On the issue of Aaron Brooks

I'm not discounting Brooks' value or abilities one bit. When he does penetrate however, he seldom is looking for a pass, unlike Lowry and if we were to acquire another scorer, especially an elite one like Melo, then enhanced distributive qualities of a PG would be more valuable, IMO. If the team stands pat until the season starts, then Brooks' scoring abilities would be more valuable, and Lowry would continue to complement him as before, IMO. If Denver is offering up Melo and Billups, then I have no qualms about offering up Brooks, Martin and lagniappe, seeing that with that duo Denver has gotten farther than us in recent years... combine them with Yao, Scola and Lee, with a deep bench, and ouila! we're contenders again.

I'm sorry, but I don't like any scenario involving a trade with Denver, regardless of the numbers and what it looks like on paper. In my opinion, the Denver Nuggets are, of recent history, a team comprised of pure, "thugs", for lack of a better term; while Houston historically seeks after the most intelligent, hard-working, high-caliber character players in the league.

Of course Lowry can penetrate the lane...and Brooks does too.
Lowry may do it more powerfully, but Brooks did it more quickly, and with clever street ball tricks. Granted, some of those street ball tricks resulted in turn overs, but that doesn't discount the success Brooks also achieved when penetrating the lane. Let's also not forget all the missed calls on Brooks drawing fouls. The dude would draw harder fouls in the lane than Martin, but for some reason no call. There's no stat for that, had those been transferable to points like they should have been, most people's analysis would be more forgiving. I think this season we can expect to see more improvement from Brooks in that department of drawing fouls, some self-improved tactics, others taught by and/or picked up from Kevin Martin in this off-season. Brooks can re-surface this season a much more dangerous guard. I expect to see improvements all-around from him. I also expect Lowry to improve his 3-point shot, so that in those moments when Adelman pairs Brooks and Lowry on the court, the defense will have worn down not knowing which guard will penetrate or pop from outside.
With all that said, the presence of Ish Smith, more than anything else, may signal the end to ABZ v1.0. He's still got to refine his game, and might spend most of his time in the beginning of the season in the D-league, but could turn out to be a better fit in the event Brooks is traded and Lowry takes over as starter.

this was a joke, right? i bet he misspelled his name

well put. i'd rather lose martin in these scenarios, but its not going to be one for one and budinger.

i don't like it either. who's the back up two, and three? budinger, and who?

With acquisition of Martin, Brooks' value only sky rockets. Please do not confuse the Rockets with any other team folks. Brooks will be worth every penny of $8 mil he will command. Do you know how hard it is to come by humble, confident, fast point guards in the nba. Let alone one that is the best pure shooter on the team... I do agree Lowry could take the helm at point but I feel he would take even longer to mature than Brooks would. Just because we have a little breathing room now that the "dumb" era of the Rockets is over doesn't mean we have to stick to the stigma of Houston franchises. Develop talent from within. Create a nucleus, even better a brother hood. Recreate Sparta! Train them from the womb of the draft and nurse them to become warriors. STOP LOOKING FOR OUTSIDE HELP. MELO IS NOT THAT GREAT! Remember when we traded off our assets for a certain over the hill and over weight powerforward? We broke up a championship roster to search for outside help. Its been a downward spiral ever since. Do not think the great wall of China will hold up another season. HE WILL NOT. He never has. He is great and has played well but i'm afraid injuries is his most consistent asset. With the young guys we have on the bench we can make a push at the western conference. Easy. Hakeem did it with some no names and a vet. We have all of that. So come on Rick start inspiring these young bloods and light a fire under our vets. Lets make a push with what we have. Lets win with 12 players instead of trading people out to try to win with 3 or 4.
THE DREAM IS THE GREATEST OF ALL TIME. PEACE.

