For those wanting an update on Brooks. http://www.oregonlive.com/nba/index.ssf/2012/02/nba_high-5_158.html
So basically that article states we have no chance at him. We have no money to throw at him and phoenix is not going to renounce his rights.
Good. He doesn't have the PG skills that Felton has. It would be nice to have a good shooter at PG, true, but he's an only slightly better version of Patty. (According to Shavlik Randolph, his team is "the Chinese Lakers", stocked with members of the Chinese national team, and always wins. So the chances of him being available before the very last game of the Chinese playoffs are slim anyway.)
I pretty much agree. Brooks is Mills 2.0. I might take him over Failton for no other reason than Failton has thus far been a miserable failure.
Neither Mills nor Brooks is the answer to our starting PG. That said, there is some evidence to suggest that Mills is better than Brooks. Mills - http://www.asia-basket.com/player.asp?Cntry=CHN&PlayerID=73711 Season: 2011-2012 (China ) Avarage Team G MIN PTS 2FGP 3FGP FT RO RD RT AS PF BS ST TO Xinjiang F.T. 12 34.5 26.5 55.0% 49.4% 73.9% 0.9 2.9 3.8 3.8 1.3 0.1 2.3 2.7 Brooks - http://www.asia-basket.com/player.asp?Cntry=CHN&PlayerID=46414 Season: 2011-2012 (China ) Avarage Team G MIN PTS 2FGP 3FGP FT RO RD RT AS PF BS ST TO Guandong ST 28 30.1 21.6 52.3% 43.8% 85.3% 0.8 2.4 3.2 4.9 2.9 0.1 1.9 3.0 Head to head http://www.nba.com/advancedstats/pl...ron-Brooks|201988,201166;year=201011;season=r The only NBA game I remember them playing against each other. BENCH MIN FGM-A 3PM-A FTM-A OREB DREB REB AST STL BLK TO PF +/- PTS Patrick Mills, PG 23 6-12 2-4 0-0 1 1 2 5 5 0 4 3 +2 14 Aaron Brooks, PG 23 3-10 1-6 3-3 0 1 1 2 1 0 3 0 -5 10 http://espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=310102022 [video=youtube;1_TT_U1jTNA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_TT_U1jTNA[/video]
Brooks may not be the second coming of Steve Nash, but I think he's certainly worth consideration. To my knowledge, he's the closest thing to young, available, experienced, talented and reasonably inexpensive... I can see bringing him on as essentially a lease... If we're not in love with what he gives us as a potential PGOTF/PGOTNow he's not a big enough investment to ruin other potential moves with our caproom, he's a local kid so the crowd would immediately be excited about him (can't really say that about Felton...) and he plays an exciting brand of basketball... If he becomes available, I'd be for giving it a shot, if phoenix matches, so be it...
You can hate Felton's finishing ability (oh god how I hate it) or his ability (or inability?) to shoot the ball, but felton is a pass first point guard and he does willingly pass.
I agree he's a pass first PG, but his shooting and untimely turnovers have been atrocious. He's a game killer.
No, Pattty Mills, Steve Blake, Sergio Rod, & Andre Miller not being able to guard an opposing teams PG's is a game Killer. At least Felton's shortcomings are correctable, been a long time coming since we've had a PG that can actually defend. Not giving up on Felton yet, however have always been a fan of Brooks, think he's the better long ranger shooter between him an mills regardless of stats.
I don't think his only one positive thing this year (assists) outweigh everything else he [doesnt] bring to the table. I thought he was supposed to be better or as good as Dre' only younger. God, why cant Portland get a freaking PG!
I don't get the infatuation with Aaron Brooks. Sure I'm not happy with Felton, haven't been since the first game. But I'm not grasping at that straw. I'd just as soon sign Patty for much less.
I didn't say he's a good point guard ... but he is a real one. And for the record he's never been as good as Miller, except for a 40 game run with the Knicks.
That's an excellent question. The highlight of the Blazers' ineptitude in getting a good point guard is of course the whiffing on D-Will and CP3, but the ineptitude continues unabated. There is a second problem of course, IMO, and that is that Nate seems to be a point guard killer. Nate seems incapable of developing or working with a decent point guard. I wouldn't want to work for him. I would also argue that Andre Miller is the best we've had since Strickland. So, why don't we still have him? Andre > Nate
We had one. His name is Andre Miller. He's a great player with one weakness, outside shooting. We focused on the negative and ignored the many positives and went for a player who was supposed to be "a better fit", and it backfired big time. (Don't give me the crap of him also being a poor defender, no one can really guard PGs well, so I really don't care.)
Mills had N8 as a coach, and we're all up in arms about how he handles point guards. Give Mills the same freedom Brooks has had, and who knows?
