look to pass the ball that much in Oregon which is why I believe some scouts labeled him as a scoring-only PG and questioned his passing abilities. I'm not saying he can pass and create like Kidd or Nash but I do think he could be a 7+ apg PG if he was averaging 30+ mpg. I have little doubt about his poise and his ability to be a consistent player. He already possesses those important PG attributes. He carried himself like one of the most experienced guys in Summer League even though he was only a rookie. I also think he has high basketball IQ and it comes natural to him. There is a reason why the Suns and Kings were both very interested in this guy. He is quick, athletic and very skilled. Brooks will get his chance but the real questions I see are: 1. Is Adelman's system the right one for him? Yes, I know he's an offensive-minded coach but is it the right kind of offense for Brooks? 2. Can he learn how to be effective on a team like the Rockets that has two offensive focal points ahead of him? In other words, would he thrive better early in his career on a team that is developing/rebuilding where he could play more to his natural tendencies without having to defer to two other all-star-caliber players? 3. Can he overcome being barely a 6-footer and having a small frame? Will his tremendous speed and skill overcome these weaknesses? The bottom line is that it is too soon to tell how Brooks will fit on this team or in this league. There is no question in my mind though that he is a legitimate talent who deserves a shot as a starter in the next season or two.
One of the biggest knocks on Brooks is obviously his size, and the fear that opposing teams will exploit PG mismatches on the block. This is certainly a possibility, but if you look at the PGs in the West, most are not big enough or skilled enough on the post to consistently punish a smaller player. Lakers - Fisher - He is certainly not a concern on the offensive end for Brooks. Spurs - Parker - He may drive past you, but forget about posting up. Hornets - Paul - Nope. Suns - Nash - Brooks may be able to post HIM up. Jazz - Deron - Perhaps one of two guards in the West who can punish Brooks on the block Denver - Iverson - Too small. Mavs - Kidd - He's a big guard, but he's not offensively skilled on the block. So, as long as Brooks can improve his team defense and learn the offensive system, he can be a very solid 6th man off the bench.
You definitely want to include Baron Davis on that list. Shaun Livingston should be back next season, too. Then, there are the young guns like Foye and Conley, among others. There are several PGs that would present matchup difficulties for Brooks. At the same time, Brooks would be a matchup nightmare for just about every guard in the entire league once he gets acclimated and develops some confidence. Have you ever seen anybody effectively shut down Iverson? There is a reason he is a two-time scoring champ despite his very small stature. It's his incredible speed. The same type of speed that Brooks possesses. And, Brooks is a better shooter than Iverson was coming into the league. If Brooks can figure out how to finish around the basket and get to the line, similar to Iversion or Parker, he will definitely become a multi-dimensional offensive threat and we will have a piece of gold on our hands. People should be excited about Brooks' potential. It is more than the Rockets have seen out of a PG in years.
IMO, brooks wasn't picking up the system fast enough. With Yao out, Adelman brought in someone who was familar with it to back up Rafer during the late season push & the playoffs. This doesn't mean Brooks can't pick it up.
I don't trust these heights at all. I've met Allen Iverson and he and eye were eye to eye. I'm 5'10. There is no way he's six foot. I'd assume most of these other listed heights are similarly inflated.
Most good coaches fall in love with their lineups and stick to them no matter what, unfortunately i think Adleman has done this. I think one of our strong points during the streak was us going to different guys to keep the defense guessing and provide a boost off the bench. We should definately play him a little so they have to respect the drive from the PG position and it will open up the jumpshot from Bobby and Skip. I'm not ready to call him our savior though. You can spot a special player even when they don't have big minutes/stats because you'll see them do something that makes you wonder how he did it. Brooks has done all that was expected of him (he should be commended for that alone) but just doesn't look special to me.
