Gotta get Marshon Brooks

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from guyfromtex. Show guyfromtex's posts

    Gotta get Marshon Brooks

    The Nets don't need him and don't care to use him. Why not pick him up this offseason? He is definetly up for grabs. Don't know how the C's could get him but there's got to be a way. I would much rather have Brooks than Terry.

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from snakeoil123. Show snakeoil123's posts

    Re: Gotta get Marshon Brooks

    In response to realdfury13's comment:

    In response to guyfromtex's comment:

     

    The Nets don't need him and don't care to use him. Why not pick him up this offseason? He is definetly up for grabs. Don't know how the C's could get him but there's got to be a way. I would much rather have Brooks than Terry.

     




    Maybe Danny shouldn't have traded him less than 2 years ago.

     

    Thanks Dannyyyyyyyyyyyy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



    Well Ainge traded Collins and Barbosa for Crawford. Brooks isn't going to do anything that Crawford doesn't.

    Brooks isn't any good.

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from snakeoil123. Show snakeoil123's posts

    Re: Gotta get Marshon Brooks

    In response to realdfury13's comment:

    In response to snakeoil123's comment:

     

    In response to realdfury13's comment:

     

    In response to guyfromtex's comment:

     

    The Nets don't need him and don't care to use him. Why not pick him up this offseason? He is definetly up for grabs. Don't know how the C's could get him but there's got to be a way. I would much rather have Brooks than Terry.

     




    Maybe Danny shouldn't have traded him less than 2 years ago.

     

    Thanks Dannyyyyyyyyyyyy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

     



    Well Ainge traded Collins and Barbosa for Crawford. Brooks isn't going to do anything that Crawford doesn't.

     

    Brooks isn't any good.

     




    Washington did not want Crawford.

     

    They gave him away because they didn't want to pay him next year.

    He can score at times but that's all.

    Career 40% shooter. Yuck.



    I don't like Crawford either.

    When did I say I liked Crawford?

    My point was that somehow you were acting like ainge screwed up by not getting Brooks. which is odd.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from snakeoil123. Show snakeoil123's posts

    Re: Gotta get Marshon Brooks

    In response to realdfury13's comment:

    In response to snakeoil123's comment:

     

    In response to realdfury13's comment:

     

    In response to snakeoil123's comment:

     

    In response to realdfury13's comment:

     

    In response to guyfromtex's comment:

     

    The Nets don't need him and don't care to use him. Why not pick him up this offseason? He is definetly up for grabs. Don't know how the C's could get him but there's got to be a way. I would much rather have Brooks than Terry.

     




    Maybe Danny shouldn't have traded him less than 2 years ago.

     

    Thanks Dannyyyyyyyyyyyy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

     



    Well Ainge traded Collins and Barbosa for Crawford. Brooks isn't going to do anything that Crawford doesn't.

     

    Brooks isn't any good.

     




    Washington did not want Crawford.

     

    They gave him away because they didn't want to pay him next year.

    He can score at times but that's all.

    Career 40% shooter. Yuck.

     



    I don't like Crawford either.

     

    When did I say I liked Crawford?

    My point was that somehow you were acting like ainge screwed up by not getting Brooks. which is odd.

     



    Ainge wouldn't have had to trade for Crawford if he hadn't screwed up the Brooks/JJJ trade.

     

    I know, little Danny tries his best.

     



    Right...but Brooks stinks.

    You seem to have a hard time following along.

    The guy is a career 30 percent shooter from 3 that averages 8 points a game over 20 minutes.

    Crawford gives you what Brooks does. Neither one is very good.

     

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Red-16Russ-11. Show Red-16Russ-11's posts

    Re: Gotta get Marshon Brooks

    In response to snakeoil123's comment:

    In response to realdfury13's comment:

     

    In response to snakeoil123's comment:

     

    In response to realdfury13's comment:

     

    In response to snakeoil123's comment:

     

    In response to realdfury13's comment:

     

    In response to guyfromtex's comment:

     

    The Nets don't need him and don't care to use him. Why not pick him up this offseason? He is definetly up for grabs. Don't know how the C's could get him but there's got to be a way. I would much rather have Brooks than Terry.

     




    Maybe Danny shouldn't have traded him less than 2 years ago.

     

    Thanks Dannyyyyyyyyyyyy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

     



    Well Ainge traded Collins and Barbosa for Crawford. Brooks isn't going to do anything that Crawford doesn't.

     

    Brooks isn't any good.

     




    Washington did not want Crawford.

     

    They gave him away because they didn't want to pay him next year.

    He can score at times but that's all.

    Career 40% shooter. Yuck.

     



    I don't like Crawford either.

     

    When did I say I liked Crawford?

    My point was that somehow you were acting like ainge screwed up by not getting Brooks. which is odd.

