I still firmly believe Kyle Lowry is the key to our bench being the best in the leauge, so I am still in the "AB should start" crowd. HOWEVER, he has been playing incredible ball as of late and at minimum he and Brooks should split the PG minutes regardless of who starts. Even though Kyle is playing phenomenal it doesn't make AB expendable. Those two together are the best PG combo in the NBA and that isn't something you give up easily. If we can get a STUD big man? Sure Brooks can be dealt.
If Lowry can consistently shoot around 35% from the arc, there is absolutely no reason for starting Brooks. We already have some good shooters: Martin, Scola, Miller, Lee, Battier, Budinger, Hill. We need a playmaker more than a shooter out there. We don't need Lowry to create his own outside shots. He just needs to get inside, create for others, which is exactly what he's been doing so well. If he can hit above 35% of wide open 3's, it will keep the defense honest.
^That's the thing though, our bench players are full of fast-pace/uptempo players that can't necessarily create their own shot. I would argue that the bench needs a playmaker more than the starts considering Luis/Kevin can create their own offense. Brooks gunning from the bench wouldn't necessarily work as well as most think.
Lowry has really stepped it up in Brook's absence. Can't wait to get the AB back and see how good this squad really is.
T-Will says he likes to create for others also. I'm intrigued on how Lowry and T-Will will play together coming off the bench (I'm assuming Lowry goes back to the bench when AB comes back). Lowry gets a new shiny toy to play with.
Look I love lowrys play the past few games and everything but starting him is out of the question for me. Brooks is our fourth quarter guy with yao out and martin not being able to score late in the fourth. I think some of that has to do with opposing teams not respecting lowrys shots. With brooks in the starting lineup he'll have a lot more shot attempts and he'll have a better chance in making those big shots in the fourth. theyre going to have to guard him and this will open up the offense more for the other players. Lowry was always great off the bench, and our bench this year would better off playing along side him rather than AB.
You're saying Brooks should start so that he gets more of an opportunity in the 4th quarter? I don't follow.
I think so... We need to look at him like we would look at a rookie. He will get his shot, but the Vets will be incredibly difficult to beat out. He will have to earn/take his minutes, they won't be given. Will Jordan Hill ever force Rick to play him more than 20 per? That's his next step, ala Landry. Become such a beast that we can't take him out.
PGs don't split minutes, they run the team and control the tempo and identity of the team, no good has ever come of splitting minutes at the PG position. I can't think of any contending team in NBA history that has not had a definitive starter/bench PG.
I think the Lakers would love to have Brooks. Brooks + Yao's contract for Andrew Bynum + Steve Blake?
I guess because we have Martin now. Offensively, AB is not as good as Martin. Defensively, they are equally bad. Since Martin has locked the starting shooting point guard, there is no need for AB starting now.
Martin and Brooks are redundant. Both are good at creating for themselves but not good at creating for teammates. Scola is the same at the PF position. A creator is not the same as a playmaker. Brooks is a creator. Martin is a creator. Scola is a creator. Lowry is a playmaker. Ish is a playmaker. Miller is a playmaker. If you put a bunch of creators but non-playmakers, you end up playing "take turn iso" basketball. Bottom line, putting Brooks and Martin together is a bad idea. And they are not going to put Martin to the bench. The best we can do is let Martin score his 20+ points in the first three quarters, and then replace him with Brooks in the 4th.
