Should we address the PG position in the offseason?

Dumars was thinking long term when he dealt Billups. He knew the lineup that won the 2004 title reached it's potential and Billups had a lengthy contract. So he traded for AI's shorter contract and is banking on Stuckey's potential. Can't judge a trade meant for the long term in it's first year. I highly doubt the Pistons would have made far in the playoffs even with Billups, that's assuming they made the playoffs.

 

Who are the 75+ idiots who want to get rid or cut the minutes of two of the top young PGs in the league? Yes they are young but they showed in the playoffs they are capable of performing consistently against great opponents. They should only get better and better.

Anyone who is talking about getting rid of AB is a complete and utter dumb***. He showed that no one can really guard him on the pick and role. With our normal starting lineup, i.e. Hayes out, the opponent can't just double AB on the pick and roll. That will be Scola or Yao next year on the pick and roll and they will hit the jumper or layup almost every time. AB is on the cusp of stardom. He may never get there because nothing is guaranteed but there is a reason all the analysts and all the intelligent fans are raving about him.

 

You are correct. Detroit wasn't a contender and Dumars knew that. He traded Billups for Iverson leaving them in great position to get one of the stars in free agency this year or next. Two years from now the trade will be a win-win. Obviously Denver has already won as they are in good position to go to the finals and in two or three years Detroit will have a much younger superstar and be contending again.

Dumars essentially avoided the 2-3 years of rebuilding where you are one of the worst teams in the league and lose a lot of your fanbase/attendance goes way down.

 

If someone calls Morey with a good offer, then Morey should think about it. That's about it. Don't think Morey will be actively shopping for one.

 

I would hope another year of experience would help them to cut back on the turnovers and help them improve with delivering the ball to the guys at the right spots. (Or at least, another addition to the roster to help in that area).

But Brooks and Lowry made some strides this season, and Brooks is on the cusp of possibly being one of the top scoring guards in this league, I would hate to just give up on that so quickly.

As with the question regarding Artest, the answer here really has more to do with the rest of the roster.

 

Hell No he only started have a season and his game is coming around, does he make some bad passes sure he does. I would be interested in taking a look at Shaun Livingston in the off season if he is healed by trainning camp he could guard the two and Aaron could play more as a shooting guard and guard the point.

 

Yes, Chojie is right. Brooks was very inconsistent against Portland, especially with getting Yao the ball.

Bottom line is, Brooks has issues getting the ball to Yao. AB is very good at what he does - penetrating and hitting 3 pters. Unfortunately, if you want a PG to run the offense and get the ball to Yao, that is one of AB's shortcomings.

The Rockets would be foolish to not consider potential trades, with AB's value so high now.

 

He's not untouchable, but I bet Morey won't be knocking on the Suns door to give them AB and a salary match player for Barbosa.

 

we need a scorer, another playmaker, and a couple of big man.

 

No player is untouchable. That goes without saying. But Brooks is one of the most untouchable players on our roster right now. If we can get an already top PG then maybe but considering Brooks' salary, age and potential and that he has already shown much of that potential you don't trade him for a above average PG and draft picks. When you have a player that is beginning to show the ability to be a top PG you don't trade that away. PG's are like QB's you don't trade a good one away unless you have to.

 

You have picked up the good fight, but do not expect the serfs to understand, when you are speaking the language of Kings...



DD

 

That's nice, too bad we're dealing with an erratic 5-10 shooting guard here, not a good point guard.

 

Now that depends on what kind of PG you are looking for, doesn't it?

Brooks is a nice young scoring PG, and will get better with more playing time.

He did a pretty good job for a guy who only started about 40 games.....I doubt he has peaked Sam...

He should get even better as he plays more....

DD

 

Oh and you should look more into how good Tony Parker was when he was one or two years into the league. I use him because he is the most comparable to Brooks. Anyways he didn't average more than 6 assists a game until his fourth season despite getting 30-35 minutes a game in every season. Parker still isn't a great passer but he has developed in a good one. He averaged 7 assists this year which is very respectable but hardly awe inspiring for a PG on a top team getting 34 minutes a game. Brooks averaged 17 and 3.4 in the playoffs and still has only just over half a seasons worth of starts. He can very easily develop into a 20 and 6 PG and was already pretty close to it this post season.

 

His biggest problem is 1) scoring underneath and 2) bad decisions.

He's probably not going to get better at 1 unless he grows 6 inches. As far as 2 goes - he's never really had to be a passing guy before and it shows. He's not there yet.

He's a nice backup/bench player now. Starting PG for the next 10 years? not likely at this juncture unless the Rockets want to get rid of post players and showcase him. Unlikely.

Edit: I'm not going to bother to address the "TONY PARKER!!!11!!11!!" and "STEVE NASH!!111!!!!" calls, except to say that lots of young PG's come into the league and have erratic first and second seasons, and the overwhelming majority of them do not become Steve Nash or Tony Parker. Fact.

 

Support you "Brooks is best served as a 6th man"

 

Well, teams that get rid of good young PGs end up regretting it for the most part.

Chauncey Billups struggled and got traded.
Devin Harris same thing

AB has earned the starting spot until someone better comes along and takes it.

You do not need to be 6'4" to be successful in the NBA, especially with his hops and quicks.

I do agree he struggles a bit scoring at the rim, but if he can continue to develop there and his midrange game he will be fine.

Tony Parker is only 2 inches taller you know and doesn't have NEAR the jumping ability.

I do agree his decision making needs work, but there are flashes of good passes, so I see hope.

He is far from a polished product, but he is miles better than anything we have had in the last 4ish years.....

Unless you can get an elite PG in a trade for TMac....like BDiddy or Nash or something, then you got to let him just grow into the job, IMO.

DD

 

Well 1 could be managed by drawing more fouls, he's not great at that, but he could learn to create contact consistently like Lowry, as well as put on a few pounds.

how many pgs in the league have both speed and a solid shot? Even tonight the Lakers couldnt stay in front of him, he's a guy you either back up on and let him kill you from 3, or you stay close to him and he drives by you, that's not a something you can give up so easily. If you can afford to double him, well it stops him from penetrating completly, but that's why we need the right scorers/shooters around him, so other teams can't afford to double him.

 

His passing and scoring will probably improve with time,however his court vision and passing ability is less than of the rookie Tony Parker. He doesn't have that natural ability. I think he can develop into a more consistent backup PG, but not as a starter.