How did we miss out on this Brooks kid?

[TheReaLPuba]

I think the Nets have a stud in the making in MarShon Brooks.

He's a rookie but he scores like a vet.

He has a pretty nice stroke and the range and he can slash.

I really think the sky is the limit for this kid.

Defensively he isn't there yet but what rookies are?

I don't know why or how we could have missed out on this pick because he's exactly what this team needs off the bench who can contribute right away.

[slamtheking]

I think the Nets have a stud in the making in MarShon Brooks.

He's a rookie but he scores like a vet.

He has a pretty nice stroke and the range and he can slash.

I really think the sky is the limit for this kid.

Defensively he isn't there yet but what rookies are?

I don't know why or how we could have missed out on this pick because he's exactly what this team needs off the bench who can contribute right away.

I had him as a top candidate for this team before the draft but I also had JJJ as a solid pickup.  Brooks for his scoring and JJJ for his overall skillset and size.  Too early to get down on JJJ.  Even if Doc didn't have a problem playing rookies, he'd still be behind KG and Bass on the depth chart.  He isn't going to take minutes from either of those 2. 

[CDawg834]

I think the Nets have a stud in the making in MarShon Brooks.

He's a rookie but he scores like a vet.

He has a pretty nice stroke and the range and he can slash.

I really think the sky is the limit for this kid.

Defensively he isn't there yet but what rookies are?

I don't know why or how we could have missed out on this pick because he's exactly what this team needs off the bench who can contribute right away.

I don't know that we necessarily missed out on him...it's not like Ainge thought he was a bum, he just liked Johnson more and was fine with swinging a deal with NJ to basically move down two spots.  Also, in the C's defense, the draft was pre-lockout, so they had no idea what their bench would look like if and when the season got underway.  Kinda hard to fill a need 6 months before you know what your needs will be and what players will be available to fill those needs.

Sure, he may turn out to be a great player, but I don't think that means the Celtics missed out on him.  It's only a 10 game sample size.

[hpantazo]

He's playing for the nets. Bradley would look like Monta Ellis playing for that team.

[Chris]

The kid is a heck of a talent, but I will give it a little while before worrying too much.

The book on this kid was that he had attitude problems and was not a team player.  We will see if that comes up at all.

I also want to see more of Johnson.  I am not overly confident about him, but its way too early to make a ruling.

[guava_wrench]

I suppose we weren't looking for a Gilbert Arenas type.

[Scribbles]

Why do people keep saying "its cause Brooks plays for the Nets!"?

Seriously so when Pierce was playing for all those rebuilding Celtic teams and leading them in almost every statistical category its because he was playing for a garbage team right? Kevin Love was putting putting up monster numbers in Minnesota because he played for a terrible team. The list goes on.  Basically what I keep hearing is if you play for a bad team your stats don't mean anything.  

This is a league where if you can play you'll see the court.  Now yes is Brooks getting more court time, shot attempts, etc because he's on the Net's then he would if he was on a playoff roster with veteran star players in front of him? Probably.  Does that take away from anything he's doing at all? No.  JJJ may very well turn into a rotation player down the line.  However he's not ready physically to step onto the court.  Brooks was. He was an NBA ready scorer and there's no doubt in my mind he would be playing some minutes off our bench and would have no trouble filling in when Pierce or Ray needed some rest/were injured.  

However it is what it is, we traded him. JJJ may turn into something a few years down the line, he may be Danny's latest draft miscue.  Brooks may go on to be a star player or he could turn out to be one of those shot happy players like Jamal Crawford.(which by the way you'd still want on your team)

[Reyquila]

We pick a player who cannot possibly help us cause he will always be behind Kevin, JO, Bass, and now, that whit kid. We could have drafted Brooks, who could help us now with the needed scorer for that second team; scoring that is missing with the likes of Sasha, Daniels at the 2 and 3 positions. Dont tell me that Brooks is not a better scorer than those two together. Danny didnt miss out on Giddens? didnt miss out on Walker? Greene?  where are Delonte, Tony Allen? Where are 95% of the players drafted by Danny? Not wearing Celtic uniforms. Sure we only play veterans - but our veterans are at the end of their productive careers - and we got nobody, NADA. to replace them. No wonder we cannot woo top players to come play with us anymore - they see no future in our "brain team". Dont blame them.
Rivers does not play rookies. Fine. Look at the end of the tunnel and what do you see for our future? Another 20 years of mediocrity cause we didnt have a transition plan?

Its not like we havent played JJJ cause he has not played good. He doesnt have a chance of playing here untilour bigs break down physically. Brooks could have helped us NOW. At least he would have had a better chance of helping us now that JJJ will have in the foreseeable future.

Our drafting strategy since Danny and Rivers have been aboard has never ceased to amaze me. I just do not understand their "Grand Plan".

[PosImpos]

He doesnt have a chance of playing here until our bigs break down physically.

Give it a month or two.

[Finkelskyhook]

He doesnt have a chance of playing here until our bigs break down physically.

Give it a month or two.

He still wouldn't have a chance of playing here.

[dlpin]

Remember when Bill Walker scored 12 ppg on 52% shooting? Don't trust good stats on bad teams.

[Inside-Out]

Well, I'd say the big question is whether this kid would be playing as a rookie, so he would have to basically beat out Bradley, Dooling, and Daniels for minutes at the 2.

I'm not sure his offense would outweigh defense in getting floor time.  So he'd probably not play for us, either.

So let's compare him to J3 in a year or two.  No rush.

[Cman]

How did every other team in the league miss out on Stiemsma?

Hat tip dinguspie:

Stiemsma has been the 2nd most productive rookie in the NBA, according to WP48.  Also lighting it up: MIL's Jon Leurer and MIN's Rubio. 

Let's give the Steamer 25 or 30 minutes a game and let O'Neal ride the pine!

http://wagesofwins.com/2012/01/06/put-em-in-coach-theyre-ready-to-play/

[kozlodoev]

Why do people keep saying "its cause Brooks plays for the Nets!"?

Mostly because up to now all he's shown is the capability to be a volume shooter.

[byennie]

I think the Nets have a stud in the making in MarShon Brooks.

He's a rookie but he scores like a vet.

He has a pretty nice stroke and the range and he can slash.

I really think the sky is the limit for this kid.

Defensively he isn't there yet but what rookies are?

I don't know why or how we could have missed out on this pick because he's exactly what this team needs off the bench who can contribute right away.

I agree that he's a nice young player, but people need to CHILL before anointing him an All-Star. Yeah he's scoring a lot of points, but here's the flipside:

1) He hasn't even played 200 minutes of NBA basketball! Defenses may adjust.

2) He's shot over 50% from the field exactly 1 time in 8 games.

3) He has 5 assists, total.

I wouldn't mind having him, but it's both a little early and a little exaggerated.