Brooks or Rory?

[PowderedToastMan]

I’ll take Brooks over Rory for the following reasons: Brooks has better distance control with the short irons, is a consistent putter, but mainly, he has an unshakeable champion’s mindset. Rory is too positive when he doesn’t win. He’s too content.

 

If Rory had Brooks’ mind, he’d have the grand slam by now with a few other majors. People forget how important the mind is in sports. Tiger dominated not only when he was light years ahead of his competition (1999-2002), but also when the gap narrowed (2005-2008). Brooks isn’t better than many other tour pros. He just doesn’t break down mentally, which is why he wins when there’s the most pressure, the majors.

[J13]

Brooks is #1 in the world right now and the last two years he has dominated in majors. Thing with Brooks is he doesn't seem to slow down and really conserves his peak golf for majors. Not to mention Rory has been on Tour since 2010 while Brooks joined the pga tour in 2014. So in almost half the time Brooks has matched Rory in majors. Of course Rory has more overall wins which could give him the slight edge but if Brooks wins another major that argument is gone.

[tiderider]

> @J13 said:

> Brooks is #1 in the world right now and the last two years he has dominated in majors. Thing with Brooks is he doesn't seem to slow down and really conserves his peak golf for majors. Not to mention Rory has been on Tour since 2010 while Brooks joined the pga tour in 2014. So in almost half the time Brooks has matched Rory in majors. Of course Rory has more overall wins which could give him the slight edge but if Brooks wins another major that argument is gone.

 

didn't rory win 4 majors in his first 4 years on tour? ... same as brooks? ... you're inaccurately giving brooks credit for winning more majors in shorter time ...

[tiderider]

> @sailfishchris said:

> **Remember when Tim Herron** and Carl Pettersson **got fit**? Same thing happened to Rory - he needs to go to Sonic or Five Guys. As of now Rory.....more wins. You are what your record is.

 

i do not remember this ...

[cdnglf]

Rory has 9 more PGA Tour wins, including the Players, another 5 or so Euro Tour wins, a FedEx Cup, and a RtD or two. If he retired tomorrow, he’d probably still be ahead of Brooks 5 years from now.

[GoGoErky]

Even with mediocre putting Rory over brooks.

[bladehunter]

> @Krt22 said:

>

> > @Shilgy said:

> > > @Krt22 said:

> > > > @Llortamaisey said:

> > > > Rory has definitely had the better career by a large margin, despite only being a year older than Brooks. However, it’s hard not to argue that Brooks is currently the better player by a hair. Rory is a stats darling, and he’s still statistically better than Brooks in almost every category, except for total driving and fairway %, but Brooks seems to be statistically better when it counts the most. Rory appears to be content with who is, where as Brooks plays with a chip and plays like he still has something to prove. So if the question is who’s career would I rather have at the moment, give me Rory. If the question is who I’ve got in the US Open, give me Brooks.

> > >

> > > Rory turned pro in 2007 while BK turned pro in 2012 since he went to college. So yes he has more wins, but also had teed it up 44 more times. How many more majors/tournaments does BK win in the next 44 starts?

> >

> > 3/ 8 total

>

> How about Rory in the same time frame?

 

Lord knows we can’t use that metric. I tried to use it Vs another player who shall remain nameless and it caused quite a stir.

[Titleist_PT23]

> @J13 said:

> Brooks is #1 in the world right now and the last two years he has dominated in majors. Thing with Brooks is he doesn't seem to slow down and really conserves his peak golf for majors. Not to mention Rory has been on Tour since 2010 while Brooks joined the pga tour in 2014. So in almost half the time Brooks has matched Rory in majors. Of course Rory has more overall wins which could give him the slight edge but if Brooks wins another major that argument is gone.

#1. Rory's start was similar.

#2. Even if Brooks' start was slightly better, I don't see how that means he's had a better career. It means his start was better but that's it.

#3. Brooks is the better player right now. Rory's career will be better for at least the next couple of years unless he (BK) books #5 quickly.

 

[Titleist_PT23]

> @cdnglf said:

> If he retired tomorrow, he’d probably still be ahead of Brooks 5 years from now.

Not sure on this part. He may be behind BK in 5 years even if he keeps playing.

 

[puttingmatt]

Half way through the majors this year, and Rory is not firing on all cylinders. Only Rory can change that . Brooks is on a different trajectory, at least for now.

[BobMorris]

Who's better right now? Koepka, no question. Rory can't putt any more. If he doesn't figure it out, he's won all the majors he's gonna win. I guarantee Koepka has more in the tank.

[Philomathesq]

Brooks, without question. This entire thread is filled with excuses for Rory: he's too fit, if only he could putt better, he's not as mentally strong as Brooks but... Brooks needs no excuses. He is what he is: a monster on the course.