The construction of this team is nothing short of amazing, here we have an elite talent on the table and we are poised to offer 1st round draft picks and a heralded starting player from any of 4 positions, and just about any combination. Brooks, Martin, Battier and Scola, we have the depth to absorb the loss of any 1 of those players in pursuit of a star along with young talent, expirings and draft picks, whichever our suitors want. If Denver wants to add other players to the mix, like Billups, then we've got the answer. I will be minorly crestfallen if something doesn't come of this.

As far as Brooks goes, his heavy usage last season no doubt, a reaction to fill a scoring void. It's what Aaron does best and last year we needed points wherever we could get them, and he came through more often than not. But we did not make the playoffs last season, so the rules of insanity would dictate that we not approach the next season with the same strategy and expect a different result. It makes no sense to load a roster with significant scoring talents with Martin, Yao and Scola, and not give them every opportunity to score. A point guard who can exploit the talents across the roster will be infinitely more valuable than one who can't and seeks his own shot every play. That's the point guard's job and Lowry is much better at that job than Brooks. Not to knock Brooks, because without his talents, we may have lost 20 more games than we did, but we can't expect any higher degree of success using him in that way. If retained, and especially if we get Melo, he would be much better suited being an instant offense/energy guy off the bench. Lowry's style will compliment Scola and Yao much better also because both have deadly 15-18' jumpers and lane penetrations from a point guard create those.

With respect to Brooks/Lowry starting, I think it depends on the health of Yao. If he's playing limited minutes, I do like Brooks in there to take advantage of three point shooting opportunities. If Yao plays heavier minutes, I like Lowry in there to take pressure off of him by pushing the ball for occasional easy baskets, plus keeping him out of foul trouble by locking down the quick scoring point guards on opposing teams.

i think you keep brooks at least for now. he hasn't gotten a chance to play with yao ming since his immense improvement last year. most players won't improve so much in a matter of three years and he did it in one.

additionally, with kevin martin sharing the wings with brooks, the backcourt is so loaded, it might be easier to get the ball into yao since the coverage won't be as strong. and hey, if the coverage IS strong up front, that just leaves more room for the backcourt to rain threes all day.

i think if you're morey, you wanna test the waters and see, in games, where any weak links are before making any more trades. you've got a good team, possibly on the verge of great, but trading away valuable assets before seeing the team play together when everyone's healthy seems like a bad idea.

realistically, the lakers and the heat are pretty much certain to end up in the championship series this season anyway. so, i think you wait.

we've got the knicks picks which could be a cheap way to fill in any holes, and the ariza trade exception. we'll be able to get rid of jeffries after this season, too, so that'll free up a lot of room.

i don't think there are any possible trades at the moment to make the team an instant contender, so i think you wait for something that will. it's silly to trade away assets to still be a team that is "almost" good enough to win a championship. and when you don't know what the next two drafts will look like and you haven't tested the free agent market, there's value in waiting.

i dont like it.

TS% of around .600 as well...

The Rockets should keep Brooks he led the leauge in the three point field goals he improved his game, he should have made the all star squad this past season.

What impact does an incompentent front office have on a players game, the perception of the player in the league, by the fans and by other organizations. It is true that usage increases averages however the player has to have the skillset to accomplish increased averages. Usage is a funtion of organizational trust. As such, any discussion of players that played for the Raptors is limited by the disfunctional front office. Bosh is a quitter, Lebron is a quitter - we wish the quitters were on our team. Horrible.

What impact does an incompentent front office have on a players game, the perception of the player in the league, by the fans and by other organizations. It is true that usage increases averages however the player has to have the skillset to accomplish increased averages. Usage is a funtion of organizational trust. As such, any discussion of players that played for the Raptors is limited by the disfunctional front office. Bosh is a quitter, Lebron is a quitter - we wish the quitters were on our team. Horrible.

