RealGM

Brooks is very tradeable right now....young and scorer, progressing, and regarding his contribution to the Rockerts.....he is a BRAINLESS point guard, a ball hog with TOTAL LACK OF COURT VISION...

Lowry or Conroy could do the job at PG, we're somehow well covered rith now at the PG spot, while we lack a C.

Brooks, or even brooks plus a salary matcher (Cook?) could be traded for a real C.....?

Why would it be needed to keep Brooks, not taking advatage of a high trade value and solving a problem with is FAR MORE URGENT, the C spot?

Opinions?

There aren't a lot of "real C's" out there to begin with, much less teams willing to part with them.

I think trading Brooks for a "real C" is stupid. We have a center, his name is Yao Ming. You know, the tall Chinese guy with the really good free throw shot? He's hurt, not dead. Why trade a budding player that we've invested so much time and effort into for a temporary fix? Let's say, hypothetically, that we did package Brooks and Cook for a Center. What happens next year when Yao comes back? Let's face it, we're not winning the Championship this year, it'll be a victory just to make the playoffs. And you can make a case for that being a long shot. Therefore, it would not be smart to trade a away one of your best trade assets for a lost cause. My suggestion is to keep your weapons, and ride out the storm. Next year we'll be back.

I'm back again here would be a great chance for you'll to land a serviceable center in Nazr for 2yrs while Yao rehabs his foot. You have him on a 2yr contract while getting rid of Barry and Cook players you'll won't use and keep a young pg which shows upside.

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachi ... Id=ykwyjhm

or this one which might catch your eyes better

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachi ... Id=yf99qyj

No to Nazr.

Hell no. Why would we possibly trade away our young and up and coming pg for a center, which we would use just for this year. Then what happens when Ming comes back? I say let Brooks keep on developing instead of getting a C which might get us to the playoffs, and most likely lose in the 1st round accompanied with T-mac.

Go Away!!! There are no centers available worth Brooks in a trade. Just go away!!!!

What are you NBA fans? are you flat TV watchers? or do you have REAL BASKETBALL KNOWLEDGE? DO YOU KNOW AT LEAST SOMETHING ABOUT STRATEGY AND TACTICS?

I can't believe YOU DON'T SEE HOW DUMB BRROKS IS.....can't you notice when he has WIDE OPEN TEAMMATES and he won't give them the **** ball, even in the most obvious situations?

Don't you realize his BLATANT LACK OF BASKETBALL IQ?

Of course he ends up with good stats, BUT LOOK AT CHAMPIONSHIP TEAMS.....such kind of players is ABSENT on their rosters......or will you deny it?

PLEASE ANSWER DIRECTLY

OK - if Brooks sucks as bad as you're saying, then what team would trade a "Real C" for him, in your opinion?

Dude - I'm a lifelong Rockets fan, so I may be a bit elitist when a term like a "Real Center" is thrown around. Hakeem, Admiral, Kareem, Shaq...those are "real centers."

In our modern game the only players whom I would refer to as "real Centers (not PF-hybrids)" are Yao, Howard, Pryz, Ilgauskas and Shaq. Those are the only "true" centers in the game right now. I'm not saying that is a good thing or a bad thing - it's just the evolution of the game.

But all of this is pointless - you are advocating trading Aaron Brooks (our starting PG) for a "real C," when everyone and their mother knows that "real C's" are few and far between. You don't help your selling point by completely badmouthing the asset you are trying to trade.

Hell, coming from your description of Brooks I don't think that even the Knicks would trade Eddy Curry for him!

I am going to assume that the person who started this thread, is a Utah fan. How else could something make no sense, and sound like worthless drivel.

We have a serviceable C in Andersen, and Hayes as a backup. the only "true" C's in this league are on stacked teams. Howard/Gortat, Shaq/Big Z, Gasol/Bynum, Oden/Pryzbilla, and these guys aren't going to part with their C's so easily. We made a play for Gortat in the offseason, and it didn't pan out.

I actually think we can do well with the unit we have. Houston are going to look like speed freaks on the court. Maybe Houston should see if NOS, (Nitrous Oxide) want to sponsor the team.

If the team wanted to get rid of a PG, I think Lowry would go before Brooks anyway.

Ok, forget 'real C' ....think ANY useful TEAM PLAYER.....(if such useful young team player can play decent minutes at C, better than Hayes and Andersen, the better)....

and more important....are you denying that Brooks HAS A BLATANT LACK OF BASKETBALL IQ?

In NBA, rules allow such kind of brainless scorers to survive.....but again, think about WINNING TEAMS (Lakers, Spurs, Celtics)...do you see them flooded with these kind of stats producers? or do they have TEAM PLAYERS with at least DECENT BASKETBALL IQ? Even their main stars on those teams.....are they as dumb to usually ignore wide open teammates over and over in games?

