Brook Lopez or Kanter/Augustin/Singler/Novak?

Luca Brasi · Post #1 » by **Luca Brasi** » Thu Feb 26, 2015 10:54 pm

Hey guys. OKC fan here. I desperately wanted Lopez ever since the trade was first reported. So I had lurked around your boards for a couple months to see if you guys had any inside info on a possible deal.

When it looked like the Reggie/Perk for Lopez deal was happening on deadline day, I was ecstatic. And then severely disappointed we got Kanter instead.

But I gotta say... I'm really really happy with how it all went down now. Kanter looks legit and we have so much depth now. Presti did a great job in my opinion.

My question- as people who know Lopez's game better than anyone, which deal do you think would have been better for OKC? The Lopez deal or the deal we got? I'm really interested in your thoughts. Thanks!

Shook Jones · Post #2 » by **Shook Jones** » Fri Feb 27, 2015 12:12 am

The deal you got was better. Hate that Nets didnt have a plan B but Presti is just a better GM.

Kanter and Singler are good young players.

jeff1624 · Post #3 » by **jeff1624** » Fri Feb 27, 2015 12:24 am

The deal OKC got was better because it gave your team more depth. Lopez is a better player than Kanter (by a fair margin) but you don't need Lopez's high usage scoring, which is why kanter is a good enough to take on that role while gaining back a good backup PG, a decent enough backup wing and a guy that could swing a playoff game with his three point shooting. OKC did the right thing.

Post #4 » by **CalamityX12** » Fri Feb 27, 2015 12:51 am

Okc got the better deal in many aspects

Paradise · Post #5 » by **Paradise** » Fri Feb 27, 2015 1:16 am

The Utah/Detroit deal was much better but Lopez is alot more explosive than Kanter when it comes to scoring and Lopez would have definitely helped Ibaka defensively more than Kanter could.

DarkXaero · Post #6 » by **DarkXaero** » Fri Feb 27, 2015 1:20 am

I think you guys did the better deal, considering the circumstances. However, it's not impossible that a Lopez trade would've been better for you. Brook Lopez is still a far more accomplished scorer in this league than Kanter, and he's certainly a better defender (although worse rebounder). IMO, Ibaka would've been a great fit next to Brook, and you guys would've had some great shotblocking/rim defense from the combination of Brook/Ibaka. At the same time, Brook would've slowed down your offense a bit, and his P&R defense weakness would still be there (but not as apparent as it is here).

It's hard to say how Brook would've meshed with Westbrook and KD offensively, but I would have loved to find out. I could see Brook thriving in OKC. When I say you guys did the better deal, it's mainly for depth reasons. But if Brook would have gotten traded to you and played at a high level, that would turn out to be the better deal for you.

Prokorov · Post #7 » by **Prokorov** » Fri Feb 27, 2015 2:09 am

Luca Brasi wrote:Hey guys. OKC fan here. I desperately wanted Lopez ever since the trade was first reported. So I had lurked around your boards for a couple months to see if you guys had any inside info on a possible deal.

When it looked like the Reggie/Perk for Lopez deal was happening on deadline day, I was ecstatic. And then severely disappointed we got Kanter instead.

But I gotta say... I'm really really happy with how it all went down now. Kanter looks legit and we have so much depth now. Presti did a great job in my opinion.

My question- as people who know Lopez's game better than anyone, which deal do you think would have been better for OKC? The Lopez deal or the deal we got? I'm really interested in your thoughts. Thanks!

You guys got the much better deal and I think you would have been REALLY disappointed had you gotten lopez after being so excited to get him. he is an ok scorer, but not what you would expect. he isnt a huge impact guy. his numbers arent completely empty but his offense kind of can come at the expense of everyone else. he will score 20 and it will have the impact of like 6 points.

Defensively and rebounding is a problem. as is consistency. he also falls in love with jumpshots, which he is horiible at (38% from 16 feet out) yet he cant stop taking them.

he is frustrating because he could be good if he was more driven and consistent. he will ahve some crazy game where he dunks left and right, grabs 17 boards, and is active. theng oes a month before you see that guy again.

we have been better without him the last 2 seasons record wise... it is really hard to find the right fit with him. i personally thought he would be a horrible fit in OKC and actually make you worse

lkitt0804 · Post #8 » by **lkitt0804** » Fri Feb 27, 2015 2:22 am

Prokorov wrote:
Luca Brasi wrote:Hey guys. OKC fan here. I desperately wanted Lopez ever since the trade was first reported. So I had lurked around your boards for a couple months to see if you guys had any inside info on a possible deal.

When it looked like the Reggie/Perk for Lopez deal was happening on deadline day, I was ecstatic. And then severely disappointed we got Kanter instead.

But I gotta say... I'm really really happy with how it all went down now. Kanter looks legit and we have so much depth now. Presti did a great job in my opinion.

My question- as people who know Lopez's game better than anyone, which deal do you think would have been better for OKC? The Lopez deal or the deal we got? I'm really interested in your thoughts. Thanks!

You guys got the much better deal and I think you would have been REALLY disappointed had you gotten lopez after being so excited to get him. he is an ok scorer, but not what you would expect. he isnt a huge impact guy. his numbers arent completely empty but his offense kind of can come at the expense of everyone else. he will score 20 and it will have the impact of like 6 points.