总结两点，小布名不副实，洛瑞更适合首发。说实话，我湿了··········

ESPN is reporting that Denver is interested in trading Billups as well as Anthony, which makes this discussion of Brooks particularly relevant. Consulting the ESPN trade machine, the Rockets could send Battier, Books, Martin, Jeffries, Hill, and the Ariza trade exception for Billups, Anthony, and Anderson. It is an excellent trade for both teams. The Rockets get their own "Big Three" of Melo, Billups, and Yao, with Courtney Lee and Scola filling out the staring five. The bench would be far deeper than most contenders--Miller, Hayes, Patterson, Budinger, and Lowry is highly respectable, and I like Anderson as our third or fourth big man off the bench. BTW, Billups has a very interesting contract. He's sign through 2011-12 at around $14 million, but only $3.7 is guaranteed, so it is a great trade chip if things don't work out.

No kidding, what the heck is Melo thinking? Clippers, Nets, Golden State as his preference? (I would love for him to come to Bay Area personally, but all 3 are perannual loser franchises) Makes one wonder what his priorities are ..... Maybe he plans to La La his way thru the rest of his career.

Agree I would rather trade Martin for Carmelo than Brooks. (But I still doubt that Anthony will be traded to Houston. Altho I have to laugh at the three teams Carmelo is supposedly interested in. They were all dreadful last yr,and all having Front Office issues. Wonder if this is PO'd owner saying "try and eff w/me and I'll send your butt to Siberia".)

I could easily live w/Brooks as the PG if there was a playmaking wing on the roster.(Put Iguodala on the team and I'd be quite content with Brooks starting.)
But a line-up of Brooks,Martin and Battier is relying on Brooks to set everyone up and I have my doubts.(Not to mention there is very little rebounding out of the three.)
Hope I'm wrong.

Definitely true that Lowry finished some games. Adelman like having those 2 on the court at the same time. Although I think I infrequently saw Lowry closing games without Brooks also closing with him.

Regarding Rondo and Parker, I can see where you come from, and apparently you don't always have to have a great shooting point guard to win. But each team's situation has to be analyzed differently. Boston didn't have a low post offensive presence. Allen operated at 3 pt line, Garnett shot a lot at high post, and Pierce also seldom posted. They need a slasher like Rondo. With San Antonia, it's not as clear to me, I know Parker didn't shoot too well early, later he did shoot fairly well from 2 pointer. San Antonio always had at least 2, sometimes 3 very good 3 pt shooters around Duncan on the floor; I just recall defense often dared Parker to shoot; so how well Parker shot played a big factor. I think he shot well enough to keep defense honest. In either case, those team had other great players and roll players that masked the deficiency of Parker/Rondo's shooting. Besides, Parker/Rondo are(were) border line allstars that contributed significantly in many other ways. Parker had amazing shooting percentage for a PG. Rondo rebounds matches those of some forwards. I don't think Lowry is quite there yet.

All things considered, I would value Brook's ability to get his own shot + shooting ability more so than Lowry's defense and point guard abilities. Don't get me wrong, I love Lowry and I definitely would be in favor of a Brooks for Melo trade. But as mentioned in earlier post, I think it's an even better trade to do Martin for Melo. I don't think Lowry is as good a fit for our starters as Brooks is.

Rahat. I agree Brooks for Melo would be a good trade. But I like Martin for Melo better. Assuming we also lose Budinger, the former gives us a team of
Starters: Lowry, K Martin, Melo, Luis, Yao
Bench: Lee/Ishmeal S, Lee/Taylor/Shane, Patterson/Hill/Chuck, Miller

Strength: Crazy fire power in 1st team that'll lives at the line, capable of both half court and fast break. 2nd Team above average defensively.
Weakness: No real backup for the 1; injury to Lowry will kill our season. 1st team defensively sub-par. Not enough ball to go around for 1st team. 2nd team offensively challenged. Shane not a good fit on 2nd team. Martin come off bench with Shane starting would solve some problems.

Trading K Martin for Melo gives us a team of:
Starters: Brook, Shane, Melo, Luis, Yao
Bench: Lowry/Smith, Taylor, Lee, Patterson/Hill/Chuck, Miller

Strength: Still crazy fire power in 1st team, with better spacing and offensive balance. Slightly better 1st team defense and better rebounding. 2nd team with good energy and balance offensively.
Weakness: A bit weak at the backup 3 position. 1st team a bit worse at fast breaking and foul shot team than previous one.

