Aaron Brooks would like to stay in Phoenix

[Superbone]

"All signs point to me going back to Phoenix," Brooks said. "I had a good time. I like the organization and it's a great city. I would love to continue playing in Phoenix. I would love to stay with this team. This summer, I'm going to get more comfortable with the guys. I want to get to know everyone a little bit better and then hopefully we have a better season than we did last year."

Read more NBA news and insight: http://www.hoopsworld.com/Story.asp?story_id=20387#ixzz1S1KHTO9z

 

[dodie53]

he'll go

 

[Cheesewater]

Please no.

 

[Mainstreet]

I would like for Brooks to stay in Phoenix unless the Suns can do a sign and trade that makes sense. At least he is a proven starter. If Nash is traded before the trading deadline, he could prove valuable. Besides, I have always contended the Suns need three PGs on their roster.

 

[asudevil83]

i'm beginning to think that once Nash is gone the ONLY way we dont bitch and moan about our PG position is if we bring in an MVP candidate.

because thats all we are going to see in the rest of this thread

 

[Griffin]

It doesn't matter that much who the Suns' backup PG is next season. As long as there are no players other than Nash who can create their own shot, the Suns will continue to struggle with Nash on the bench. The priority should be adding a scoring wing player, not backup PG. Nevertheless, someone has to backup Nash and it might as well be Brooks if the price is right.

 

[mojorizen7]

Please no.

This.

 

[Irish]

It doesn't matter that much who the Suns' backup PG is next season. As long as there are no players other than Nash who can create their own shot, the Suns will continue to struggle with Nash on the bench. The priority should be adding a scoring wing player, not backup PG. Nevertheless, someone has to backup Nash and it might as well be Brooks if the price is right.

I think the SG position is a key for the starters. I'm not sure there is enough cap space to fill that position this coming season.

I wasn't here in the early 90's, but IMHO Brooks is more like KJ than Nash. Once he gets 100% physically, the challenge is to have the entire backup group learn a totally different style.

 

[mojorizen7]

I'd rather see Nash and Dowdell split time. It sounds risky offensively,but so does counting on the PG duo of Nash and Brooks to be liable defensively at the other teams point of attack on the perimeter.

Dowdell looked like an athletic,high-energy, hard-nosed,semi-poised,inexperienced young PG last season. I saw him in maybe 3 gms last season. Did i just catch him at the right time and place? I thought he looked like a promising young player...i could be wrong though because i didn't see him play that much.

I just think that at this point in time for the SUNS...maybe getting a PG to "backup" Nash should be a PG that can run a different offense,run a 2nd team...maybe a 2nd team offense like the WCF team that had success 2 years ago. Our bench wasn't playing Nashball. Maybe Gentry was on to something there...?

We've still got Frye,who was effective being the focus on offense,keep Childress in there with Duds and Zowdell. Dudley makes big offensive plays when those around him don't necessarily want to shoot the ball IMO. Another young aggressive scorer/shooter among that group would be helpful obviously.

You still start:
Nash (yawn)
FA 2 guard who can demand the ball.
Hill (semi-yawn)
Gortat
Lopez (just hit somebody!)

...and you continue to run Nashball,but maybe at a slower pace, because time IS a factor here folks

...but maybe you gain from a younger,stronger 2nd team, and evolve your bench.

 

[Errntknght]

...maybe a 2nd team offense like the WCF team that had success 2 years ago. Our bench wasn't playing Nashball. Maybe Gentry was on to something there...?

At the time I gave Alvin credit for it but the way he rejected the idea of continuing it during last season's training camp, makes me think it was something that evolved among the players rather than a conscious plan of his.

 

[JCSunsfan]

Keeping Aaron Brooks is a good thing. I cannot understand why so little appreciation for him. I like Dowdell but he is not a game changer like Brooks. More options right now.

 

[Griffin]

Keeping Aaron Brooks is a good thing. I cannot understand why so little appreciation for him. I like Dowdell but he is not a game changer like Brooks.

I think that's partially because there were a lot higher expectations of Brooks than Dowdell, given what Brooks already accomplished and what it took to bring him in. No one had any expectations of Dowdell, so it's easy to ignore what he did wrong and just focus on the few glimpses where he looked decent. But in reality Dowdell didn't really do much in the limited minutes he got, and Brooks did look much better at times, although failed to meet the higher expectations.

Keeping Brooks however may cost the Suns $5M/year or more, so that's one reason why many Suns fans are willing to pass on him. I doubt that Brooks can live up to such a contract.

 

[AzStevenCal]

I think that's partially because there were a lot higher expectations of Brooks than Dowdell, given what Brooks already accomplished and what it took to bring him in. No one had any expectations of Dowdell, so it's easy to ignore what he did wrong and just focus on the few glimpses where he looked decent. But in reality Dowdell didn't really do much in the limited minutes he got, and Brooks did look much better at times, although failed to meet the higher expectations.

Keeping Brooks however may cost the Suns $5M/year or more, so that's one reason why many Suns fans are willing to pass on him. I doubt that Brooks can live up to such a contract.

I think that's a bargain price IF Brooks is fully healed and stays that way. He's good enough to be at least a decent starting point guard in this league and that's a small price to pay for a starter. Even if he remains a backup, that's not an exorbitant amount if he can bounce back to his pre-injury season and progress from there. Right now though, I think most people are judging his potential based on his disappointing run with us.

