Aaron Brooks, Answered

by haildablazer on Apr 19, 2009 8:10 PM PDT

Aaron Brooks absolutely killed the Blazers. Am I wrong? Didn't think so. I personally see a huge correlation between the fact that Portland lost by 27, and Brooks scored 27 points on us. Brooks is fast. He's the kind of player that has given the Blazer point guards fits all season long, and it showed last night. But he has a flaw.

The Blazer points are defensive liabilities, yes. And I'm including Bayless on this one simply due to youth and the lack of a good sample size. I doubt anyone has a good argument against this.

But the one aspect of Defense that I never hear mentioned is: Offense. Bear with me.

Aaron Brooks did not have to think about defense last night, at all. For the whole game. Playing the Point Guard position in the NBA is one of the most mentally demanding positions in all of sports. Since he didn't have to worry about moving his feet and keeping his man in front, he was able to concentrate purely on offense. This is why I think the Blazers Points need to drive and go for the score on him, not just be a 3-point camper (Blake) or so inconsistent that you dare him to beat you (Go Go). Sergio has shown flashes this season of an inside game. A layup here, a teardrop there. The fact that he can dribble so well is one reason why, but because the D knows he won't (or can't?) beat them with his own shots, they can play off of him and clog the passing lanes.

Which is why I would start Bayless.

Bayless is a rookie, yes. He's inexperienced, yes. He's raw and inconsistent, yes.

But the man can drive to the hole, which is exactly how the Blazers need to attack Brooks. Aaron is six foot even. He's not a big point guard. He's quick, but he lacks upper-body strength, though it has improved in the last year. Plus Brooks is a sophomore. He doesn't know all of the tricks yet, but on the flipside of the same coin; he doesn't know what he CAN'T do yet. OK, maybe starting Bayless is a bit extreme, but I don't think by much. Bayless can drive on Brooks. He's good enough to do that. He also has a pretty good outside shot when he's feeling confident (like at Arizona). He's not going to make Aaron Brooks disapear, but he'll make him think.

And making a Point Guard think about something besides his Offense is half the battle.

Tweet Comment 30 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Not sure about that

But I agree I would love to see someone take it to him, I’m sure that would help.

by twggyy on Apr 19, 2009 8:22 PM PDT reply actions

Aaron Brooks got most of his points when the lead was already big

and the rockets were cruising. Brooks was shooting well and Adelman left him in there to gain confidence as a playoff starter.

In a closer game, brooks would not have played as much, especially if the blazers are playing a good offensive point guard. Kyle Lowry was not needed much last night due to brooks play and lack of a real threat to the lead. Lowry is a much better defender than Brooks and runs the offense very efficiently. He is a bulldog like artest on defense and gets a fair share of foul shots by driving on offense. You dont need to be scared of Brooks, you need to be scared of brooks and lowry cause they can combine for the production brooks had, all while playing better defense

Game 1 108-81 Rockets

Rockets lead series 1-0

by TexasHoosier on Apr 19, 2009 8:35 PM PDT reply actions

After the first couple of minutes into the game, Jerryd Bayless would be riding the pine with two fouls.

Bayless, moreover, would probably have a stat line that included 0-2 shooting, 0 assists, and 2 turnovers in that short time frame.

by AK1984 on Apr 19, 2009 8:35 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs

I doubt Nate starts Bayless, but I could see him get a bit more playing time in the right situation

Maybe he could try starting Roy and Rudy to have a more variable offense, then bring in Blake for Rudy to create the old lineup, and then Bayless as a ~~shooting~~ penetrating guard when Roy needs a rest. But somehow I doubt Nate mixes things up that much now. Blake just needs to make his open shots and try his best to defend.

by Norsktroll on Apr 19, 2009 8:36 PM PDT reply actions

Norsktroll beat me to it...

No way Nate starts Bayless..and if we DIDN"T get to the paint the sets would be messed up, That said, you might as well get him some minutes… throw Batum on him for a few, let Rudy have a try and for godsake whoever it is has to guide him to the middle. Team defense will conquer all.
The Idea of making Brookes work on defense is part of the plan. I agree with you there.

by Roadblazer on Apr 19, 2009 8:45 PM PDT reply actions

Observation from a neutral guy (Bobcats blogger over at Rufusonfire)

— Point guard is not necessarily the new Most Premium Position Evar!!! Derrick Rose went nuts, and Rondo acquitted himself admirably, but at the same time, Portland rolls with Steve Blake and Houston goes with Aaron Brooks, who’s kind of a souped-up Raymond Felton, and Kyle Lowry, who’s still got the whiff of potential about him, but is still undistinguished. In other words, you can probably come up with at least fifteen other point guards better than those guys, yet you don’t see two of the smartest GMs in the league tripping over themselves to upgrade. If you can get superior talent at wings and bigs, then run your system to emphasize them, rather than the point guard.