I think both options are good ones, but I prefer we don't loose Brooks because we have no credible backup after Lowry and the resulting team seem more balanced. What do you think?

RL,
Lowry was finishing quite a few games last season. Camp may be very interesting this yr because I wouldn't be supprised if Adelman lets Brooks and Lowry fight it out for the starting job.

The shooter argument falls apart for me because Rondo and Parker are poor 3pt shooters and barely shoot from distance well. They've been the starting PGs on 5 Finals teams this decade.(And Rafer was starting PG after the trade that saw Orlando make the Finals!)

As to CP3,that points directly to what Rahat is asking. Paul will make between 2-3 times what Brooks will. Considering how much of the teams' payroll would be tied up in Paul's salary,Morey must believe Paul offers such significant advantages over what Brooks will be that he's willing to trade for CP3. You do not take on that much additional salary unless you think you are getting a significant upgrade.

I somehow doubt Morey is still pursuing Rubio so Rubio can fight it out w/Lowry as the back-up PG. Morey wants Rubio as his starting PG.
Patterson is a long term project who it is hoped will replace Scola. And note that his main competition is Hill-who the team wants to be a back-up C,not a PF,and Hayes who the team prefers as a defensive specialist/stopper off the bench.

The Chris Paul argument is a no starter. Every team would bid for Chris Paul if they can get him for a reasonable price. Regarding Rubio, as a GM, he has always look for for the best talent in a given draft and never worried about position. just because he look to get Rubio doesn't mean he doesn't like Brooks. Just because he went after Patterson doesn't mean Scola is in danger.

No doubt Lowry is better in defense, rebound, and assists. But Brooks is better in shooting, creating a shot, and in general scoring. Who is the better player? I bet Adelman and Rocket's Front office think it's Brooks ... Otherwise Lowry would be starting and finishing games

If the question is whether we use Brooks in a Melo trade, that's altogether a different question. I am not against trading Brooks for a very good scorer like Carmelo because Lowry will have very good scoring options Yao, Melo, Martin to go to . But I still prefer trading Martin for Melo so that we will have Brooks, Lee/Battier, Melo spreading the court around Yao, rather than Lowry, Martin, Melo.

A PG who can play defense but cannot shoot would be like Rafer Alston.

too bad we can't combine brooks and lowry into one player... oh wait. that would be chris paul.

There's an awful lot I like about Brooks. He plays w/heart,competitive,and can score from anywhere. His beloved bounce passes are things of beauty. BUT...
He plays bad D,never using his speed to beat his man to a spot and draw charges,and his hands are fairly slow and he can't pick another guards' pocket.
Far worse,he simply will not/can not pass inside. Two yrs ago Adelman had to have Battier and Artest feed Yao because Brooks could not. Last yr Scola and Landry would flash across the middle,be open for a moment and never get the pass. Once or twice a game Ariza would flash backdoor and never got the pass from Brooks.
The argument that Brooks is a better fit w/Yao than Lowry falls apart for me because I want a PG who can actually feed Yao,not just make open Js and I esp want a PG who makes eveybody better,not just himself.
As to the turnover issue,I was reading another blog where the poster was defending his team's rookie PG. Part of his defense of the rookie PG was that the rookie had a better assist-to-turnover ratio than every other ROOKIE PG-and Aaron Brooks! Brooks was in his 3rd season and had a half-season the previous yr of being the starter,yet still has a lower assist-to-turnover ratio than several rookies.

A quick look at some of Brook's peers.
Brooks had 6 games last yr w/10+ assists. Darren Collison,rookie,had 14 10+ assist games. Brooks in 35.6min/game ave'd 5.3 assists,2.83 turnovers,.432%,.398% on 3s. Collison as a rookie in 27.8min/game averaged 5.7 assists,2.7 turnovers,.477%,.400% on 3s.

