Good point. Eli Brooks is a talent upgrade over the guys who have been getting minutes off the bench at PG the past few years. If we are being honest, we’d all agree on that.
I view him as a PG with a very nice feel for the game that excels at shooting off of ballscreens and can create shots for people off of ballscreens.
Again, I didn’t give my opinion on his level of competition. I’m simply stating a fact that he plays (AAAA) in PA. You can’t disagree with a fact, Matt. Well… you can but you’d be wrong. Facts are facts.
Brooks will play backup PG and is a talent upgrade over the Albrecht and Dakich who have been playing backup PG the past few seasons.
2 Likes
If all I stated was a fact, then how can you say “However, I don’t think you’ll find many people that agree with you in terms of comp level - it’s very poor.”??
He is an upgrade over Dakich, that is for sure. But, is it an upgrade that will make an impact to the extent of being competitive with upper tier opponents? Not in my opinion
Perhaps you shouldn’t speak for everyone then.
I agree that we need a talent upgrade at every position. Does Brooks not upgrade the talent at backup PG? If we don’t get a PG in 2017, who backs up Simpson, who has yet to even play a game?
2 Likes
Yes, I think not having to play someone like Dakich at all over the next 4 years is very nice addition by subtraction. Replacing him with a guy like Brooks who is a good fit in terms of shooting, ball control, and PnR offense is nice to have. If we are being honest.
Fair enough. So why bother conveying division classification if it’s meaningless within the context of an evaluation of Eli Brooks - if it’s just a fact? Seems pointless IMO
What do you mean fair enough?
You said “However, I don’t think you’ll find many people that agree with you in terms of comp level - it’s very poor.”
How are people going to disagree with me in terms of level of competition when all I did was state a fact?
1 Like
If I’m being honest, when it gets to the point that addition by subtraction has become the standard and logic for you, that tells me all I need to know about this dialogue. That’s if I’m being honest
You don’t think playing someone like Brooks instead of a scrub like Dakich is a good thing?
I’m expressly stating that I don’t disagree with his HS classification - I cannot dispute a fact as you say.
Switching gears - what is your opinion of the comp level in which Brooks plays against? And if you don’t have an opinion why bring classification? Seems a bit silly IMO
Yes, I do. However I don’t think it will result in wins vs the teams that beat us this year. In other words, it’s a marginal improvement when we need serious improvement at basically every position. Ideally you want each 17 signee to be just as good, and most likely better in terms of ceiling, then the predecessor. Eli Brooks is not that IMO. You want pieces to the puzzle whereas I think we need an entirely new puzzle
A lot of ticky tacky back and forth stuff here… It should be a red flag if you and one other poster have a 7-8 comment back-and-forth with no other input.
The pick and roll is the most important part of Michigan’s offense and I think in just a few games Brooks showed some ability to play off ball screens (dribble jumpers, passes to the rollman, attacking)… That’s important. And probably more important than ISO ability IMO. Michigan’s offense has been best when the PNR flows more than when ISO flows.
3 Likes
So do you view Brooks as a talent upgrade over his predecessor - Xavier Simpson? If not, then it appears Brooks’ is not a talent upgrade, and that we actually agree
Disagree, it’s not the system, it’s the players within the system. We’ve had the same system since Morris, the results have changed based on the personnel. Bottom line for me - our 2 most successful seasons have come when we have Iso guys with borderline NBA talent. Trey/Nik/THJ and then Nik/Caris. Brooks is not a step in that direction IMO. We need talent, not fit
Also, why is it that the conversation is always limited to offense. We need talent upgrades in the form of 2 way players.
1 Like
I think Eli Brooks is just as good and better in terms of ceiling than Spike Albrecht. Considering Xavier Simpson is likely a 4 year player, Brooks will be a backup for until his senior season. I think he is better than his predecessors at the backup PG position.
When Brooks is a senior, I expect another higher ceiling (ie. Simpson level) PG to be on the roster.
3 years of Simpson and Brooks > 3 years of Walton and Albrecht/Dakich in terms of both floor and ceiling IMO. Combine that with bringing in talent upgrades with Poole and Matthews and maybe Cain/Livers/etc. and I think we are getting a “new puzzle”.
1 Like
MattD - coming back full on 
2 Likes
You keep comparing Brooks to our starters. Compare him to the guys that were backing up Trey/Nik/Caris. I think he is an upgrade over the guys that were backing those players up.
1 Like
So we are saying that Michigan should only sign pros. That sounds great in theory.
How many guys that U-M is even recruiting right now would you say are guys with ‘borderline NBA talent’?
If you add Cain and Young to this class (for example), it’s a damn good class with predominantly top-100 kids, probably the best class U-M has signed in years, and I would argue that no one in that group is really likely to be in the league as soon as Nik, Trey, or your examples of ‘borderline NBA talents’.
Either way it would be basically a class that would be a big upgrade at the guard and forward spots and provides a far better blend of skillsets than the current roster IMO.
7 Likes