     



    Ainge wouldn't have had to trade for Crawford if he hadn't screwed up the Brooks/JJJ trade.

     

    I know, little Danny tries his best.

     

     



    Right...but Brooks stinks.

     

    You seem to have a hard time following along.

    The guy is a career 30 percent shooter from 3 that averages 8 points a game over 20 minutes.

    Crawford gives you what Brooks does. Neither one is very good.

     




    You'll probably have to explain it at least twice more, Snake, becuase.....well, you know.....

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from snakeoil123. Show snakeoil123's posts

    Re: Gotta get Marshon Brooks

    In response to Red-16Russ-11's comment:

    In response to snakeoil123's comment:

     

    In response to realdfury13's comment:

     

    In response to snakeoil123's comment:

     

    In response to realdfury13's comment:

     

    In response to snakeoil123's comment:

     

    In response to realdfury13's comment:

     

    In response to guyfromtex's comment:

     

    The Nets don't need him and don't care to use him. Why not pick him up this offseason? He is definetly up for grabs. Don't know how the C's could get him but there's got to be a way. I would much rather have Brooks than Terry.

     




    Maybe Danny shouldn't have traded him less than 2 years ago.

     

    Thanks Dannyyyyyyyyyyyy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

     



    Well Ainge traded Collins and Barbosa for Crawford. Brooks isn't going to do anything that Crawford doesn't.

     

    Brooks isn't any good.

     




    Washington did not want Crawford.

     

    They gave him away because they didn't want to pay him next year.

    He can score at times but that's all.

    Career 40% shooter. Yuck.

     



    I don't like Crawford either.

     

    When did I say I liked Crawford?

    My point was that somehow you were acting like ainge screwed up by not getting Brooks. which is odd.

     



    Ainge wouldn't have had to trade for Crawford if he hadn't screwed up the Brooks/JJJ trade.

     

    I know, little Danny tries his best.

     

     



    Right...but Brooks stinks.

     

    You seem to have a hard time following along.

    The guy is a career 30 percent shooter from 3 that averages 8 points a game over 20 minutes.

    Crawford gives you what Brooks does. Neither one is very good.

     

     




    You'll probably have to explain it at least twice more, Snake, becuase.....well, you know.....

     



    I know.

    Tommy" Ainge sure screwed up the Brooks trade

    me: not really Ainge gave up nothing for Crawford and he is just as good as Brooks

    Tommy Crawford is bad.

    Me Brooks is too

    Tommy Boy did ainge screw up the brooks trade

    me why? Brooks stinks

     

     

    The guy is really a sharp basketball mind.

     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Red-16Russ-11. Show Red-16Russ-11's posts

    Re: Gotta get Marshon Brooks

    In response to snakeoil123's comment:

    In response to Red-16Russ-11's comment:

     

    In response to snakeoil123's comment:

     

    In response to realdfury13's comment:

     

    In response to snakeoil123's comment:

     

    In response to realdfury13's comment:

     

    In response to snakeoil123's comment:

     

    In response to realdfury13's comment:

     

    In response to guyfromtex's comment:

     

    The Nets don't need him and don't care to use him. Why not pick him up this offseason? He is definetly up for grabs. Don't know how the C's could get him but there's got to be a way. I would much rather have Brooks than Terry.

     




    Maybe Danny shouldn't have traded him less than 2 years ago.

     

    Thanks Dannyyyyyyyyyyyy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

     



    Well Ainge traded Collins and Barbosa for Crawford. Brooks isn't going to do anything that Crawford doesn't.

     

    Brooks isn't any good.

     




    Washington did not want Crawford.

     

    They gave him away because they didn't want to pay him next year.

    He can score at times but that's all.

    Career 40% shooter. Yuck.

     



    I don't like Crawford either.

     

    When did I say I liked Crawford?

    My point was that somehow you were acting like ainge screwed up by not getting Brooks. which is odd.

     



    Ainge wouldn't have had to trade for Crawford if he hadn't screwed up the Brooks/JJJ trade.

     

    I know, little Danny tries his best.

     

     



    Right...but Brooks stinks.

     

    You seem to have a hard time following along.

    The guy is a career 30 percent shooter from 3 that averages 8 points a game over 20 minutes.

    Crawford gives you what Brooks does. Neither one is very good.

     

     




    You'll probably have to explain it at least twice more, Snake, becuase.....well, you know.....

     

     



    I know.

     

    Tommy" Ainge sure screwed up the Brooks trade

    me: not really Ainge gave up nothing for Crawford and he is just as good as Brooks

    Tommy Crawford is bad.

    Me Brooks is too

    Tommy Boy did ainge screw up the brooks trade

    me why? Brooks stinks

     

     

    The guy is really a sharp basketball mind.




    Yeah, like Darko will commit murder on the court - YOUR thread!