Defensively and rebounding is a problem. as is consistency. he also falls in love with jumpshots, which he is horiible at (38% from 16 feet out) yet he cant stop taking them.

he is frustrating because he could be good if he was more driven and consistent. he will ahve some crazy game where he dunks left and right, grabs 17 boards, and is active. theng oes a month before you see that guy again.

we have been better without him the last 2 seasons record wise... it is really hard to find the right fit with him. i personally thought he would be a horrible fit in OKC and actually make you worse

Brook can be a monster if he had more of a nasty side to him. He's just really laid back. He'll do what the coach asks him to do and a really good teammate. He can be a super star if he WANTS to be. If he ever gets that motivation... Look out.

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

MrDollarBills · Post #9 » by **MrDollarBills** » Fri Feb 27, 2015 1:54 pm

Luca Brasi wrote:Hey guys. OKC fan here. I desperately wanted Lopez ever since the trade was first reported. So I had lurked around your boards for a couple months to see if you guys had any inside info on a possible deal.

When it looked like the Reggie/Perk for Lopez deal was happening on deadline day, I was ecstatic. And then severely disappointed we got Kanter instead.

But I gotta say... I'm really really happy with how it all went down now. Kanter looks legit and we have so much depth now. Presti did a great job in my opinion.

My question- as people who know Lopez's game better than anyone, which deal do you think would have been better for OKC? The Lopez deal or the deal we got? I'm really interested in your thoughts. Thanks!

The deal you got was way better. Brook is a one trick pony and is also lazy and accepts losing.

Post #10 » by **Trader_Joe** » Fri Feb 27, 2015 2:21 pm

You guys took the right deal.
Kanter is younger, cheaper, healthier, a much better rebounder and restricted.. plus you got depth out of it.

I do think Lopez has some advantages:
Defensive stats are all in Lopez' favor.. Blocked shots, opponent FG%, DWS and most are significant.
Lopez also has a significant size advantage being at least 7'1" with a 9'5" reach helping those defensive numbers. Neither are known for the D obviously, but Kanter has some of the worst defensive numbers out there (for example he allows the highest opponents FG% at the rim of any big that plays over 25 mpg other than Boris Diaw) and he's not a shot blocker at all. And while I can't find them, I'm guessing Lopez has much better numbers defended post ups and isolation...pick and roll would be the interesting one. Brook is pretty bad there, while I'm guessing Kanter is better given he is more mobile.

The other advantage is that Lopez has some PO experience where he was
#1 scoring PF or C
#1 in blocks
22.3/7.5/3
top 5 PER

In his first PO against the much more experienced and vaunted Chicago D (Noah, Gibson and Thibs). He had a bad game 7, but overall had an excellent first playoffs.

But...
Offensively, I don't think he suits OKC when they are healthy. He's not going to make as much happen as Kanter unless he is fed the ball. Kanter can be more of a garbage man and play PF or C.

And of course his contract was a big issue.. he could have opted out and left you guys for nothing.

Luca Brasi · Post #11 » by **Luca Brasi** » Fri Feb 27, 2015 8:58 pm

Awesome. I read all your comments and am feeling really good about our trade now. I was one of the biggest cheerleaders for getting Lopez, so to hear you guys say we definitely got the better deal makes me feel really good about it. Appreciate it guys. You had some great feedback.

BeardedGoatee · Post #12 » by **BeardedGoatee** » Fri Feb 27, 2015 9:22 pm

OKC got the much better deal. As mentioned many times before, Lopez is a ball stopper, and with high usage players like Westbrook and KD who need the ball in their hands, Lopez would just be a body in their way.

lkitt0804 wrote:
Brook can be a monster if he had more of a nasty side to him. He's just really laid back. He'll do what the coach asks him to do and a really good teammate. He can be a super star if he WANTS to be. If he ever gets that motivation... Look out.

If only there were a nasty side to him. If an intense guy like KG can't light a fire under you to play hard and go 150% every night, you're a lost cause. There's no room for softness in this league.

Paradise · Post #13 » by **Paradise** » Fri Feb 27, 2015 10:32 pm

BeardedGoatee wrote:If only there were a nasty side to him. If an intense guy like KG can't light a fire under you to play hard and go 150% every night, you're a lost cause. There's no room for softness in this league.

I don't think he's soft. He just doesn't have the typical superstar ego like Carmelo, Love, Westbrook, Bosh, etc. He's a great person and greater teammate but he doesn't have the "this is my team" presence.

MrDollarBills · Post #14 » by **MrDollarBills** » Sat Feb 28, 2015 5:51 pm

Paradise wrote:
BeardedGoatee wrote:If only there were a nasty side to him. If an intense guy like KG can't light a fire under you to play hard and go 150% every night, you're a lost cause. There's no room for softness in this league.

I don't think he's soft. He just doesn't have the typical superstar ego like Carmelo, Love, Westbrook, Bosh, etc. He's a great person and greater teammate but he doesn't have the "this is my team" presence.

His rebound rate, overall effort and game 7 of the first rd vs. the Bulls say otherwise.