If you want the rockets to become one of such franchises who cherish such brainless ball hogs who produce nice stats and would never be considered real contenders as teams, good for you.....I thought you'd prefer a contending team, perhaps with less flashy players, but with more team awareness, specially for the PG spot....

Will you answer DIRECTLY if you deny that Aaron Brooks has a severe lack of Basketball IQ? will you deny that he ignores WIDE OPEN TEAMMATES and instead he goes into dumb decisions?

dartherus wrote:Ok, forget 'real C' ....think ANY useful TEAM PLAYER.....(if such useful young team player can play decent minutes at C, better than Hayes and Andersen, the better)....

and more important....are you denying that Brooks HAS A BLATANT LACK OF BASKETBALL IQ?

In NBA, rules allow such kind of brainless scorers to survive.....but again, think about WINNING TEAMS (Lakers, Spurs, Celtics)...do you see them flooded with these kind of stats producers? or do they have TEAM PLAYERS with at least DECENT BASKETBALL IQ? Even their main stars on those teams.....are they as dumb to usually ignore wide open teammates over and over in games?

If you want the rockets to become one of such franchises who cherish such brainless ball hogs who produce nice stats and would never be considered real contenders as teams, good for you.....I thought you'd prefer a contending team, perhaps with less flashy players, but with more team awareness, specially for the PG spot....

Will you answer DIRECTLY if you deny that Aaron Brooks has a severe lack of Basketball IQ? will you deny that he ignores WIDE OPEN TEAMMATES and instead he goes into dumb decisions?

well until t-mac is back in business why on earth would we trade him? hes our best option on offense right now and t-mac is still at least a month or so away.... I don't see that he has a lack of basketball IQ i just see him as an undersized two guard and not a point guard in the sense that most people know...

Ya know, maybe I'm way off with this one. But I just can't put my finger on it for the life of me why something keeps telling me that you don't like Aaron Brooks.

i lol'ed so hard on this one!

VC#15 wrote:well until t-mac is back in business why on earth would we trade him? hes our best option on offense right now and t-mac is still at least a month or so away....

Why would it be impossible to trade him for another scorer with a little more of brains and team awareness?

I don't see that he has a lack of basketball IQ i just see him as an undersized two guard and not a point guard in the sense that most people know...

Did you check the scorers in winning teams? even at the SG spot....Ray Allen, Manu Ginobili, Kobe......Do you see them OVER AND OVER IGNORING WIDE OPEN TEAMMATES, EVN WHEN THEY'RE ON BAD STRIKE? would you consider them to have worse COURT VISION than Brooks? HAVE YOU FORGOTTEN THE LATEST PLAYOFFS? Even in this board there were people wanting to kill him because of that after the games.....do you forget that fast?

Do you remember the Kings when Adelman was there? do you remember the ball movement they had? Even at the PF and C spot they had people with more court vision! (Webber and Divac)....can you imagine such ball movement with such a ballhog running the PG spot?

And it's not a matter of liking or disliking him, perhaps he's a great guy in his personal life, I'm talking strictly about basketball, strategy and tactics.....will you show me what's false in what I'm saying? Thanks in advance....

Before we keep going, how about you answer this directly: what player/s are you looking for?

Forget the fact that they way you're describing Brooks would make any team that traded for him foolish - what player do you want for him?

You started this off talking Centers, so do you think that we should try to get Cleveland to bite on a deal involving Ilgauskas? Do you think that Brooks could get you Marc Gasol out of Memphis, or perhaps Thabeet or Haddidi? Would you be happy with a Brooks/Haddidi swap?

If not a center, then are you thinking that a guy like Kevin Martin or Andre Iguoudala would be reasonable trade targets? Maybe a PG for PG swap with someone like Mario Chalmers?

I know that you're going on about high BB IQ, and trust me, most of us around here are aware of players who have high basketball IQ and players who don't. No, Brooks is not Deron Williams, but he's also not Moochie Norris. He's an undersized SG trying his best to be a PG while realizing that he's probably the top offensive threat on the team. The PG position between Brooks and Lowry actually is not that big of a concern for this team in the grand scheme of things...but if you trade one of them off then it will become so.

Another thing you have to consider is which assets are you willing to part with in order to move Brooks for the type of player you seem to want? Sacramento may like Brooks, but they're not moving Kevin Martin straight up for him. Would you be willing to part ways with Landry, Scola or Battier to move Aaron Brooks?

Also, would you be willing to take on a long-term salary in order to move Brooks? Would you be willing to take a risk on a highly-paid, but injury-prone player like Michael Redd?