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from PHX85014. Show PHX85014's posts

    Re: Gotta get Marshon Brooks

    The jury is still out on Jordan Crawford , if nothing else, Ainge picked up a nice trade asset for nothing......Crawford can shoot the ball and I love is aggressiveness , but his whole offensive game seems to be standing behind the three point line and waiting for a pass....maybe he just hasn't been integrated ifully into the offense, but he seems one dimensional.

    Marshon Brooks, from what little I have seen, can score from anywhere and can create his own shot. Crawford seems to be limited to hitting wide open long range jumpers.

     

    Since both salaries match up, a trade scenerio involving Jordan Crawford for Marshon Brooks is plausible this offseason.

     

    Still can't figure out why Ainge drafted Marshon Brooks then gave him away for a guy who did nothing for the Celtics , and no other team has picked up JuJuan Johnson either ? That's says it all ! Trading Brooks was a bigtime blunder as was drafting JD Giddons over DeAndre Jordan, Mario Chalmers and Minnesota center Pekovic.....

     

     

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from DrBoogiebone. Show DrBoogiebone's posts

    Re: Gotta get Marshon Brooks

    Guys, please stop feeding the monkeys.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from snakeoil123. Show snakeoil123's posts

    Re: Gotta get Marshon Brooks

    In response to realdfury13's comment:

     

    If Brooks stinks then why did a Celtics fan start a thread titled:

    Gotta get Marshon Brooks?

     

    Are you just envious that you didn't think of the topic in this thread?

     



    Because I don't agree with the Celtics fan? Do you really think that all Celtics fans and all Laker fans think the same way?

    this is like talking to a child. "But another Celtic fan said he wanted Brooks, doesn't that mean you do too"?

    What an amazing intellect.

     

     

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from snakeoil123. Show snakeoil123's posts

    Re: Gotta get Marshon Brooks

    In response to DrBoogiebone's comment:

     

    Guys, please stop feeding the monkeys.

     



    I like messing around with monkeys. 

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Red-16Russ-11. Show Red-16Russ-11's posts

    Re: Gotta get Marshon Brooks

    Crawford is much better than MarShon Brooks

     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from snakeoil123. Show snakeoil123's posts

    Re: Gotta get Marshon Brooks

    Crawford career per 36 minutes 18.1 points 4.2 assists.

    Brooks 15.5  2.9 assists.

     

     

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Gasthoerer. Show Gasthoerer's posts

    Re: Gotta get Marshon Brooks

    Brooks is not good. No need for a thread about him. Doesn anyone believe that this guy will change the fate of our franchise?

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from snakeoil123. Show snakeoil123's posts

    Re: Gotta get Marshon Brooks

    In response to Gasthoerer's comment:

    Brooks is not good. No need for a thread about him. Doesn anyone believe that this guy will change the fate of our franchise?



    Exactly.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Red-16Russ-11. Show Red-16Russ-11's posts

    Re: Gotta get Marshon Brooks

    In response to snakeoil123's comment:

    In response to Gasthoerer's comment:

     

    Brooks is not good. No need for a thread about him. Doesn anyone believe that this guy will change the fate of our franchise?

     



    Exactly.

     




    They are both about the same - mediocre - I was just toying with a sick monkey!

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from OneOnOne. Show OneOnOne's posts

    Re: Gotta get Marshon Brooks

    Marshon Brooks is not the answer to our problems.  Crawford might be pretty good if he could play under control.  He appears to be trying on defense.  It might take training camp to teach him the correct way to play. That fadeway where he is nearly laying on his back is horrendous.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from debrit. Show debrit's posts

    Re: Gotta get Marshon Brooks

    In response to realdfury13's comment:

    In response to guyfromtex's comment:

     

    The Nets don't need him and don't care to use him. Why not pick him up this offseason? He is definetly up for grabs. Don't know how the C's could get him but there's got to be a way. I would much rather have Brooks than Terry.

    Danny did not trade him.He drafted him for the Nets. One those GM,s deals.




    Maybe Danny shouldn't have traded him less than 2 years ago.

     

    Thanks Dannyyyyyyyyyyyy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!




     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from kdp59. Show kdp59's posts

    Re: Gotta get Marshon Brooks

    wow as our celtics slip father and farther (due to injuries) we fans seem more on edge  (bickering over silly things).

     

    fact is trading Brooks' rights for Johnson WAS a bad move by Ainge.

     

    fact is Crawford cost us only Collins (who we could use now) and an Injured Barbosa, who both were on one year deals only.,,,most would agree it was a good trade on Ainges' part since Crawford is under contract next year.

     

    fact is neither player is a quality NBA starter now and most likely neither one wil ever be.

     

    more importantly the Celtics need to get HEALTHY and get there FAST.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share