I have read up on it, and people who advocate for it take as a given that it would make things better, but I just dont see it. I go by three axioms:

• as long as drawing districts is a political process, districts will be drawn to the partisan advantage of the major party in charge

• Once you have multi-member districts, major parties will run a candidate for as many slots as they are allowed to. And party-line voters will expect to have a way to express a party-line preference. I expect that any system which does not allow a party to run a candidate for every slot will be challenged.

• Once you disassociate votes with individual candidates, major party bosses can dole out "safe" seats as patronage. But if you don't disassociate votes with individual candidates, a party can still sweep a multi-member district with 50.1% percent of the vote for each spot

The only case where proportional voting helps is where the multi-member district becomes so large that it is the only district, and now it can't be gerrymandered at all. But you still have other problems then.

I would sooner keep districts the way they are, but make many more of them, and introduce either RCV or a true runoff when no candidate gets 50%.