Quote:
Originally Posted by StrayBullet
Again, I'd like to respond with wondering how you think he's better. You stated that "He is better than Fisher" and in brackets, "What is he 36-38 now". What does age have to do with being better than Aaron Brooks?
|
AS I said earlier, age comes into because Fisher was better than Brooks when younger. Now that he is older he is not as good as a defender as he was and therefore Brooks can score on him.
Quote:
|
I gave examples of older players who were great, but are still better than good players now. I would rather have an aging vet with great leadership skills, who can still hit big shots, play with the best player in the league, and at his age, still do an alright job of defending his assignments instead of a shoot first, shoot second minded point guard with breakneck speed.
|
Thats great but it doesn't have much to do with the fact that based on the defenders that Brooks is facing in this series that it isn't crazy top think that he can score double digits every game.
Quote:
|
Tonight was another example of Brooks being overrated by you. Fisher was NOT in the line-up, which means he was being guarded by even worse (According to you) defenders. He was playing so badly, Adelman had to put Kyle Lowry (Who is absolutely better than Aaron Brooks) in. With worse defenders, Brooks ended the night with a whopping 7 points, 3 turnovers and 1 assist.
|
I don't know how I can overrate Brooks when I don't think that he is that good.
The point I made is that with the crap defenders that the Lakers have at PG it is entirely possible that Brooks can put up double digit points every single game. It has a lot more to do with how bad the Lakers PG's are moreso than Brooks being any good.
And again I don't care how many assists or turnovers he had. He had a bad night last nightbut that doesn't change the fact that considering who he (or any PG playing the Lakers) can get double digits points every night.