T.J.Ford(of the $8mil contract and not being able to keep a starting job) in his first 3 yrs was 26.5mins,6.5 assists,2.53 turnovers,.384% then 35.5min,6.6,3.04,.416% and 29.9min,7.9,3.08,.436%.

Russell Westbrook(who so many consider a SG,rather than the PG he plays) in his two seasons has ave'd 32.5min,5.3 assists,3.35 turnovers,.398% and then 34.3min,8.0,3.27,.418.

Ramon Sessions(of the $4mil deal) played just 17 games in his rookie season. In his 2 and 3 seasons he went 27.5mins,5.7assists,1.92 turnovers,.445% and then 21.1min,3.1,1.67,.456%.

And Kyle Lowry? Because of injury he only played 10 games.
In his second yr he had 25.5min,3.6assists,1.36 turnovers,.432%.
After the trade his third yr he got 21.7min/game,3.5 assists,1.36 turnovers,.475%(Brooks that yr was 25min,3.0 assists,1.56 turnovers,.404%.) Last season in 24.3min he ave'd 4.5 assists,1.71 turnovers,.397%(again Brooks was 35.6min,5.3 assists,2.83 turnovers,.432%).
Note how much better Lowry shot the year Yao was playing vs. last yr. Brooks is a vastly superior 3pt shooter,but it may be of interest how his overall shooting percentage was better the yr w/out Yao than the
previous yr.
Lowry makes up for his inferior 3pt shooting by getting to the line far more frequently than Brooks. Last yr Lowry shot a FT every 6.35 minutes,whereas Brooks shot a FT every 9.79 minutes.(In 1,268 more minutes Brooks shot a measly 38 more FTS.)
Which begs the question,who is better teamed w/Yao. Lowry shot significantly better in his half-season w/Yao than last season w/out him/. Brooks shot much better in the season w/out Yao than he did the previous season w/Yao.
Assuming no roster changes,the Rockets will be starting Martin and Battier,two very good 3pt shooters. Woud it be better for the team to have a third 3pt shooter or a PG who penetrates,kicks to open shooters,can pass inside and draws fouls at a high rate,helping get teams into foul trouble where Yao and Martin can feast at FT line?

Final thought on Brooks overall value. If Morey is sold on Brooks,why is he still after Rubio and recently bid for Chris Paul?

It is simply too early to tell about AB. I think AB would be a better complimentary player to Yao than Lowry, but we'll have to wait and see. So far, it seems Lowry's game is better suited for uptempo, off the bench play. However, that's not to say Lowry can't succeed with our starters but I think Lowry has certainly looked the better playmaker because of our above average bench players. I love both AB's and Lowry's game but AB is certainly a more valuable trade chip.

RAHAT,
How do you feel about andre iguodala? He's been my most sought after this offseason. He generally isn't the efficient scorer that Morey likes but his overall game is fantastic.

I think the usage-inflation argument is a sound one. Do you know who else benefitted from usage-inflation that Rockets fans may remember? Mike James.

Here's a scoring /assists / FG% comparison between James's 2005-06 year with Toronto and Brooks's numbers from this season:

James: 20.3 / 5.8 / .469
Brooks: 19.6 / 5.3 / .432

James also had higher FG, 3PT and FT percentages that year, as well as steals per game, rebounds, etc. I'm not saying this is a perfect comparison by any means, but it may provide some perspective into just exactly how valuable Brooks is versus how valuable we, as fans, perceive him to be.

Let's say your contentions are true and that he is worth the $8million.

Would you trade him for an elite player if that's what the deal required? For me, it's a no-brainer.

Remember, you can't just view these assessments in a vacuum of just the player's abilities: that's when things get misconstrued into indictments.

Were Kyle Lowry not making $6million or simply not on that team, would I trade Brooks? Hell no. But given the circumstances, and the fact that I feel Lowry is more than capable, I would have no qualms about spreading around the wealth.

