RealGM

Post here if you want to see more of brooks in game 4 especially if the nets can't score again.

So far the nets are plus 6 in game 2 in the 1:38 that he was on the floor. The nets actually went on a run in that game when marshon came onto the floor to pull it to 5 I think and then pj took him out for Dwill and then the bulls went on a run the next second.

In game 3 he played 12 mins and they are a plus 10. Also going on a run when he came into the game.

He isn't making mistakes. he is trying on d and getting some rebounds.

It's not about him scoring or getting shots. It's about the fact that he can score. The bulls have to guard him outside of 5 feet and that opens the floor for brooks, dwill and jj. Its is so important to have players that spread the floor. When wallace, reggie and stack are in the game the bulls are leaving them wide open and doubling brook in the post or anyone who comes close to the post. The nets need to spread the floor.

Why pj hasn't tried Mirza is beyond me. He can also spread the floor and even if he misses shots as long as they are contested shots that means brook will be more open. It's not like hump and evans are guarding Boozer so great anyway.

id rather see mario elie suit up and then have marshon come in. if he plays 1 second it will be an automatic loss. he is as close to a cancer as possible.

If only he got meaningful experience during the season....

Brooks being given erratic minutes and no chance to develop properly is a huge reason why he hasn't improved much from year 1 to year 2.

If you don't develop players, or put them in positions to succeed, I don't know how you can expect improvement.

I would wager that once Marshon goes elsewhere, and is actually coached and given a legitimate role instead of the **** that PJ tosses him into, he'll be a productive player just like he was last year.

Had we spent most of the season giving Marshon AND Mirza time to define roles and get into a rhythm, we'd be far more dangerous offensively.

The way that this team is handled is an embarrassment

Called this before this series started. Stack house is ****.


Play tele over hump too hump is just eating minutes . And start Blatche why not

At this point, I'd give him Stackhouse's 8 MPG. Stackhouse has airballed in 3 consecutive games and has as many airballs as points in this series at 5. I'd be really surprised if Stackhouse gets benched though.

Marshon played well last night ,he deserves all of stackhouse's minutes

I think this thread should be called the 'Never play Stackhouse again and I don't care who you replace him with cuz anybody is better than him' thread.

This is just my thing: Stackhouse should never have been playing over Brooks. PERIOD. Not now, not at ANY TIME during the season.

Brooks is flawed, and he has haters on this forum, but there isn't a single legitimate reason to not play him over Stackhouse. NONE.

For all the hate Marshon receives, he was a +12 last night and was a key to our run late. The fact that he was active and he's a competent player made him a MUCH better option than Stackhouse or Wallace. He can dribble, shoot and get to the rim.

If he was coached throughout the year, he'd be a lot more ready for this situation. Sadly, just like some people in this forum, PJC/Avery prefer a 42 year old Stackhouse chucking up bricks at a 30% clip while getting burned on defense instead of developing a solid scorer.

MGrand15 wrote:For all the hate Marshon receives, he was a +12 last night and was a key to our run late. The fact that he was active and he's a competent player made him a MUCH better option than Stackhouse or Wallace. He can dribble, shoot and get to the rim.

If he was coached throughout the year, he'd be a lot more ready for this situation. Sadly, just like some people in this forum, PJC/Avery prefer a 42 year old Stackhouse chucking up bricks at a 30% clip while getting burned on defense instead of developing a solid scorer.

Some folks have an agenda against Marshon, I'm not sure what he's done to garner such hate when he's never been used properly at all this season, and he clearly needs coaching and the stability of a defined role.

All I've seen is that the kid needs a legitimate chance to succeed.

Same goes for Mirza.

MrDollarBills wrote:This is just my thing: Stackhouse should never have been playing over Brooks. PERIOD. Not now, not at ANY TIME during the season.

Brooks is flawed, and he has haters on this forum, but there isn't a single legitimate reason to not play him over Stackhouse. NONE.

because he is the worst player in the playoffs on any roster and a gaurantee you wont win if he steps on the floor?

thats a good reason

He absolutely needs more time. Put him at SG and slide JJ over to SF. Would be a much more effective lineup.

NyCeEvO wrote:I think this thread should be called the 'Never play Stackhouse again and I don't care who you replace him with cuz anybody is better than him' thread.

lol agreed

PetroNet wrote:

MrDollarBills wrote:This is just my thing: Stackhouse should never have been playing over Brooks. PERIOD. Not now, not at ANY TIME during the season.

Brooks is flawed, and he has haters on this forum, but there isn't a single legitimate reason to not play him over Stackhouse. NONE.

because he is the worst player in the playoffs on any roster and a gaurantee you wont win if he steps on the floor?

thats a good reason

so his positive +/- is an accident? for the WORST player in the playoffs, he seems to be doing a lot better than 3-4 guys on our team. 2 guys in our a starting lineup!

MGrand15 wrote:

PetroNet wrote:

MrDollarBills wrote:This is just my thing: Stackhouse should never have been playing over Brooks. PERIOD. Not now, not at ANY TIME during the season.

Brooks is flawed, and he has haters on this forum, but there isn't a single legitimate reason to not play him over Stackhouse. NONE.

because he is the worst player in the playoffs on any roster and a gaurantee you wont win if he steps on the floor?

thats a good reason

so his positive +/- is an accident? for the WORST player in the playoffs, he seems to be doing a lot better than 3-4 guys on our team. 2 guys in our a starting lineup!

that doesnt say much considering our team doesnt play hard

PetroNet wrote:

MrDollarBills wrote:This is just my thing: Stackhouse should never have been playing over Brooks. PERIOD. Not now, not at ANY TIME during the season.

Brooks is flawed, and he has haters on this forum, but there isn't a single legitimate reason to not play him over Stackhouse. NONE.

because he is the worst player in the playoffs on any roster and a gaurantee you wont win if he steps on the floor?

thats a good reason

And Stackhouse does?

Or Reggie Evans for that matter?

Gerald Wallace?

MrDollarBills wrote:

PetroNet wrote:

MrDollarBills wrote:This is just my thing: Stackhouse should never have been playing over Brooks. PERIOD. Not now, not at ANY TIME during the season.

Brooks is flawed, and he has haters on this forum, but there isn't a single legitimate reason to not play him over Stackhouse. NONE.

because he is the worst player in the playoffs on any roster and a gaurantee you wont win if he steps on the floor?

thats a good reason

And Stackhouse does?

Or Reggie Evans for that matter?

Gerald Wallace?

all awful players.

all light years better then brooks. there isnt anyone i wouldnt rather have out there then brooks.

Your team needs scorers and you've got a guy who can score sitting on the bench. Good coaches know how to utilise the talent they have, it makes no sense to play Bogans and Stack ahead of this guy when he can help produce. Your losing the series to a team that is without it's superstar, and it's center is struggling with a foot ailment, stop being so stubborn and play the guy.