You make an entirely unsubstantiated claim and essentially continue with ‘and you cannot prove me wrong’.
GQ Hot Dog wrote:He chucks up shots because they had no better options. You can't credibly say otherwise until they have better options. Someone has to take those shots.
You continue to write that lack of other scorers is why he basically has to
take so many shots and there is just no substance to it. Let's be very clear: Brooks is an inefficient scorer. Inefficient scorers don't put up 24 FGA per 100 possessions unless they constantly look to score. Heck, the Grizzlies even had other players who scored as much as or more than him at higher efficiency – he's not playing with G-League scoring talent, there is zero argument for that.
What is more, only 5% of his FGAs are very late in the shot clock (0-4 seconds) and 7% late in the shot clock (4-7 seconds). In contrast, close to 70% of his shots are in the average and early shot clock range and his efficiency is poor in those instances and not notably different from late-clock situations. If he wasn't an inefficient chucker who only takes shots because he has to, he wouldn't put up most of his shots at poor efficiency when there is still plenty of time to work for a better shot.
Lastly, Brooks had a 31.6 USG% in his last year in college. You don't just stumble into this kind of usage unless you are actively trying.
Note that this is not to say that in different settings, Brooks usage can't be lower and he can't be more efficient. As I wrote, you can tell him not to shoot as much and maybe that works to some extent. That doesn't change, however, that Brooks just naturally gravitates towards high-volume shooting despite not being capable of achieving even NBA average efficiency. It's who he is, and I have certainly substantiated that claim a lot better than you have substantiated yours (while you, at the same time, argue that any claim contrary to yours has no credibility – which is quite ironic, to be honest, because if anything one could point out that your claim has no credibility until and unless he plays next to better options and actually changes his approach).