 

And, if you go back to the OP, the question is "who's better," not "who has had the better career." Nobody here, if they are being intellectually honest (or had to put money down on a straight up bet), would pick Rory over Brooks anytime soon.

[Titleist_PT23]

Would be really interesting to see the % of votes going to Koepka, Rory, and Spieth for who ends up the best when it's all said and done a) before the PGA and b) now.

 

Now, I'd think Koepka gets 2x the other two combined. I understand why but in terms of odds I'm not sure it's justified. Based on what I've seen and heard from him, I wouldn't count out Spieth just yet. It also gets complicated if Spieth gets the career slam (and neither of the other two do) but ends up with 1-2 less majors.

 

Personally, I think Rory's had a better career than Spieth through age 25 (this is through age 25 for Jordan thus far, he could jump ahead by winning either of the Opens). I'd also say Rory's career is better if they both quit today. But based on the age differential and attitude, I'd take Spieth straight up to finish higher despite being a major down right now.

[J13]

> @tiderider said:

> > @J13 said:

> > Brooks is #1 in the world right now and the last two years he has dominated in majors. Thing with Brooks is he doesn't seem to slow down and really conserves his peak golf for majors. Not to mention Rory has been on Tour since 2010 while Brooks joined the pga tour in 2014. So in almost half the time Brooks has matched Rory in majors. Of course Rory has more overall wins which could give him the slight edge but if Brooks wins another major that argument is gone.

>

> didn't rory win 4 majors in his first 4 years on tour? ... same as brooks? ... you're inaccurately giving brooks credit for winning more majors in shorter time ...

 

You’re dancing around the facts. I didn’t say who won earlier, that doesn’t matter. Fact is Rory has been on tour for 9 years and has 4 majors. Does anyone think Brooks won’t have more than that by the time he reached 9 years ? Brooks have 4 more years to get there.

 

 

[cdnglf]

> @J13 said:

> > @tiderider said:

> > > @J13 said:

> > > Brooks is #1 in the world right now and the last two years he has dominated in majors. Thing with Brooks is he doesn't seem to slow down and really conserves his peak golf for majors. Not to mention Rory has been on Tour since 2010 while Brooks joined the pga tour in 2014. So in almost half the time Brooks has matched Rory in majors. Of course Rory has more overall wins which could give him the slight edge but if Brooks wins another major that argument is gone.

> >

> > didn't rory win 4 majors in his first 4 years on tour? ... same as brooks? ... you're inaccurately giving brooks credit for winning more majors in shorter time ...

>

> You’re dancing around the facts. I didn’t say who won earlier, that doesn’t matter. Fact is Rory has been on tour for 9 years and has 4 majors. Does anyone think Brooks won’t have more than that by the time he reached 9 years ? Brooks have 4 more years to get there.

>

 

Irrelevant. It makes no sense whatsoever to compare Brooks thru age 33 to Rory thru age 30.

 

[Titleist_PT23]

> @J13 said:

> > @tiderider said:

> > > @J13 said:

> > > Brooks is #1 in the world right now and the last two years he has dominated in majors. Thing with Brooks is he doesn't seem to slow down and really conserves his peak golf for majors. Not to mention Rory has been on Tour since 2010 while Brooks joined the pga tour in 2014. So in almost half the time Brooks has matched Rory in majors. Of course Rory has more overall wins which could give him the slight edge but if Brooks wins another major that argument is gone.

> >

> > didn't rory win 4 majors in his first 4 years on tour? ... same as brooks? ... you're inaccurately giving brooks credit for winning more majors in shorter time ...

>

> You’re dancing around the facts. I didn’t say who won earlier, that doesn’t matter. Fact is Rory has been on tour for 9 years and has 4 majors. Does anyone think Brooks won’t have more than that by the time he reached 9 years ? Brooks have 4 more years to get there.

Why's it Rory's fault BK played in Europe early? Brooks is literally 1 year younger. That's more relevant to me, and you could judge where they are at by 30.

 

But if they both quit today, Rory's career is better. BK is better teeing it up tomorrow.

[straightshot7]

Brooks by a nose because of his mental approach and attitude. Rory will finish with more regular Tour wins but Brooks will finish with more Majors.

[Golfnutgalen]

> @Krt22 said:

> > @Llortamaisey said:

> > Rory has definitely had the better career by a large margin, despite only being a year older than Brooks. However, it’s hard not to argue that Brooks is currently the better player by a hair. Rory is a stats darling, and he’s still statistically better than Brooks in almost every category, except for total driving and fairway %, but Brooks seems to be statistically better when it counts the most. Rory appears to be content with who is, where as Brooks plays with a chip and plays like he still has something to prove. So if the question is who’s career would I rather have at the moment, give me Rory. If the question is who I’ve got in the US Open, give me Brooks.

