But yes I would trade Brooks for Williams or CP3 in a heartbeat. I don't think the decision would be easy for any other trade point guard for point guard, however.
Miller, Bibby and Arenas are certainly not ahead of Brooks. He is a top 10 point guard but not top 5 and I do not think he will ever be a good enough defender and passer to get into that group. Certainly a top 5 scoring point guard now.
Explain to me why you think Brooks is better than Kidd. They have similar shooting percentages, but Kidd averages almost double the rebounds, steals, and assists of Brooks.
Put old Jason Kidd in this team and I wanna see who good we are. Old Jason Kidd can play defense anymore, he have never been good on offense and now all he does is take wide, wide open 3 pointers. And yes he always been a good true point guard especially on the open court but he is the last option on his team so he will be assisting on the shoots instead of makings them like Aaron is force to do. Today Aaron is better that JKidd who is a hall of fame but not anymore.
Bibby??? no. Arenas/Parker right now...no, one is injury prone, one is...u know. If Nash and Kidd are breaking down in a couple years, Brooks just might "breaK" into the top tier.
What difference does that make? The question is who is a better point guard...not who is a better point guard for this team. Kidd's defense is at least equal to Brooks', and his 3pt % is better than Brooks'. Also, the 3 pointers that Brooks' takes are generally open. Last options don't average 10 points and 9 assists. You have yet to make a valid argument to support your opinion. It'll be an uphill battle since statistics indicate otherwise.
Jason Kidd is a 36-year-old future hall of famer playing his seventeenth full season as a starter in the NBA. Aaron Brooks is a 25-year-old kid barely more than a rookie playing in his first full season as a starter in the NBA. The fact that this is even an argument suggests to me that hey, Brooks is pretty darn good! Let's not get too hung up on ranking players. It really, really doesn't matter. All that matters is "which would you rather have on the Rockets?" If you'd choose 36-year-old last-leg Jason Kidd, you're insane. Same goes for any other point guard in his mid-thirties.
So, no. If you have the chance to become a legitimate contender by trading away young prospects, you do it. Everytime.
Top 5 pg no way cp3 and dwill our head and sholders above the competition then you have nash who 5 yrs ago was the best pg in the game hince back to back mvps but the man is old and while it hasn't slowed his game down it hasn't helped his team improve but none the less he still is the 3rd best pg. Then I think its up for grabs with the rest of the top 10 in no order including brooks, billups, rose, westbrook, kidd, rondo, and parker. Out of the top 10 I just named 3 of them (kidd, nash and billups) are old on the decline and will in all probabilty not be in the league in 5 yrs but with that said you must consider the young pgs we our seeing in collison, jennings, tyreek, and curry who our closing in on top 10 status. The nba is filled with very good young guards which make the game very exciting for us fans. As for scoring I think brroks is the best in his class even ahead of cp3 and williams he can score from literally everywere no pg has his offensive skill set he absoluty schooled billups last night dropping 31 and dishing out 9 dimes we as rockets fans should feel luck to finally have a top pg and for all you brooks haters please find me a better pg for the money were giving him ab is worth 10 million a year right now feel blessed that we have such a stud on our team to lead martin scola and big yao were ready folks ab can take us to a title in convinced his game is perfect for the way the nba has changed and throwing yao in the mix were competing nxt year I'm exicted guys I hope ab and martin can lead us to the palyoff but none the less adding yao to this team makes us automatic contenders.
Something stupid, as I just stated? Or did you miss that implication? That is a bad strategy for any sports franchise. You build for the long term. Championships are a crapshoot; as we saw with Cleveland last year, you can never count on being able to win one in a single year. Your best chance is to build to contend every year, to be perpetually in the postseason contending for the title. Even if you sell everything to go all in, your chances of winning in one year are still going to be low. Four 20% chances to win the championship are better than one 30% chance.
You're getting off topic and your points have already been addressed in other threads. But FWIW, no team would gut its roster to increase its championship chances from 20-30%. If a team were to gut its roster, it would need to be a legitimate contender afterwards. Look at the Heat and Celtics. Maintaining a perpetually solid playoff team isn't the way to go. There will always be teams making big moves in an attempt to capitalize on their window of opportunity. And if you stand pat while others advance, then you've fallen behind.
