I guess if the GM's making the deal think it improves both teams. But it seems to me we are helping Houston out there, and leaving ourselves with a different hole to fill. If there is a plan to fill the hole it creates, great. But if not, then we would just be solving one problem by creating another.
I don't even think Aaron Brooks is really the answer at point guard. Basically we trade a big for a poor man's Damon. No thanks.
I'm not terribly interested in Aaron Brooks... I'd like to think that Camby could be part of a deal for someone that would be a starter, rather than a backup. And I'm not sure why Portland would hand Houston a starting center for a guy that doesn't start for them regularly. Ed O.
Here is the way I feel about Brooks. Brooks would be an awesome guy off the bench. But trading a starting center for him, which also helps a conference rival? Not good. Houston has plenty of guards. They can afford to lose one. We do not have plenty of centers.
I am for most moves that get us better, assets or team wise going forward. My fear is just how much Miller and Camby have helped LMA so far this season, and what would happen if they are both moved in deals.
I prefer the trade I proposed earlier today - Bayless TPE and one our 1sts top 12 protected for Brooks.
Is Brooks much better than Patty Mills nowadays? Didn't Patty totally school Brooks earlier this season? Give up Camby for a guy we already have? No thanks.
