Even after all the crap that's happened to him over the past year, and his antics towards the refs in Phoenix, there is no flipping way the Suns do not match a MLE offer towards Brooks. Especially because they already gave up a useful backup PG for him.
I think Brooks' game is ideally suited to being a 6th man scorer. As for the defense, I think it's an interesting proposition. He's not a great defender, but the thing that's really hurt the Lakers the past couple of seasons has been teams with fast point guards, because Fisher can't keep up. Brooks has the speed to keep up, so I think he would actually improve their defense in that regard without actually being a good defender. In any case, I don't think Brooks is the best fit for them. I think a younger PG (so he can be fast enough to keep up with someone like Chris Paul), who can shoot the 3 and focus on defense and doesn't cost too much (to fit in the payroll) will do the trick. Brooks' ability to drive the ball and to create his own shot isn't needed and would probably be too expensive to acquire given that you don't need half his skillset -- and he's probably below average in the things you do need, defense and reliability.
Then the Lakers would have just as much of a defensive liability at the point as they do now. He could come off the bench for them, but starting, no.
He was never a ballhog. He was just the only decent point guard at the time. Till we figured out Lowry was a beast.
Lakers have over 90 mil in cap space next year and 60 mil in cap space the next 2-3 years after that. With the more than likely reduced cap and the MLE and bi-annual's being abolished, they are in cap HELL! They cannot offer anything besides a vet minimum and would have to rely on that and the draft too fill out their roster. AB is restricted, why would PHX not match a small offer. They are not signing Dwight Howard outright and I don't think Orlando is interested in making them better after getting swept by them in the finals.
I don't really care if he gets signed by the Fakers. It's easy to gaurd Brooks now that we know his weakness. Just D-him up on the 3pt line and leave the baseline wide open. As he makes his move, close off the lane and let him dribble it off his foot...out of bounds...turnover....Rocket's ball! Wash, rinse, repeat.
FIFY I dont think Brooks fits in quite as much as some might think. A team would not be improved by replacing a guard who cant keep up with other guards with a guard who is not noticably better at defense than the one he replaces. He may be able to keep up, but without any defensive fundamentals what good does it do?
Brooks started for a great (top 4) defensive team here. That argument is tired. He's already proven that what he can bring offensively outweighs his (purported) defensive shortcomings, and he did it right here in Houston. It's too bad that irrational dislike of anything that isn't stereotypical point guard play has so cemented itself into the conscience here that what happened two years ago (you know, when the Rockets finally advanced to the 2nd round of the playoffs after a ridiculous amount of years) is so easily discarded.
He He. Though, Once/IF Aldeman is chosen by the Lakers - then Brooks will immediately be looked as an option at PG. The Lakers will remember that playoff series as well when they look at Brooks.
Brooks is a volume shootout who gets worse the fewer shots he gets. He would be third or fourth option at best in LA. Not good. We don't need to talk about his defense anymore.
