Interesting...
http://www.nba.com/2009/news/features/d ... index.html

Alston is on contract for next year too... Guess Orlando is desperate for the championship.

I like the trade for Orlando. Alston gives them a guy that can replace Nelson as their starting PG (a worse player, but better than any other PG on their team) without commiting too much money for the future.

TMC wrote:I like the trade for Orlando. Alston gives them a guy that can replace Nelson as their starting PG (a worse player, but better than any other PG on their team) without commiting too much money for the future.

i agree. and next season alston starts off as the starter until nelson is recovered from surgery then becomes back up to jameer. having a backup of his caliber is amazing.

Yeah, good trade for Orlando. Alston is no where close to Nelson, but he's still very serviceable as a replacement. If he can accept a back up role for next year, which he should, they'll be set a PG for next season.

good trade for Orlando. Don't really understand it for the Rockets though

Quazza wrote:good trade for Orlando. Don't really understand it for the Rockets though

they think aaron brooks is good enoguh.

saintdee wrote:

Quazza wrote:good trade for Orlando. Don't really understand it for the Rockets though

they think aaron brooks is good enoguh.

Yep, and they're totally fine with Luther Head backing him up, too.

xbay wrote:

saintdee wrote:

Quazza wrote:good trade for Orlando. Don't really understand it for the Rockets though

they think aaron brooks is good enoguh.

Yep, and they're totally fine with Luther Head backing him up, too.

Head is no PG, he is a shooter at best. Rockets were fools doing this trade, they needed as much guard talent now that McGrady is out for the rest of the season

migya wrote:

xbay wrote:

saintdee wrote:

Quazza wrote:good trade for Orlando. Don't really understand it for the Rockets though

they think aaron brooks is good enoguh.

Yep, and they're totally fine with Luther Head backing him up, too.

Head is no PG, he is a shooter at best. Rockets were fools doing this trade, they needed as much guard talent now that McGrady is out for the rest of the season

im thinkin that kyle lowry will back up brooks. theyve been doin fine without TMac for most of the season already...i dont think it was that bad for houston.

migya wrote:

xbay wrote:

saintdee wrote:

Quazza wrote:good trade for Orlando. Don't really understand it for the Rockets though

they think aaron brooks is good enoguh.

Yep, and they're totally fine with Luther Head backing him up, too.

Head is no PG, he is a shooter at best. Rockets were fools doing this trade, they needed as much guard talent now that McGrady is out for the rest of the season

why are the rockets fools? Brooks is better than Alston. Plus they got enough backups to be pretty solid deep in that position.

E-Man wrote:

migya wrote:

xbay wrote:

saintdee wrote:

Quazza wrote:good trade for Orlando. Don't really understand it for the Rockets though

they think aaron brooks is good enoguh.

Yep, and they're totally fine with Luther Head backing him up, too.

Head is no PG, he is a shooter at best. Rockets were fools doing this trade, they needed as much guard talent now that McGrady is out for the rest of the season

im thinkin that kyle lowry will back up brooks. theyve been doin fine without TMac for most of the season already...i dont think it was that bad for houston.

That's right. I forgot Lowry was traded there.

E-Man wrote:

migya wrote:

xbay wrote:

saintdee wrote:

Quazza wrote:good trade for Orlando. Don't really understand it for the Rockets though

they think aaron brooks is good enoguh.

Yep, and they're totally fine with Luther Head backing him up, too.

Head is no PG, he is a shooter at best. Rockets were fools doing this trade, they needed as much guard talent now that McGrady is out for the rest of the season

im thinkin that kyle lowry will back up brooks. theyve been doin fine without TMac for most of the season already...i dont think it was that bad for houston.

Lowry was incapable of taking his chances by the horns earlier this season with the Grizz, when they clearly favoured him over Conley, so I don't think he's as going to be much of a factor for Houston and definately not as good as Alston was for them

Mr. Crackerz wrote:why are the rockets fools? Brooks is better than Alston. Plus they got enough backups to be pretty solid deep in that position.