This whole thread seems to be an outlet for you to yell about how much you don't like Aaron Brooks, but then you say that you think that another team would give up something of value for him despite the fact that you think that he's a lousy player. Top it off with you not giving us any idea of what you're looking for beyond "something of value" and you leave the rest of us pretty perplexed.

Mr E, It's simple, it's about how many people here IGNORES Brooks blatant lack of Basketball IQ.....the trade issue is secondary, but its about raising awareness how a player with total lack of basketball IQ, but young and with good personal stats...is something that should be keep in mind as tradeable.....

And if other team would bewrong by trading him? THAT'S WHAT TRADES ARE ABOUT!!!!

Do you think all the other managers are top notch thinkers? if so, how come a mediocre player like Allan Houston was giving such HUGE contract? how come players like Marbury, with great stats but NEGATIVE FOR THE TEAMS THEY PLAY end up with HUGE CONTRACTS? Brian Grant? How come the Rockets got Scola for peanuts? Gasol traded for crap?

Marbury or Nash? who had more team awareness? who was better for his teams? who was more flashy and with better stats at the start of their careers?

The trades are about trying to get others to agree on a trade that in mainly for benefit on your teeam, even if such trade won't benefit the other....don't you agree? it's a matter of TRYING TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE OTHER LACK OF KNOWLEDGE......

That's my point, Brooks has great speed, dribbling, nice shooting, but he's totally nil regarding court vision...total lack of team awareness...and it seems mainly to IQ reasons.....not a matter of lack of will....

Each time more scientific research shows that Intelligence is developed from 0 to 5, perhaps to 8 at best....after that, it's an uphill battle with the more chances of losing it.....

A player with severe shorcomings in Basketball IQ, and great physicial skills (in this case speed, agility and dribbling, and even perhaps shooting)...will make good stats in NBA, but his contribution to the achievements would be frar from being the money they usually get paid.....

Or would you say it's a real asset a guy who scores 17 ppg during season, but that for obtaining such scoring average, he had to screw the offensive system of the team? again, remember marbury?

Why do you think these kind of players are ABSENT in championship contending teams, and are more common on crappy teams who loose games over and over, while these players keep scoring a lot each game?

And that's forgetting defensive shortcomings of Brooks....

One more thing, did you watch the latest playoffs? would you say Brooks was more important than Scola? why do you keep saying he's the primary offensive option? just because he hogs the ball a lot and has a lot more oportunities to shoot, instead of sending the ball inside more often?

Will you comment about these specific things?

Not sure you watched the most recent playoffs......the only time the Rockets beat the Lakers...it was because Brooks had a great game.

What is with you and all of the CAPS too?

tosweet68 wrote:Not sure you watched the most recent playoffs......the only time the Rockets beat the Lakers...it was because Brooks had a great game.

What is with you and all of the CAPS too?

Did you watch the games? Wasn't it Scola who made the 7th game happen?
Again, are you sure you know the difference between scoring a lot and really being the most positive contributor to a team?

Are you really sure you can't notice how a player like Marbury, who had awesome individual stats, and how positive he was for his team?

Are you sure you can't note how 'boring' teams like the Spurs, usually lack the kind of flashy players who are more centered in their individual stats than in the fate of the team?

Are you that uncapable to see the pattern of players integrating top teams? the team awareness on most such players in the rosters, wether they are role players or stars?

dartherus wrote:

VC#15 wrote:well until t-mac is back in business why on earth would we trade him? hes our best option on offense right now and t-mac is still at least a month or so away....

Why would it be impossible to trade him for another scorer with a little more of brains and team awareness?

I don't see that he has a lack of basketball IQ i just see him as an undersized two guard and not a point guard in the sense that most people know...

Did you check the scorers in winning teams? even at the SG spot....Ray Allen, Manu Ginobili, Kobe......Do you see them OVER AND OVER IGNORING WIDE OPEN TEAMMATES, EVN WHEN THEY'RE ON BAD STRIKE? would you consider them to have worse COURT VISION than Brooks? HAVE YOU FORGOTTEN THE LATEST PLAYOFFS? Even in this board there were people wanting to kill him because of that after the games.....do you forget that fast?

Do you remember the Kings when Adelman was there? do you remember the ball movement they had? Even at the PF and C spot they had people with more court vision! (Webber and Divac)....can you imagine such ball movement with such a ballhog running the PG spot?

And it's not a matter of liking or disliking him, perhaps he's a great guy in his personal life, I'm talking strictly about basketball, strategy and tactics.....will you show me what's false in what I'm saying? Thanks in advance....

Why are you comparing Brooks to All stars and an MVP? But while your at it why not remember AI, a shoot first point guard who took a team to the finals? You can never bad mouth a player that delivers on offense even if it means ignoring open players...