ESPN: Clippers would take back Brooks in a Howard Deal

Nanogeek · Post #1 » by **Nanogeek** » Mon Jul 9, 2012 8:06 pm

Chad Ford ‏@chadfordinsider
Just going up on ESPN. Clipoers will be 4th team in D Howard deal. They would take back MarShon Brooks in return for a lottery protected 1st

Post #2 » by **mkwest** » Mon Jul 9, 2012 8:07 pm

Just going up on ESPN. Clippers will be 4th team in D Howard deal. They would take back MarShon Brooks in return for a lottery protected 1st

Chad Ford

Nanogeek · Post #3 » by **Nanogeek** » Mon Jul 9, 2012 8:08 pm

Heh sorry MK - beat you by 60 seconds!

jflipclip · Post #4 » by **jflipclip** » Mon Jul 9, 2012 8:13 pm

Whoa. Interesting turn of events. I like Brooks but we're back to our clogged backcourt again if this goes through.

LOJ · Post #5 » by **LOJ** » Mon Jul 9, 2012 8:18 pm

jflipclip wrote:Whoa. Interesting turn of events. I like Brooks but we're back to our clogged backcourt again if this goes through.

It's good value, and if Crawford stinks it up at least we have a backup plan. It'll be good to have the guys competing for minutes.

Don Tommy · Post #6 » by **Don Tommy** » Mon Jul 9, 2012 8:24 pm

I still think that a trade of DJ and Bledsoe, and hopefully Gomes would be better than what the Nets and Cavs are offering. I don't understand trading a future first for Brooks does for us. Brooks seems like the kind of guy that gets his points because of the number of shots he takes. If we ahdn't signed Crawford I might be okay with it, but as of now, why bother?

Post #7 » by **mkwest** » Mon Jul 9, 2012 8:25 pm

I was kind of wondering if we would get in on this deal. Even though he sucked today, adding Marshon for a future (late) first adds another young asset to the team on a rookie deal. We'd also be keeping Howard in the eastern conference, which helps our chances moving forward

To get all of these guys minutes, we're still going to be playing a lot of 3-guard line-ups.

Nanogeek wrote:Heh sorry MK - beat you by 60 seconds!

LOL I was in brief shock, so there was a delayed reaction

Sofia · Post #8 » by **Sofia** » Mon Jul 9, 2012 8:27 pm

I knew it would be us! Troll those Lakers

Det the Threat · Post #9 » by **Det the Threat** » Mon Jul 9, 2012 8:39 pm

I like Brooks and wouldn't mind giving up a future protected first for him.

Though, that would make the Crawford signing pretty redundant cause Brooks brings exactly the same talents as he's a scorer that doesn't defend.

Still, if we get Brooks we could concentrate on backup bigs to fill out the roster.

Paul/Bledsoe
Billups/Crawford/Brooks
Butler/Brooks/Gomes
Griffin/Odom/Thompkins
Jordan/???

Looks pretty solid so far, even if Chauncey misses some time to start the season...

Nanogeek · Post #10 » by **Nanogeek** » Mon Jul 9, 2012 8:46 pm

Sam Amick ‏@sam_amick
Source says the Clippers have been asked to be 4th team in the Dwight Howard trade proposal w/ Nets, Magic, & Cavs, but have not yet agreed.

Quake Griffin · Post #11 » by **Quake Griffin** » Mon Jul 9, 2012 8:47 pm

How is Marshon on defense?

Roscoe Sheed · Post #12 » by **Roscoe Sheed** » Mon Jul 9, 2012 8:52 pm

Brooks is a very talented young guard. He could also slide over to play a bit of the 3 if the opponent on any given night doesn't have a big 3 man. This would be a very good acquisition in my view

Nanogeek · Post #13 » by **Nanogeek** » Mon Jul 9, 2012 9:00 pm

Quake Griffin wrote:How is Marshon on defense?

Brooks thinks defense is what keeps his dog in the backyard.

azncorruptedo17 · Post #14 » by **azncorruptedo17** » Mon Jul 9, 2012 9:07 pm

Nanogeek wrote:
Quake Griffin wrote:How is Marshon on defense?

Brooks thinks defense is what keeps his dog in the backyard.

Post #15 » by **og15** » Mon Jul 9, 2012 9:18 pm

Early this morning, one of my first thoughts was that the Clippers should trade a pick for Brooks, interesting that it happened. Of course, still isn't a defender, but it is what it is.

LOJ · Post #16 » by **LOJ** » Mon Jul 9, 2012 9:33 pm

Det the Threat wrote:I like Brooks and wouldn't mind giving up a future protected first for him.

Though, that would make the Crawford signing pretty redundant cause Brooks brings exactly the same talents as he's a scorer that doesn't defend.

Still, if we get Brooks we could concentrate on backup bigs to fill out the roster.

Paul/Bledsoe
Billups/Crawford/Brooks
Butler/Brooks/Gomes
Griffin/Odom/Thompkins
Jordan/???

Looks pretty solid so far, even if Chauncey misses some time to start the season...

I like Brooks as much as the next guy but Crawford is clearly better. Brooks is good to have as a project, and can soke up some playing time here and there, while keeping Crawford in check.

Kyle · Post #17 » by **Kyle** » Mon Jul 9, 2012 10:24 pm

Add a competent Center, and thats a damn good 2nd unit.

Roscoe Sheed · Post #18 » by **Roscoe Sheed** » Tue Jul 10, 2012 12:27 am

I think they should consider Diagu or Okur. Perhaps Wilcox?

Sounds like the trade still is quite tenative. Would certainly be nice to get Brooks though. I think he has more upside than Nick Young

kombayn · Post #19 » by **kombayn** » Tue Jul 10, 2012 2:16 am

MarShon Brooks is a Nick Young-type player who can play some 3 and has an extremely good upside for his future and would replace Chauncey after next year. Plus we still don't have a back-up center so our rotation would be solid once we shore up the back-up center position which is rumored to be Ryan Hollins, not exactly excited about that.

PG - C. Paul/E. Bledsoe
SG - C. Billiups/J. Crawford
SF - C. Butler/M. Brooks
PF - B. Griffin/L. Odom
C - D. Jordan/R. Hollins

It's questionable though if we're as good as last year. Williams, Young, Martin & Evans can be considered a better bench then Crawford, Brooks, Odom & Hollins.

LOJ · Post #20 » by **LOJ** » Tue Jul 10, 2012 2:41 am

A lot of you are putting Brooks as a backup 3.... I really hope he isn't our answer for running the backup 3 spot. He might play some spot minutes but I see Odom absorbing those minutes.