True Rocket's fans would never accuse you of bashing players Rahat. Your blog has supported the fan base by giving us insight into personnel areas that most teams don't have the benefit of. I appreciate your willingness to share your thoughts and your reasoning even though I don't always agree with your conclusions.

Regarding Brooks' value to the team, it is quite hard to ignore that he added 2 assists per game last season with a starting lineup including Hayes(our non-scoring midget center), Scola (always double teamed), Ariza (no description needed), and Battier. It is tough to get assists surrounded by that particular offensive lineup. He added 2 assists and improved his scoring to near 20 per game.

That is not to say that he should be untouchable, but this year's lineup will not even resemble last year's. I am not convinced that his upside has peaked just yet. Also, even if he deserves an 8 million dollar salary after this season, that is only 40% of a current max player. Since Battier and Jeffries will make nearly that much this year, is it really too much? Remember, this year he is locked in at 2 million.

Any trades with Brooks had better put us in the Western Conference finals with a legit chance of winning.

Completely agreed with JT, especially about the third guard part. He should be someone's 6th man of the year candidate, but to the Houston Rockets, I suspect he's best suited to help us as a trade asset.

Rahat, great to see you back and I love the supporting team you've put together.

I get the sneaking suspicion that this is not a re-hash of Brooks' game simply to kill time, but rather as a prelude to what I personally think could be his inclusion in any upcoming trades. There are those who think that trading Brooks would gut the Rockets and I think this simply provides perspective. Maybe that's me talking because I agree with the overall assessment that while I love Brooks and what he brings, his shortcomings (no pun intended) don't give him "untouchable" status or even would make me think we would implode without him. Or to put it another way: don't get too attached to Brooks. Morey has a history of selling high, and some subtle shifts seem to be positioning the team in the event that he is moved for someone else.

Great spelling, man. You're an inspiration to me.

Brooks is a little like Sleepy Floyd a scoring one guard with an average passing touch. He's never going to average double digit assists and he's always going to have problems with turnovers but, at the moment can anyone think of a better PG to come off the bench and providing scoring?

In an ideal situation, Brooks would be a pivotal third guard in the Vinnie Johnson or BJ Armstrong mold and if there was a match-up problem, could start. If a package including Brooks could be flipped for an elite player, then I'm all for it. But I'll also be happy if Brooks was part of the Rockets future as well provided Daryl Morey doesn't pay more than market value for good but not one of the top-5 PGs in the league.

Here we go again with the ceremonial Brooks bashing.
Either Rahat has a personal agenda to target Brooks for some unknown reason, or he's bored because he doesn't have Ariza around to pick on anymore.
And to think I would drift over to this blog again so that I could engage in some speculation on the Rockets with or without Melo (however boring that may have already become), it's gone from being yet another diatribe on Brooks to a prolonged process of putting Brooks in a dirty bag and beating the crap out of him with opinionated hypothetical scenarios. Suggestion: Either find another player to complain about, or just talk crap about another team, but please stop it with the assessing of Brooks, it's old.

Wow i'm sorry to say but none of you guys no basketball.first of all aaron brooks is not a jock second of all kyle lower is no where close to brooks.third of all aaron brooks had to score an step it up this year who was on are team besides brooks an jermain tht could creat the shot ill answer that no body.are starting five was ab shane bat ariz lous an chuck hayes no of these guys are dinamic scorers. We obly got a good scorer in the middle of the season in kevin martin an by then ab wss already doin his thing an we did see him get better towards the end of the year so i think becuse rahat rights it doesn't mean you have to agree or even if hes right.how does he kno ab wont look to pass more then score once we get our team bac he only did this much scoring this year because he j
Had to

Scoring ability doesn't matter if you don't rebound, because you don't have the ball. Scoring ability doesn't matter if you don't defend, because the other team is far ahead. Brooks can score. That's all. I don't understand why Rockets fans want one-dimensional players so badly.

