RealGM

what a fukin player. Has a tremendous offensive repotoire. We saw him hit 3's, 15 foot floaters, drives, midrange shots, offensive tips!.

I mean this guy is all hustle and not just the type of hustle where you have no talent and you just TRY TRY TRY, he TRIES TRIES TRIES and has a bit of talent!

He just about owned Grant Hill in every way possible last night. Tipped a shot over Hill who's what 9 inches taller than him, and then blocked Hill's shot.

This guy is the most entertaining player to watch on the Rockets!

If this kid had height, he would've been a star already.

T-Mac United wrote:If this kid had height, he would've been a star already.

Definitely. He'd be more touted than OJ Mayonaise.

Averaging 12 ppg in 20 minutes shooting 48.5 FG% 47 3PFG% and 91 FT%.

What a stud.

Brooks came into to camp ready to prove he is worthy. If Rafer keeps up this horrendous shooting then I could see Brooks taking his spot near the All-Star Break. Although, I do like the energy and instant offense off the bench. But damn, imagine all the open looks hed get playing with T-Mac, Artest, & Yao to start the game.

Did ya'll see his block ?!?!? That was sick. Top 5 play of the week for sure, could even be #1.

KiDdFrESh wrote:Brooks came into to camp ready to prove he is worthy. If Rafer keeps up this horrendous shooting then I could see Brooks taking his spot near the All-Star Break. Although, I do like the energy and instant offense off the bench. But damn, imagine all the open looks hed get playing with T-Mac, Artest, & Yao to start the game.

Did ya'll see his block ?!?!? That was sick. Top 5 play of the week for sure, could even be #1.

Guys like Brook IMO are best left on the bench. He's amazing and all but I don't know how good he'd be starting.

We should never put Brooks on the bench , he will need to play controlled and the only shots he will get are the ones T-Mac and Yao create.
Let him play with the 2nd unit and create havoc.

When Battier comes back put him with the starters , pair Artest with Brooks then we will really be rolling imo.

Brooks is a scoring guard, he can't be the playmaker. I know Alston aint one of the top playmaker in the league, but he's damn good at fast break. Brooks still doesn't know his teammates well enough to know when to give them the ball. He's not ready to be the starter to play with Yao and T-Mac. He will be great playing with Battier, Hayes, Landry those that will do all the dirty works for him.

I agree, Brooks is someone who is better off creating shots for himself, and the best way for him to do it is to come off the bench as an offensive spark plug.

ShaY wrote:We should never put Brooks on the bench , he will need to play controlled and the only shots he will get are the ones T-Mac and Yao create.
Let him play with the 2nd unit and create havoc.

When Battier comes back put him with the starters , pair Artest with Brooks then we will really be rolling imo.

I mean we should never put him as a starter

I say go back to last year's starting lineup of Rafer, T-Mac, Battier, Scola and Yao. Then you have a squad of Brooks, Barry, Artest, Landry and Hayes off the bench.

You preserve the chemistry of last year's starters while still getting a killer squad off the bench.

It's hard to prepare for a half-court, slower offense in the starters and then have to prepare to do a complete 180--the faster, smaller--with the bench squad.

A lineup of Brooks, Artest, T-Mac and Yao sounds great but only one of them can score at a time. And Brooks doesn't need much help getting his.

Brooks 6th man of the year--Yeah, I said it!

There have been many players like Brooks before and usually they come off the bench. He's the prototypical quick, undersized, scoring PG. He wouldn't work as a starter because he just can't match-up densively vs first string PGs, but that doesn't mean he can't be a great player off the bench (which he is showing). I think people should just be happy that our concerns about the back-up PG have been answered because I know personally that was one of my biggest concerns.

No one in the league can stay in front of this kid. If he could pass a little better and if he had 3 inches more and if he weighed 20 more lbs he could start for half the teams in the league. Then again, if if's were fifths we'd all be drunk.

1. 3 inches taller
2. 20lbs heavier
3. better passer
if Brooks is all that above, you wont see him available at 26th pick

He is instant offense on our bench. Even though he isnt tall he still was a steal in round 1. They guy is a stud.

MaxRider wrote:1. 3 inches taller
2. 20lbs heavier
3. better passer
if Brooks is all that above, you wont see him available at 26th pick

I know! And his name would be Brandon Roy.

EDIT: Ok, so he'd have to be 5 inches taller to be Roy. You get the point.

jove9 wrote:

MaxRider wrote:1. 3 inches taller
2. 20lbs heavier
3. better passer
if Brooks is all that above, you wont see him available at 26th pick

I know! And his name would be Brandon Roy.

EDIT: Ok, so he'd have to be 5 inches taller to be Roy. You get the point.

actually the closest to that description is Deron Williams

Chris Paul is a legit 6' so what is Brooks really? 5'9 tops? The best Brooks can hope for is the 2nd coming of Allen Iverson.

CuttingEdge wrote:Chris Paul is a legit 6' so what is Brooks really? 5'9 tops? The best Brooks can hope for is the 2nd coming of Allen Iverson.

Brooks is 5'10.5" w/o shoes, 5'11.75" w/ shoes
Paul is 5'11.75" w/o shoes, 6'1" w/shoes

MaxRider wrote:

CuttingEdge wrote:Chris Paul is a legit 6' so what is Brooks really? 5'9 tops? The best Brooks can hope for is the 2nd coming of Allen Iverson.

Brooks is 5'10.5" w/o shoes, 5'11.75" w/ shoes
Paul is 5'11.75" w/o shoes, 6'1" w/shoes

But Paul weights about 205.
Brooks is like 175.

According to their bios, Paul is 180 and Brooks is 160. What they are no is anyone's guess.