>

> Rory turned pro in 2007 while BK turned pro in 2012 since he went to college. So yes he has more wins, but also had teed it up 44 more times. How many more majors/tournaments does BK win in the next 44 starts?

 

I used to think that same way and in my opinion it's flawed because it's taking Rory's early career for granted at a time when Brooks wasn't on anybody's radar. Koepka won his first event at age 25 while Rory won his first at 20 (and won on the Euro Tour at age 19!). Koepka is almost exactly 1 year younger than Rory, so we can compare their current record on a fairly equal footing.

 

Rory has 15 wins including 4 majors + 7 European Tour wins

Brooks has 6 wins including 4 majors + 1 Euro Tour win

 

To be absolutely fair we could remove Rory's wins from the past year which would remove The Players from his resume compared to Brooks.

[tiderider]

> @J13 said:

> > @tiderider said:

> > > @J13 said:

> > > Brooks is #1 in the world right now and the last two years he has dominated in majors. Thing with Brooks is he doesn't seem to slow down and really conserves his peak golf for majors. Not to mention Rory has been on Tour since 2010 while Brooks joined the pga tour in 2014. So in almost half the time Brooks has matched Rory in majors. Of course Rory has more overall wins which could give him the slight edge but if Brooks wins another major that argument is gone.

> >

> > didn't rory win 4 majors in his first 4 years on tour? ... same as brooks? ... you're inaccurately giving brooks credit for winning more majors in shorter time ...

>

> You’re dancing around the facts. I didn’t say who won earlier, that doesn’t matter. Fact is Rory has been on tour for 9 years and has 4 majors. Does anyone think Brooks won’t have more than that by the time he reached 9 years ? Brooks have 4 more years to get there.

>

>

 

did anyone think rory wouldn't win another major after 2014, after winning 4? ... ain't nobody dancing to nothing ...

 

 

[Krt22]

> @Golfnutgalen said:

> > @Krt22 said:

> > > @Llortamaisey said:

> > > Rory has definitely had the better career by a large margin, despite only being a year older than Brooks. However, it’s hard not to argue that Brooks is currently the better player by a hair. Rory is a stats darling, and he’s still statistically better than Brooks in almost every category, except for total driving and fairway %, but Brooks seems to be statistically better when it counts the most. Rory appears to be content with who is, where as Brooks plays with a chip and plays like he still has something to prove. So if the question is who’s career would I rather have at the moment, give me Rory. If the question is who I’ve got in the US Open, give me Brooks.

> >

> > Rory turned pro in 2007 while BK turned pro in 2012 since he went to college. So yes he has more wins, but also had teed it up 44 more times. How many more majors/tournaments does BK win in the next 44 starts?

>

> I used to think that same way and in my opinion it's flawed because it's taking Rory's early career for granted at a time when Brooks wasn't on anybody's radar. Koepka won his first event at age 25 while Rory won his first at 20 (and won on the Euro Tour at age 19!). Koepka is almost exactly 1 year younger than Rory, so we can compare their current record on a fairly equal footing.

>

> Rory has 15 wins including 4 majors + 7 European Tour wins

> Brooks has 6 wins including 4 majors + 1 Euro Tour win

>

> To be absolutely fair we could remove Rory's wins from the past year which would remove The Players from his resume compared to Brooks.

 

Im not sure how it's flawed. Koepka was an amateur for much longer, hard to compare total number of wins when he simply didnt have as many opportunities.

[Golfjack]

> @Golfnutgalen said:

> > @Krt22 said:

> > > @Llortamaisey said:

> > > Rory has definitely had the better career by a large margin, despite only being a year older than Brooks. However, it’s hard not to argue that Brooks is currently the better player by a hair. Rory is a stats darling, and he’s still statistically better than Brooks in almost every category, except for total driving and fairway %, but Brooks seems to be statistically better when it counts the most. Rory appears to be content with who is, where as Brooks plays with a chip and plays like he still has something to prove. So if the question is who’s career would I rather have at the moment, give me Rory. If the question is who I’ve got in the US Open, give me Brooks.

> >

> > Rory turned pro in 2007 while BK turned pro in 2012 since he went to college. So yes he has more wins, but also had teed it up 44 more times. How many more majors/tournaments does BK win in the next 44 starts?

>

> I used to think that same way and in my opinion it's flawed because it's taking Rory's early career for granted at a time when Brooks wasn't on anybody's radar. Koepka won his first event at age 25 while Rory won his first at 20 (and won on the Euro Tour at age 19!). Koepka is almost exactly 1 year younger than Rory, so we can compare their current record on a fairly equal footing.