Lowry can pass well, defend well, and rebound very well. No, he isn't a great shooter. But there is more to the game than jump-shooting. Because of Lowry's skillset, I think he would be a better starter. He is fast enough to keep with most PGs in the league, outside of Aaron Brooks. He's strong enough to defend the 2.

I disagree. He doesn't really suck up the clock that much. Like Ariza, he was asked to do too much.

If instead he's given the role that he was given in the Portland series, I think he would be much more efficient and would post better numbers. He's improved since then as well.

He had no post threat to create space or perimeter player who required double teams. Watching him last year, I thought Brooks played much better with Lowry, because he needed someone to take the pressure off of him.

I remember when Lowry was out with his injury, if Brooks was taken out for a couple of minutes, the Rockets would go down big time and be completely unable to score.

Also, his playmaking did improve as the year went on. I think he developed as a player and we're selling him a bit short. For example, at the start of the year, he usually faded in the clutch and we needed Landry. But after the Landry trade, he stepped up whenever we needed him.

We have lost games because he has gone iso at the end only to get owned inside. It's not a point guard's job to score. Him sucking up clock will not work with Yao and Martin on the floor. I don't mind a point guard scoring a lot if they have a lot of assists (like Chris Paul or Deron Williams).

Great to hear your voice again, Rahat.

RL,

You make a couple of great points. The first regards the way we've come to know Lowry: as an off-the-bench guy. While I love the attentiveness to statistics on this blog and within the Rockets organization, I think statistics can fail in quantifying the degree to which players excel in different roles and in contexts of shifting expectations.

I don't prefer Lowry to Brooks. Yet for as much as Brooks over-handled the ball last season, I was equally frustrated with the number of senseless mid-ranger jumpers and, by the end of the season, 3-pointers that Lowry shot. In other words, for me, I'm not convinced of what type of starting point guard Lowry can be for us. The guy knew his role last year and he prepared for it. Can he shift tempo that well or that opportunistically if he's playing 38 minutes a night against the starting five of the opponent (as RL intimates)?

Rahat,
you make a great point about Brooks value. Of all the assets on the Rockets, I feel as though Brooks is likely to garner the most bang for the buck. Much as Morey sold high with Landry last season. I'm not convinced Brooks value will ever be any higher than it is now.

To elaborate on RL's point about Brooks and increased usage, I also don't know what to expect from him. He found himself in situations last year that he hadn't encountered before--at least, not with the same frequency (like having the ball in his hands late game with the game on the line). I always wondered, pre-Kevin Martin, how Brooks was dealing with the mixed messages about Ariza: we were told by so many that Ariza was being brought in to be the go to guy. Brooks likely heard this. And Brooks had to witness the failure of the Ariza-as-efficient-17-ppg-scorer project. Remember when Brooks started pushing his scoring average up toward 20ppg? It was as Ariza was starting to score less--as his incapacity to be a consistent go to guy and/or shot creator was in doubt.

My point then, is that our judgments of Brooks efficiency don't tell the whole story so long as we leave out the context in which he put up those numbers. Brooks was asked to change his role on the fly (I'm not suggesting someone said, "Take over for Ariza," but something shifted in December or January).

Last year, I saw in Brooks, a determined effort to not look confused. I saw the confusion when he'd drive to the basket, late game, and throw up something awkward and get no foul call. I witnessed his holding onto the ball as the shot clock ran down, wondering "Why is he isoing." Yet all that occurred in the context of changed expectations surrounding Ariza, and Brooks attempts to remake his game on the fly.

I don't expect his role will be crystal clear this season, but he and Martin worked surprisingly well together. My sense is that Brooks will pass if he sees another option. Martin is an efficient scoring threat. Ariza was not. Can Brooks create shots? Maybe not as frequently as Lowry (coming off the bench and passing in transition or barreling to the basket to get the foul call). But I am skeptical about last season's statistics and Brooks potential efficiency. [I'm not Ariza-hating. I think the Rockets publicized awkward expectations for the guy. He's got a wide range of skills--a basketball bard of sorts. He will never be a primary scorer.]