by Norsktroll on Apr 19, 2009 8:50 PM PDT reply actions

Super star points

Unless your point is your Superstar( D williams, Chris paul etc… ) this is true. I am one of the people who really likes Blake. Defense liability aside, He is a good to great shooter, smart and not easily distracted. Roy is our Superstud…. Blakes are harder to find than we think I suppose.

by Roadblazer on Apr 19, 2009 8:55 PM PDT up reply actions

Nice

I just wanted to throw a firecracker into the furnace and see what happened.

I know less than half of you half as well as I should like, and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.

by haildablazer on Apr 19, 2009 8:52 PM PDT reply actions

Everybody played like crap on O and D

Yao didn’t have to worry about guarding anybody. Scola didn’t have to worry about guarding anybody. We got beat at every position. Blake was apart of a team wide problem. Every Rocket killed us. Start Bayless? Please…

"The Rockets broke the heart-shaped lock on our diary and read it. They know our shirt sizes AND our shoe sizes. They know our ballboy’s girlfriend’s nickname. They own us." - nightbluefruit

by Sabonis4Ever on Apr 19, 2009 8:54 PM PDT reply actions

I wouldn't start Bayless, but I would make it very, very clear to all the guards that he's to have his motor idling in the driveway...

That Brooks fiasco must not be repeated.

Pontiff of the Pryz for Prez Posse...

by timbo on Apr 19, 2009 8:55 PM PDT reply actions

channing said the blake is the strongest guy on the team pound for pound

i think that we should maby him up

bayless leaves over my dead body

by thomasikehara on Apr 19, 2009 9:03 PM PDT reply actions

post*

bayless leaves over my dead body

by thomasikehara on Apr 19, 2009 9:03 PM PDT up reply actions

if the blazers lose the series to the rockets, particularly if it's in 4 or 5 games

and brooks continues to be a major factor, then obviously kevin pritchard will be looking hard and without any sentimentality at fixing this weakness the team has…. this inability to contain or control ultraquick point-guards.

it might be an over-reaction: this is how jermaine o’neal was traded for dale davis, as it was imagined that davis would better defend shaq. very quickly this trade looked like a mistake.

but this is what the playoffs do. even after a very successful season wen one bad match-up exposes a weakness there is then tremendous pressure to plug that one hole, as if then everything will be perfect.

and you end up playing whack-a-mole.

ignacio

by ignacio on Apr 19, 2009 9:27 PM PDT reply actions

whack-a-mole!

by Blazin' on Apr 20, 2009 12:07 AM PDT up reply actions

I dont see Bayless getting any run....

Unless things continue to go terribly wrong. Bayless is pretty much a last resort desperation move. If Blake and Sergio are totally unable to do anything to slow down brooks, I would put Rudy in at point and run brooks through a maze of off ball screens. If they dare put Brooks on Roy, you post him up. I dont see that working either though. I think the smart decision is to stick with what has worked, and that is Blake with some Sergio sprinkled in…

RUDY > MJ

by myemic23 on Apr 19, 2009 9:39 PM PDT reply actions

Put Batum on Brooks

"The Rockets broke the heart-shaped lock on our diary and read it. They know our shirt sizes AND our shoe sizes. They know our ballboy’s girlfriend’s nickname. They own us." - nightbluefruit

by Sabonis4Ever on Apr 19, 2009 10:32 PM PDT up reply actions

Yes. I would be surprised if Nate doesn't try this at some point.

by jksnake99 on Apr 19, 2009 10:40 PM PDT up reply actions

that would create a mismatch for artest

Game 1 108-81 Rockets

Rockets lead series 1-0

by TexasHoosier on Apr 19, 2009 11:30 PM PDT up reply actions

You'd slide Roy over to Ron

and let Blake guard Battier in that scenario.

by Royster on Apr 19, 2009 11:35 PM PDT up reply actions

indeed. Battier would eventually be able to take advantage of it, but maybe it would throw Houston off for a couple possessions.