Steve

 

[JCSunsfan]

Contracts are a very much relative thing. I am just concerned that every pg not name Steve Nash is going to be henpecked to death.

 

[Mainstreet]

Contracts are a very much relative thing. I am just concerned that every pg not name Steve Nash is going to be henpecked to death.

I can understand your concern as I have always coveted adding more PGs to the roster. Clearly the Suns need to be looking at making the transition away from Steve Nash as he is not getting any younger. If all had went well with Dragic, he should have been wrestling Steve Nash for the starting PG spot. IMO, the problem has never been Nash, but the lack of a up and coming young PG that can actually run an offense when he goes to the bench and take the job away from him at a certain point in time.

 

[ASUCHRIS]

He's good enough to be at least a decent starting point guard in this league

I just don't see it. Last year he wasn't even a decent backup. It's possible that he wasn't 100%, but regardless, he just doesn't bring much to the table. Not a good distributor, not a good defender, he really only puts up a high volume of shots. I don't see the point in keeping him around.

 

[AzStevenCal]

I just don't see it. Last year he wasn't even a decent backup. It's possible that he wasn't 100%, but regardless, he just doesn't bring much to the table. Not a good distributor, not a good defender, he really only puts up a high volume of shots. I don't see the point in keeping him around.

You're right, last year he wasn't a decent backup. In fact, he was far from it. But his single greatest strength is his quickness and with his ankle injury he just wasn't able to make the quick cuts. He wouldn't be my first choice for starting point guard but healthy, his worse case scenario is Barbosa at his best. I'd rather get a full sized guard that can run an offense and play solid D but Brooks can be much more effective than we've seen.

Steve

 

[ASUCHRIS]

but Brooks can be much more effective than we've seen.

While I agree with this, I still don't see him being a long term fit or a major contributor on a contender.

 

[AzStevenCal]

While I agree with this, I still don't see him being a long term fit or a major contributor on a contender.

I don't know if he can be a major contributor on a contender but I don't see us being a contender for quite awhile. I wouldn't turn down a chance to bring in someone better but if he's healthy I still maintain he's pretty good value if he comes in around 5 mil per.

Steve

 

[Griffin]

I wouldn't turn down a chance to bring in someone better but if he's healthy I still maintain he's pretty good value if he comes in around 5 mil per.

It certainly would be a good value for the player that averaged 20/5 the year before last season or 17/3 in the playoffs the year before that. I just don't know if that's the same player we'd be getting. Also, his best games in the NBA had come as a starter. How effective can he be in limited minutes off the bench? He wasn't very effective or consistent in that role last season. Perhaps that is not his strength. And can the Suns even afford to pay another player $5M+/year to come off the bench?

 

[AzStevenCal]

It certainly would be a good value for the player that averaged 20/5 the year before last season or 17/3 in the playoffs the year before that. I just don't know if that's the same player we'd be getting. Also, his best games in the NBA had come as a starter. How effective can he be in limited minutes off the bench? He wasn't very effective or consistent in that role last season. Perhaps that is not his strength. And can the Suns even afford to pay another player $5M+/year to come off the bench?

I hadn't given any thought to that but you could be right. He wouldn't be the first player that just couldn't excel coming off the bench. I'm of the opinion that his poor play last season was solely due to his ankle injury but that's just an assumption on my part.

Steve

 

[elindholm]

While I agree with this, I still don't see him being a long term fit or a major contributor on a contender.

Brooks will be retired before the Suns are a contender again, so I'm not sure this is relevant.

 

[ASUCHRIS]

Brooks will be retired before the Suns are a contender again, so I'm not sure this is relevant.

Well, a couple years back the Celtics were in a pretty dire situation yet with a couple good trades, they were able to go from the lottery to winning championships.

I'm not saying that it's likely that will happen for the Suns for a variety of reasons, but to continue to waste money on players like Brooks, Childress, et al doesn't make any sense to me. No matter how dire the situation, I'd prefer my team to act as if they are a winning organization. (insert laughs here)

 

[Mainstreet]

I'm not saying that it's likely that will happen for the Suns for a variety of reasons, but to continue to waste money on players like Brooks, Childress, et al doesn't make any sense to me. No matter how dire the situation, I'd prefer my team to act as if they are a winning organization. (insert laughs here)

I understand what you are saying but Childress is under contract so barring an unlikely trade in the near future, there is not much the Suns can do about it. It's not that Childress is a bad player, the problem is Sarver way overpaid for him.

In regard to Brooks, if the Suns can sign him to a somewhat reasonable contract, he should be signed. He is an asset that at some point might be traded or even end up starting for the Suns if Nash moves on. IMO, if the Suns pocket any money on not re-signing Brooks, I am not convinced it will be used to secure a better player. The same with Pietrus if he is traded for a second round pick or such.

 

[elindholm]

Well, a couple years back the Celtics were in a pretty dire situation yet with a couple good trades, they were able to go from the lottery to winning championships.

They had an All-Star still in (nearly) his prime, an excellent young big man, and a high pick in a strong draft. The situations aren't very similar.

to continue to waste money on players like Brooks, Childress, et al doesn't make any sense to me.

I agree, but they have to fill out the roster with someone. Are there better PGs than Brooks available?