Coming off of a most improved player season in his first full year, it's a little rough on the little guy to suggest that NEXT year he might not be worth 8 million salary. This year he gets 2 million.

When we signed Ariza for 6 million last year, you supported the deal as being a good one for the price. Wow. Is Brooks not a little bit better and more important to our success last year than Ariza? Considering that Brooks had to accomodate fitting Ariza into the offense, and then Martin later on, I think that he showed great ability to adapt. Who is to say that he won't show more of that adaptability with Yao back in the lineup? And, when he isn't, Miller?

With our lineup as it is now, I think that the Rockets will be one of the hardest teams to defend that we've had in years. Brooks is a key part of that formula in my mind. Plus, I'll bet that he will be a bargain at 8 million next year because if his price goes up that much we are looking at an all-star type season from him. To me, that is the good news of this subject.... I sincerely hope to see that "problem" surface for us next year.

If he's scoring he's scoring, you hater

The writer of this article is wrong about brooks . Would you prefer to have a pg who could kill or the whole team getting kill. We have a great player now just want to give him away, that's why the rockets can't be consistent, trading everyone away.

i think AB will prove some doubters wrong this year. 2 years ago he was still getting accustomed to the NBA, and with Yao. Last year was a great learning experience and his game actually suffered ASSISTSWISE without Yao in the lineup, i would say to the tune of at least 2 assists per night on blown layup attempts and overall imcompetency in the lane by our bigs. I cant wait to see AB break down the defense with his dribble and find Yao all day long under the basket for easy buckets. His 3 point shot + FT % make him a legitimate option offensively. Defensively is another issue alltogether, but one that can be schemed for and with sufficient help defense can be overcome.

I don't think this is a fair assessment of Brooks at all. Two of the points I have issue with are saying Brooks has difficulty with the Rose, Rondo, Westbrook point guards and that he doesn't play well with Yao Ming. First of all, every point guard in the league has difficulty with those elite point guards, but Brooks had 1 bad game and 1 good game against Rondo and Rose last season. He had 30 pts and 9 assists in that win at Boston last year. Also, Brooks only started for half of a season with Yao Ming and it resulted in us getting out of the 1st round and going 7 games with the Lakers and Brooks had a great series vs both of those teams with and without Yao. I think it's much too early to judge Brooks yet.

Rahat Good to see your post. I was hoping that the introduction of the other 2 contributors does not reduce the frequency of your posts. Your insight is why we come to this blog sight.

I would dispute a couple points. Firstly, compared with Lowry, I actually feel Brooks is a better fit with Yao than Lowry mainly due to his ability to space the floor. Provided that the passer is not a incompetent or unwilling passer, I think successful passes to Yao in the post depends more on the height of the passer rather than his passing skills. Mcgrady and Shane tends to have easier time passing the ball to Yao because they can see over defenders, where as Brooks often resorts to bounce passes. Lowry will face the same issue as Brooks since he is not much taller. Also, passing to Yao can be orchestrated to be done by Shane or Martin, who is taller. Lowry is a better fit with a fast breaking team. Lowry is an energy off the bench; the jury is still out as to how well he would fare playing starer minutes against starter players.

Second, I think increased usage is a necessary but not sufficient element in explaining Brook's improved production. It's not really fair to imply that merely scaling up usage will lead to increased production. Brook did improve a lot last year. Brooks became the center of Rocket's offense last year with other team's defenses focusing more on him. Along with the fact that he mostly now play against other team's starters, it's remarkable that his number improved that much.

I don't know if he is worth 8 million, but in a trade for Melo, I probably rather see Martin go than Brooks.

Aaron Brooks is a ball hog. It's a fact. I've said it here before. I don't even think he's a point guard. He's basically a Jason Terry, a small shooter. Aaron Brooks has turned into Steve Francis.