Alston is better than Brooks and stats don't lie either on that one Don't see any real backups at guard for Rockets either, as Head has been mising in action for quite some time and Lowry isn't much

migya wrote:Lowry was incapable of taking his chances by the horns earlier this season with the Grizz, when they clearly favoured him over Conley, so I don't think he's as going to be much of a factor for Houston and definately not as good as Alston was for them


Alston is better than Brooks and stats don't lie either on that one Don't see any real backups at guard for Rockets either, as Head has been mising in action for quite some time and Lowry isn't much

lowry (as well as every point guard in memphis) was restricted by coach iavoroni...which is why it seemed like he couldnt succeed there. even mike conley struggled at the time. once lionel hollins took over for the team, conley flourished (as he is who hollins wanted to become point man)...once crittenton left and went to the wizards, he started doing a lot better. lowry will be getting a chance to play, under adelman, without such a short leash that was on him in memphis.

as far as brooks vs rafer...as a starter brooks is averaging 13.7 pts, 4.7reb, 4asts, 1stl, and 1.7 TOs.
rafer averaged 11.5pts, 3reb, 5.4asts, 1.2stl, and 1.8 TOs. if you ask me, both of their numbers are pretty comparable. the thing i'm thinking about is that brooks' numbers are numbers from the SG spot and backup PG spot. with the team in his hands now, will his assist numbers go up? maybe, maybe not...but saying rafer is better than brooks by just going off stats...i just think it's a little premature to say so...at least until we see how brooks can handle a team.

E-Man wrote:

migya wrote:Lowry was incapable of taking his chances by the horns earlier this season with the Grizz, when they clearly favoured him over Conley, so I don't think he's as going to be much of a factor for Houston and definately not as good as Alston was for them


Alston is better than Brooks and stats don't lie either on that one Don't see any real backups at guard for Rockets either, as Head has been mising in action for quite some time and Lowry isn't much

lowry (as well as every point guard in memphis) was restricted by coach iavoroni...which is why it seemed like he couldnt succeed there. even mike conley struggled at the time. once lionel hollins took over for the team, conley flourished (as he is who hollins wanted to become point man)...once crittenton left and went to the wizards, he started doing a lot better. lowry will be getting a chance to play, under adelman, without such a short leash that was on him in memphis.

as far as brooks vs rafer...as a starter brooks is averaging 13.7 pts, 4.7reb, 4asts, 1stl, and 1.7 TOs.
rafer averaged 11.5pts, 3reb, 5.4asts, 1.2stl, and 1.8 TOs. if you ask me, both of their numbers are pretty comparable. the thing i'm thinking about is that brooks' numbers are numbers from the SG spot and backup PG spot. with the team in his hands now, will his assist numbers go up? maybe, maybe not...but saying rafer is better than brooks by just going off stats...i just think it's a little premature to say so...at least until we see how brooks can handle a team.

Yea, Brooks has scored more in the time he's had but has played less like a PG as much as Alston, getting far less assists and steals. Brooks will have to be a PG for the Rockets, as they need one to function, especially now with McGrady out the rest of the way. My point is that none of the guys that can play PG for Houston have any sort of proof they can do it, any consistent performing at least and that is dangerous for a team that wants to be a contender

migya wrote:

E-Man wrote:

migya wrote:Lowry was incapable of taking his chances by the horns earlier this season with the Grizz, when they clearly favoured him over Conley, so I don't think he's as going to be much of a factor for Houston and definately not as good as Alston was for them


Alston is better than Brooks and stats don't lie either on that one Don't see any real backups at guard for Rockets either, as Head has been mising in action for quite some time and Lowry isn't much

lowry (as well as every point guard in memphis) was restricted by coach iavoroni...which is why it seemed like he couldnt succeed there. even mike conley struggled at the time. once lionel hollins took over for the team, conley flourished (as he is who hollins wanted to become point man)...once crittenton left and went to the wizards, he started doing a lot better. lowry will be getting a chance to play, under adelman, without such a short leash that was on him in memphis.

as far as brooks vs rafer...as a starter brooks is averaging 13.7 pts, 4.7reb, 4asts, 1stl, and 1.7 TOs.
rafer averaged 11.5pts, 3reb, 5.4asts, 1.2stl, and 1.8 TOs. if you ask me, both of their numbers are pretty comparable. the thing i'm thinking about is that brooks' numbers are numbers from the SG spot and backup PG spot. with the team in his hands now, will his assist numbers go up? maybe, maybe not...but saying rafer is better than brooks by just going off stats...i just think it's a little premature to say so...at least until we see how brooks can handle a team.

Yea, Brooks has scored more in the time he's had but has played less like a PG as much as Alston, getting far less assists and steals. Brooks will have to be a PG for the Rockets, as they need one to function, especially now with McGrady out the rest of the way. My point is that none of the guys that can play PG for Houston have any sort of proof they can do it, any consistent performing at least and that is dangerous for a team that wants to be a contender

if thats all your arguement was then you should have made that more clear, bro . i just dont think its right to dismiss the abilities of brooks and lowry so quickly.