Since November, Brooks has shot above 40% from the field in 11 out of 22 games. Alston has done so in only 6 out of 17 games (including only twice in his last 11 games). Another stat we might want to keep in mind. We're 9-9 when Alston and Brooks both play, and 4-0 when only Brooks plays since November. Though, additionally, we shouldn't forget that McGrady had perhaps his best stretch of the season during those 4 games Alston missed.
Nelson's game has really matured this season. All numbers are up. But it's not every player can improve their games as time goes by. But for Brooks, the present question is: What's the difference between Brooks and Head? Is Brooks the 2nd Head coming?
Only way to get Rafer out is to package him along with another decent player. Or trade either/or Battier, Landry, Artest, Head for a good point guard, then move Rafer down & out the depth chart how Luther Head is now. Ballhandling and bringing the ball up the court through pressure must be an underappreciated skill that has a calming influence or something. Rafer is a good guy and he was needed in last year's playoffs. But this team desparately needs some shot makers now. Jameer Nelson is stronger, heavier and tougher with physical contact than Brooks. Plus he's just a good 2 point shooter. When he shoots they go in alot, simple enough. Not saying Brooks is a weakling though...Brooks is quicker & has potential to create plays from dribble penetration. Brooks is just fine in his role, just too bad he's needed so much to make up for the inadequacies of the starting point guard.
Just do what I do on 2k9 and start wafer as pg. He is fast enough and big enough to contain just about any pg, including paul. His ball handling probably isn't even better than luther's at this time but that comes with time if thats how you want to groom him. Remember he is only 23. I think with a lineup of Wafer, Mac, Battier, Scola, Yao you would have absolutely no holes on offense like you do with Rafer.
Fair points. One thing I absolutely don't like is the Alston + Brooks backcourt. I'd rather see Alston start if it comes down to that. It's not just for defensive reasons either. I think it hurts Brooks' development as a PG and enforces his desire to shoot more. I like the idea of Brooks playing separately from Alston and encouraging his development as a playmaker even if that means as a backup.
I think that is a great assessment. I've never tried to argue that Brooks is an all-star in the making. My basis for every argument has been that Alston is so bad that unless Morey can bring in somebody better than both, you might as well go with the young gun that has upside and better scoring abilities on a team that struggles to score.
There's big difference when you are small and strong and when you are small and light in terms of defending (see Hayes and other numerous examples in guards). Nelson had some very nice passes last night.
McGrady used painkillers during that stretch. Jameer Nelson is stronger and has a much more reliable shot, both from midrange and from 3. His pull-up 3 pointer is absolutely devastating.
I have to admit, I'd been completely against it before. However, it was based on the following: Rafer has the ability to be the better starting PG. However, it is contingent on him selecting his shots better, and focusing more on defense and passing than before. I thought he would do this once he wasn't needed as a 3rd scorer, and we all know that this team was dying for a 3rd scorer. However, he hasn't done this. He's shown this season that he's just too confident and comfortable with his status on the team and Rick is not the type to put him in his place (i.e. bench him clearly for POOR PLAY). I also was surprised to see that Brooks is consistent in that he does shoot better when he's more open. This doesn't apply to Rafer. He will shoot the same percentage and amount whether he's open or not. Also, with Yao/T-Mac/Artest, Brooks doesn't need to do much more than be a good set up guy and feed these guys the ball. I think, defensively, we will dip a bit. But offensively, we will be up 2 or 3 levels with Brooks in the line-up. My proposal is that we bench Rafer and clearly send the message that this is not a product of the system - it should be clear to him that it's because he is not doing what he CAN and SHOULD do for the team. Try to find a replacement in the meantime to come off the bench - maybe someone is interested in a Rafer + Head package just to shore up their backcourt positions (Nets?). Maybe we bring in Shaun Livingston and let him take his time getting back into a rhythym and once he does, we deal Rafer for peanuts. I agree though. Let Brooks start. But let both PG's know that their play will determine their status, not their relationships or their number of years on the Rockets.
agreed. barring another high quality pg we draft in the first round, which is highly unlikely, brooks is our future pg as rafer gradually fades out the picture. the only knock i have on brooks is his play-making ability can be questionable sometimes. but that can be taught. how much he will learn is another story, though.
I'm not convinced that Nelson is the better 3pt shooter. Brooks was better in college and better as an NBA rookie than Nelson. It really is impressive though how well Nelson has ultimately shot the 3 ball as a pro considering his pretty average numbers in college. Given Brooks' better 3pt shooting in college and as a rookie, I will wait to give Nelson the edge in that area but it will be hard for Brooks to improve as much as Nelson did in recent years.
I just don't buy what rafer is selling at all. His greatest attribute is offset by tracy. His weakest point are also highlighted by tracy and yao. If he was like rondo and would drive to the hoop when people leave him, that's cool, but he's so confident in his jacked up shot, he won't or doesn't. Not only that, Brooks can and will get better with time. His shot is good, he can finish inside and as we saw the other night, he's a very,very good athlete. The only thing rafer has on brooks is he's been in the league longer. There is no way Rafer is a starter in this league on a good team. People talk about spacing, but if you're a defense and you're going to cheat to double, guess where its coming from? Shane and Rafer's man. At least for the most part, shane will knock them down at 40%. That's been his norm for his career. Rafer on the other hand will chuck and chuck at 35% on a good night. Brooks may not be the 2nd coming of kj or tiny, but I know and see that the team plays better when he started and we were getting off to great starts also. Getting off to great starts with a good free throw shooting team allows teams to be very aggressive which equals more fouls. More fouls, more ft's, more points. The stagnation is always because rafer will shoot 3 before we know what kind of night its going to be. You can't even run pick and roll because he's a horrible finisher and mid range shooter. I thought adelman wouldve learned his lesson from sacramento when he had j-will. The team went up after he traded for bibby because he was a more consistent shooter and scorer. Terry Porter was the same way.
That's pretty bad when we have a starting PG that no other team would want starting on their own team. It means he probably shouldn't be starting on this team. AB, on the other hand, other teams are probably asking about every week for a trade. AB did a fine job at the end of the Boston game the other week. When given a starting role, he has responded.