>

> Rory has 15 wins including 4 majors + 7 European Tour wins

> Brooks has 6 wins including 4 majors + 1 Euro Tour win

>

> To be absolutely fair we could remove Rory's wins from the past year which would remove The Players from his resume compared to Brooks.

 

Yeah agreed. Since they are similar age it's fair play to evaluate current career performance. Koepka is a late bloomer that's for sure. Nobody expected him to become a multiple major winner. Guys like YJS, yes, since they dominated since youth. Rory same thing. Guys who take the long way to PGA usually just win a few tournaments at best. They should be able to both age gracefully though. The only difference is that Brooks is on the upswing of his career and Rory is on a lower tier plateau (for him). People still think Brooks is a bit of a fluke due to his low win total. I mean, has there ever been anyone like him who has more major wins that regular wins? We all have short memories, so we can all agree that Rory has had the better career, and most will assume that Brooks will have the better future portion. Unless Rory goes and wins one. Then it all flips!

[fanofseri]

It will all be settled at Kasumigaseki.

[PowderedToastMan]

> @Philomathesq said:

> Brooks, without question. This entire thread is filled with excuses for Rory: he's too fit, if only he could putt better, he's not as mentally strong as Brooks but... Brooks needs no excuses. He is what he is: a monster on the course.

>

> And, if you go back to the OP, the question is "who's better," not "who has had the better career." Nobody here, if they are being intellectually honest (or had to put money down on a straight up bet), would pick Rory over Brooks anytime soon.

 

Two of the three excuses you mentioned are actually not excuses at all. They are just reasons why Brooks is currently the better player.

 

 

[Shilgy]

> @Shades234 said:

> Rory by a million.

 

Next 11 years? Including Euro tour 1 and 13

[dlygrisse]

We don’t know what we don’t know.

 

But if I had to guess, I’d guess Brooks wins more majors because of that mental toughness thingy.

[OldTomMorris]

> @imakaveli said:

> Fat Rory over Brooks.

> Brooks over fit Rory,

 

The complete myth of "Fat" Rory. Zero majors.

Also, skinny Brooks zero majors surely if people weren't aware of him at the time they have now seen pictures from his early days.

 

The both improved their results by getting in "shape".

 

On the big question, raw talent I'd say Rory but a lot more goes into winning at elite level and currently Brooks is better. Rory has the resume of a substantial amount of wins. Projecting forward I'd have to fancy Brooks to get more majors but things can change.

[aenemated]

IMHO, Rory is the better talent but Brooks has the better game ... if that makes sense.

 

When Rory is on; he has the talent to beat most. But he's not as much a grinder as Brooks. Like, I feel like if he were in the position Brooks was in on the 15th tee at Bethpage - coming off 4 straight bogeys with a dwindling lead on Sunday in a major - I feel like Rors would have lashed his tee shot off to god knows where and blown the whole thing. Brooks has the toughness to grind that out - as we saw.

 

That said, I'm a big fan of both of them.

[MattyO1984]

If this is a question of what have you done for me lately then of course it is BK. If you are looking at it over a wider period of time then it has to be Rory.

[Cincy_Ken]

Even if you compare their seasons this year everyone would agree you'd rather have the PGA championship vs Rory's Player's win. But both these guys have one win and Rory's been basically in the top 10 every week and Brooks has 2nd place finishes at Master's and Honda. Brooks has had the better year but I think Rory's year shows a more talented player that plays well almost every week. Rory feels like once he gets the monkey off his back the 2011-14 floodgates could open back up. Brooks you're counting on the only guy in history whose one majors at a high clip while winning tour events at a low clip to sustain that. Rory's form feels more sustainable.

[OldTomMorris]

> @Cincy_Ken said:

> Even if you compare their seasons this year everyone would agree you'd rather have the PGA championship vs Rory's Player's win. But both these guys have one win and Rory's been basically in the top 10 every week and Brooks has 2nd place finishes at Master's and Honda. Brooks has had the better year but I think Rory's year shows a more talented player that plays well almost every week. Rory feels like once he gets the **** off his back the 2011-14 floodgates could open back up. Brooks you're counting on the only guy in history whose one majors at a high clip while winning tour events at a low clip to sustain that. Rory's form feels more sustainable.

 

Rory would likely take a major over any other victory but The Players win was huge fo him. A course he originally hated and didn't have a good record at plus he played really well when it counted.

 

Rory can be extremely frustrating to follow but in his year so far I'm not seeing the so called problems some are alluding to. Does that DJ, Thomas, Rose etc. have problems?