Yeah, he was great pick considering the spot where he was at, most players that are bust are usually in the top 5 or 6. I don't anything lower could be considered bust in anyway especially when most of players below that number aren't expected to do much.
I don't know why everyone is pumping up a dream superstar for Aaron Brooks. Nobody did that for Tyronne Lue when he was here. These two guys could be twins according to their playing styles and stats. Lets get realistic here.
Not that i think brooks is the answer for our starting PG positiong, but come on, Brooks right now has loads more potential than tyronn lue. Faster, better scoring potential all around. Still, Brooks remains a backup PG at best.
Brooks is more quick. Lue doesn't really have the combo of dribble control plus agility in order to break defenders down and get to the rack. That said, Lue has been one of the ELITE 3pt shooters in the NBA over the last 4 years...very underrated in that aspect.
The kid has talent...let us see how well he does in his 2nd and 3rd years with the club before we ask this question. IMO, Brooks has a very good upside and tons of potential.
The only thing I can see Brooks getting better on is his Three pt shooting. Then he's the exact same pt guard as Tyronne Lue. You run both their minutes out with nearly identical stats like that and you get some fairly decent production but not All-Star status.
I don't know rocks, Brooks looked good in one or two games he got significant minutes, when Rafer and T-Mac were out. He may not be starting pg, but I think he could be great 6th man for someone, I think he can be very aggressive scorer on occassion and isn't afraid to drive to the basket. Also, I've seen him beat players off the dribble on several occassion.
Lets not forget Brooks has only layed one season of NBA Basketball. And consider how late he was drafted. May need a bit more time than one season to become any good.
I agree. I forgot to mention that Brooks developing into a poor man's Barbosa would be a very good thing.
I'll cut him some slack cause he's a rookie. So at worse he's Tyronne Lue. If he can improve, his upside might be CP3. I doubt that so I'm projecting him slightly better than Tyronne Lue.
Brooks is not Tyronne Lue because Lue is a catch and shoot player while Brooks isn't. While their low production stats are similar, their games are totally different. I would love if Brooks could shoot like Tyronne Lue, but I don't think he ever will. You guys should look up Lue's 3pt shooting and hotzones over the last few years. It's like after he got traded from the Rockets he's been on fire (and also injured a lot).
i think he is. especially with how the rules give player's with speed a huge advantage. pgs need time for the game to slow down. give him the duration of his rookie contract and i bet we'll be singing morey's/adelman's praises for drafting him. his first step, his 3pt shooting stroke, and his confidence are pretty good for being on a team of established talents - 4 year college player or not. his defensive gameplan and his controlling of the tempo need to improve - knowing when to attack. we will see a better brooks next year. he shows alot of promise.
No, players of his size succeeding in the league are few and far between. Serviceable? I think so, kids got some talent. Long term solution? Doubt it. But, if he is our future, it better be the DAMN NEAR future.
Calvin Murphy Muggsy Bogues (only 5,3 - but he was good passer, could shoot, and was actually good defender, probably better than most point guards, even some today...right now, I can only think of probably 7 to 11 points guards he could probably put him on the bench) Earl Boykins T.J Ford Spud Webb Nate Robinson Dana Barros Travis Best Terrell Brandon (All-Star) Damon Stoudemire Tyrus Edney (pre injury) Speedy Claxton (pre injury) Brevin Knight Chucky Atkins They might be far and few, but a good percentage have turned out to be successful NBA players and even consistent starters. If they do make into the league, a number of them (players on under 6) are usually pretty good or great a few things. Since, most GMs are frighten to death of drafting someone undersized anyway. Would probably slit their wrist before they drafted smaller player who wasn't necessarily good at anything. With certain stereotypes and insecurities (on the part of GMs) already present, you know that player is at least decent, if his name is popping up draft boards or if he has good numbers in college. Plus, most of these players don't get drafted in higher tier of draft, Brooks has skill, he has shown that he has shooting range, drives aggressively to basket, and is not a bad defender or even passer. I don't think he can be much worse than some of the pgs that have come through the league over the years.
I am aware of all those players you just listed. I don't disagree that there HAVEN'T been any players under 6 succeed in the league. Again, they are few and far between. I never said the kid doesn't have talent, I just don't see him as our long term solution, that's all. And when I mean HIS size...I'm talking miniscule..... http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-pre-draft-measurements/?year=2007&sort2=ASC&draft=0&sort= He was the smallest player period in his draft class and compared to this years draft class, only DJ Augustin is smaller. Of the list of players you named, only Nate Robinson is 1) still in the league AND 2) smaller. All I'm saying is, it is hard for guys of his stature to truly succeed and statistics are not on his side. I think he can be serviceable, but I doubt he is our long term solution,
