57 replies to this topic

[Warren2ThaG]

We have 4 PG's on this team, there is no way were going to take on another.

 

we have to think deep, like blowjob deep

[Majesty]

why are you so enamored with this guy after ONE GAME? name another game where he even had a performance close to this as a laker.

Boston 10 points and 5 assists.

Clippers 7 points 7 assists.

All those are nice stats off the bench he's been consistently good since returning.

He has 29 assists in our last 7 games with only 4 turnovers and he's there to playmake and make people pay if they leave him open for three. And coming off the bench is doing his job adequately, we don't look to Blake for scoring with a bench of Meeks, Jamison and a starter.

But when he does score its in opportune times and he is efficient in our last 7 he's shot 56% from the field and 52% from three.

He makes defenses pay for slacking off him but won't start chucking unless he sees the opening. This is valued with our bench because more often than not when he isn't shooting he"s finding someone for an assist as he's had 29 in that stretch with only 4 turnovers.

Once again, he's efficient.

If i throw those numbers at u from someone not on this team you'd scream "get them!" But when it's Blake it means nothing.

[Turbo]

We shoulda gotten Brooks. Can't teach speed/explosiveness and that seems to be the current x factor for many games.

Imagine if we coulda built our future around him and Dwight

[Nak]

Once again, huge mistake by Mitch, you can't pass on players such as Brooks. He would have instantly solved most of the Lakers' weaknesses.

[Piston Honda]

Do the Lakers even have 3-4 million cap space to sign Brooks? 

[Dr. Jekyll]

^ I think we can only sign for vet min.

[LakerGeezer]

Boston 10 points and 5 assists.

Clippers 7 points 7 assists.

All those are nice stats off the bench he's been consistently good since returning.

He has 29 assists in our last 7 games with only 4 turnovers and he's there to playmake and make people pay if they leave him open for three. And coming off the bench is doing his job adequately, we don't look to Blake for scoring with a bench of Meeks, Jamison and a starter.

But when he does score its in opportune times and he is efficient in our last 7 he's shot 56% from the field and 52% from three.

He makes defenses pay for slacking off him but won't start chucking unless he sees the opening. This is valued with our bench because more often than not when he isn't shooting he"s finding someone for an assist as he's had 29 in that stretch with only 4 turnovers.

Once again, he's efficient.

If i throw those numbers at u from someone not on this team you'd scream "get them!" But when it's Blake it means nothing.

Majesty, you provide posts with alot of thought, but I just dont see this one.  We have 4 PGs, 2 of which have no business on the court.  That leaves us with 2, the starter is 39 YO and could get injured (again) at any time and when healthy plays  low 30's minutes per game.  That calls for a STRONG backup.

 

Blake is a nice player, 33 YO, makes very few mistakes, decent outside shooter, makes the obvious/ safe pass, cant penetrate really.  He would be fine backing up a young PG who plays 35+ minutes per game.  Lets not cherry pick stats.  In his last 10 games, he has averaged 20 minutes, shot 45% and put up 5 and 4.  His defense is no better than Nash.  He makes $4m/ year and gets hurt alot. Overall, its ok ... I guess, but nothing special.

 

Brooks is viewed as capable of alot more.  Should we have chased him even while still with the Kings or at release?  Dont think we can given the cap issues and lack of picks (thanks Mitch!) so its a moot point.

 

But lets not act like Blake is God's gift to the backup PG spot, he is just ok.

Edited by LakerGeezer, March 02, 2013 - 07:44 AM.

[Majesty]

Majesty, you provide posts with alot of thought, but I just dont see this one. We have 4 PGs, 2 of which have no business on the court. That leaves us with 2, the starter is 39 YO and could get injured (again) at any time and when healthy plays low 30's minutes per game. That calls for a STRONG backup.

Blake is a nice player, 33 YO, makes very few mistakes, decent outside shooter, makes the obvious/ safe pass, cant penetrate really. He would be fine backing up a young PG who plays 35+ minutes per game. Lets not cherry pick stats. In his last 10 games, he has averaged 20 minutes, shot 45% and put up 5 and 4. His defense is no better than Nash. He makes $4m/ year and gets hurt alot. Overall, its ok ... I guess, but nothing special.

Brooks is viewed as capable of alot more. Should we have chased him even while still with the Kings or at release? Dont think we can given the cap issues and lack of picks (thanks Mitch!) so its a moot point.

But lets not act like Blake is God's gift to the backup PG spot, he is just ok.

Blake fits our backup pg spot.

It's also funny to me how people are saying Mitch "made a stupid move not going after Brooks".

When we live in a world where Aaron Brooks accepts the vets minimum(all we could offer to a free agent) then it's a 2K world

[LakerGeezer]

^Blake does "fit" our system, but so would other guys.  An upgrade would be nice.

 

I agree on the "Mitch goofed" part.  Not realistic from a $ standpoint. 

[PhillyLaker24]

Brooks would be a huge upgrade over blake. When that guy started the one season he avged 20 / 5. Problem was the money not that brooks wasnt an upgrade.

[Lakerace24]

Lakers don't have the money he wants in the first place.

/thread

[Gotrings?]

Brooks doesn't play any defense

[Alpha Four]

Do the Lakers even have 3-4 million cap space to sign Brooks? 

 

No but people in this thread think we do.

[Windu]

Brooks doesn't play any defense

 

D'Antoni will love him

[Bjork]

Alex Kennedy ‏@AlexKennedyNBA

Aaron Brooks will clear waivers today at 5 p.m. ET. If he clears waivers, he's likely going to sign with the Houston Rockets.

[ColStac]

Brooks doesn't play any defense

This is what I was going to ask.  How's his defense?

[Majesty]

This is what I was going to ask. How's his defense?

There isn't any. He's also not as good a passer as Blake either and Blake's passing is what helps our 2nd unit so much. But all everyone thinks about was his capability to score.

Edited by Majesty, March 04, 2013 - 11:08 AM.

[BleedPurple&Gold]

Brooks is a better defender and passer than blake