I doubt Batum will be on Brooks to start the game. Maybe at a later point when Houston has a bit of a smaller 5 on the floor or something.

by jksnake99 on Apr 19, 2009 11:38 PM PDT up reply actions

It's a valid strategy

The spurs did it to great effect last year by putting Bowen on Nash and having Finley guard Diaw. Even though Finley was completely unable to guard Diaw in the post, it completely disrupted the Suns offensive rhythm because they tried to exploit the matchup rather than getting Nash and Stoudemire involved. Even if Blake can’t stop Battier from posting up, it might be worth it to force the Rockets to run their offense through Battier rather than Yao.

by Royster on Apr 20, 2009 12:16 AM PDT up reply actions

i dont think yall want roy on artest

becuase artest can bull him in the lane and try to pick up fouls on roy. it would also wear roy out with all the bumping

Game 1 108-81 Rockets

Rockets lead series 1-0

by TexasHoosier on Apr 20, 2009 4:36 PM PDT up reply actions

Not saying it's ideal

but if Ron can guard Roy for 30 minutes without a foul I don’t see why Roy can’t do the same to him. Besides, the benefit gained by having Ron go into hero mode and taking away touches from offensive touches from Yao, Scola and Brooks is probably worth making Roy play a little more defense.

As far as him “bulling him in the lane”, Roy is far bulkier than Batum, and Nic seemed to handle him okay on that end.

by Royster on Apr 20, 2009 4:51 PM PDT up reply actions

Yeah Bayless might be stronger than Brooks but Bayless will get stripped like Oden use to.

Bayless gets stripped a lot trying to drive to the hoop. He isn’t experienced enough to play on the offensive end yet.

by BRoyInThe4th on Apr 19, 2009 9:42 PM PDT reply actions

I'm sorry but this is a terrible, terrible suggestion

Jerryd Bayless has had a horrible year. He is not ready for playing time in an important game. He has been one of the NBA’s worst rookies. Starting him is an absolutely terrible idea.

by jksnake99 on Apr 19, 2009 10:04 PM PDT reply actions

Way too much knee-jerk reaction around here

We got beat badly. Look at the Celtics who got whopped good by the Lakers in the Finals back in the Bird days. They came back and won the series.

Fine tuning and minor adjustments are to be expected. Totally changing your lineup or team’s identity is not the answer.

I'm a little confused by your tactics

by oderiferous emanations 74 on Apr 19, 2009 10:21 PM PDT reply actions

Jerryd Bayless STOPPED Brooks from penetrating for the tiny amount of minutes he played.

But Brooks did use a screen to bury a three on him.

If I put on a Spain jersey and dunk in Dwight Howard's face, they give me a "50"- Rudy Fernandez.

by Shaqselbow on Apr 19, 2009 11:10 PM PDT reply actions

Because no one set a screen

The one time they did, Brooks did the same thing that he did to everyone else.

You forget that Houston was coasting by the time Bayless got in. You also forget that Bayless couldn’t keep up the defensive pace that he was playing for a quarter, let alone a game. But whatever, reason number 5 why we lose games is that we don’t play Bayless.

by Zaig on Apr 20, 2009 9:20 AM PDT up reply actions

the"blur"

is a.brooks he knows the blazers pg’s are avg at best,brooks is a scorer amd more athletic than blake and sergio.bottom line blake*sergio just have to man*up and be men in primetime.brooks has the greenlight and he’s gonna make a name for himself in these playoffs.good for him,as for blake and sergio oh well!!!just man*up.

by fatty on Apr 20, 2009 7:06 AM PDT reply actions

Wow

I didn’t relaize (until I read this post) that Brooks is the best PG ever. Thanks for keeping me informed guys.

by Escrote on Apr 20, 2009 8:57 AM PDT reply actions

You people are nuts...

We know three things about this PG situation…

1) Blake is a “better” PG right now than Bayless. Bayless has had an up and down year for sure. No one is claiming that if we put him in he’ll average 20 pts and 10 assists against Brooks. What the Bayless supporters do know is that he is physically much more gifted than Blake. He can drive and he can play better, if not still flawed, defense.

2) Blake has been abysmal all year against speedy point guards. Does anyone honestly see Blake dusting himself off and performing well the rest of the series? I dont. He is going to be a trainwreck on the defensive end for as long as we play the Rockets. I would love to look at the production of Blake when playing quick PGs compared to Bayless. I’m sure the numbers are comparable.

3) If Blake plays his usual for the rest of the series then Brooks becomes series MVP (we lose). If Blake plays lights out for the rest of the series then Brooks is talked about for series MVP (we lose). If Bayless plays his usual for the series then watch out, ugly (we lose). If Bayless plays his version of lights out he becomes the series savior (we win).

One thing is for sure, we can not do what we did Monday and just hope for a better effort.

by TrentEdwardsHoF2018 on Apr 20, 2009 9:19 AM PDT reply actions