What's the latest on Mike James? Any sign of change in playing time? I know the wheel ain't broke so don't fix it. http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/gamelog?playerId=1051
Mike James has been traded 101 times if you've followed the GARM. I personally have him traded along with Snyder for either Artest or Kurt Thomas, depending on which thread I'm reading. Status on team? He is behind Luther Head and Aaron Brooks on the depth chart and is a DNP/garbage player as of now. But injuries happen...then again, he didn't see much playing time when Luther was injured.
He was given ample opportunity in Nov/Dec and completely blew it. How did he blow it? In the 21 games where he played at least 15 minutes: FG% 36.1 3P% 33.3 APG 2.2 couple those sh!tty stats with the fact that he's a ball hog in an offense that relies on moving the ball, and you have a recipe for FAILURE.
The "Mike James sucks" idea has been beaten to death miserably. The funny part is people seem to give Aaron Brooks, who has borderline sucked too, a free pass simply because he's a rookie. I don't get it. I like Brooks, don't get me wrong, but I simply don't think he's good enough yet to warrant a rotation spot. What happens if Rafer gets hurt or has to miss a key game? Do we start [gulp] Brooks? Barf..... Do we continue to pressure Rafer into playing 40 minutes a night the rest of the way? Do we continue to ask him to be an ironman that can never, ever miss a game for injury or rest? What gives? I really think we're at the point where we either need to give Mike James another chance (unpopular) or trade for another PG (popular). Playing Rafer 40 minues a night the rest of the way can't be the answer. No matter how great he's played lately it's unfair to ask him to do this every night.
Let's put it this way. Brooks has been a lot less sucky for a lot less change. And he's got way more upside than James.
My best Mike Tirico voice..... "Welcome to Phoenix, Arizona for the first round of the 2008 NBA Playoffs. Blah blah blah blah blah.......And the Houston Rockets will be playing without starting PG Rafer Alston, who is out due to injury. Starting in his place will be untested rookie Aaron Brooks." Totally hypothetical and dreadfully frightening if it ever actually happened, but I don't think people realize how bad our PG situation could be until you take Rafer out of the equation. I think it's a legitimate concern. What happens if he's hurt? You can't possibly start Brooks. If giving Mike James another crack at the rotation isn't the answer you simply have to look for a trade.
You have a point. That's why I believe, despite as good as Rafer is playing right now, that it is in our best interests long term to start Brooks or at least give him significant minutes. And I think it would be ideal to start him alongside Yao and McGrady where he would have actually less responsibility for running the show. I was mildly hoping we'd get Bibby but it was extremely unrealistic. Brooks to me, represents our best chance of success at the point guard position based on who else is availabe on our roster and around the league.........unless we possibly get Delonte from Seattle. I know this right now. I've seen enough of Mike James out there loafing around, not moving without the basketball, waiting for the ball to come to him and then jacking up some trash shot and trotting back on defense like he's got the next 3 years. Francis is hurt. If I had to pick one of Brooks or James to go to war with if Rafer got hurt, I'd take Brooks without thinking twice, rookie or not. I think it is vitally important that we have at least a fallback plan if not an upgrade plan to Rafer. And to me, Brooks represents the best we can get. Unless some miracle happens and we can get Cassell for nothing.
Delonte West is a sensible, realistic suggestion that has the kind of wings to take off. I'd imagine Les would be little opposed to taking on an expiring rookie deal. I might be asking for too much but I still want to see how the Andre Miller situation plays out. Bibby was traded for a song and a dance so we definitely have to play the "wait and see" approach to Miller. One idea that i've had for a while (mind you, you're going to think i'm crazy) is trading for Jamal Crawford. He could conceivably be had for just Mike James and Snyder's deals alone and given the utter disaster that is the NY Knicks i'm sure he's viewed as expendable. We're talking about trading two guys that don't even play for a 20 PPG scorer and what's worst is I think we could have him if we wanted him. Pro's: Quick, explosive and has one of the sickest crossovers in the league. He's tall and just added 20 lbs of muscle to help improve defensively. He can play the point. He's your perfect "instant offense" kind of guy. Not only can he score but he's very underrated in the 4th quarter. He hits his FT's and has hit plenty of clutch shots throughout his career. He could be that elusive "closer" guy we've been seeking. Con's: His contract. $8-10 million for three more years after this season. Plus, he's a volume shooter that isn't known for taking the smartest shots. When push comes to shove, no I probably wouldn't do this. I just think it has big home run potential on the "something-for-nothing" scale. He kind of reminds me of Jason Terry. One of those very talented combo guards that score a lot of points on bad teams. Look at how Terry flourished once he was moved to a winning environment. Part of me thinks Crawford could do the same. Anyway....back to reality. I see what you're saying on Brooks. It's not that I doubt his ability to be successful in the NBA, I just don't think it's going to happen this year. I could be wrong (and I hope I am) and I do agree that something has to give. Either you give him more minutes to better prepare him for bigger role or you look elsewhere for your "fallback plan".
I don't believe many were saying that when in preseason and the first couple of games he was lighting it up for about 15pts/game and becoming our "legit 3rd scoring threat." Boy, what I would give to see him back to that form for us.
Mike James has been the biggest Barf on the team so far. He has shown either an inability or an undesire to run the offense but rather jack up his shots. If he is shooting well that is not so bad but still not what I want from him. But he is shooting sucks at an all time low. As for Brooks at least he tries to run the offense and he is quicker and can make an occasional shot and has more upside and has proven to be an effective shooter and can slash better than anyone on the team and is a team player and doesn't cry and wants to be on this team and doesn't talk all ghetto and does much more fior much less.
