Brook Lopez

[Cammo101]

And I think people mistake a guy who doesn't jump out of the gym for not having a good feel for the game.

No, Lopez doesn't have the best feel for the game when he is being force fed on the low block.

That doesn't mean he has a poor feel for the game. His feel for the game on the defensive end is as good as one could ever ask for out of a big man.

Once again, I'll state that if Lopez had a poor feel for the game, Stanford wouldn't have been the 25th best offensive team in the country with Lopez as the team's most efficient offensive starter. They wouldn't have been a 3 seed with a mid-major supporting cast other than the Lopez'.

These are all questions that somebody claiming the Lopez vs Love comparisons are ridiculous has to answer at some point.

Just how in the heck was it that Stanford played neck and neck with UCLA twice in a two week span if Lopez has such a poor feel for the game and no supporting cast and Love has an amazing feel for the game and his ridiculously talented supporting cast?

It absolutely boggles my mind to hear people call Brook a poor rebounder and label Robin the good rebounder. The player that was significantly better as a defensive rebounder and nearly as good as an offensive rebounder despite taking more shots is the mediocre rebounder, and the one who didn't get defensive rebounds and barely outpaced the other on offensive glass despite almost never shooting...he's the good rebounder...

HUH?

It sounds nice to say that Lopez doesn't have a good feel for the game, but reality just doesn't line up that way at all.

Yep.

[wilt]

any news of players falling right now is just smokescreens and bold predictions, workouts haven

[GSW2K4]

And I think people mistake a guy who doesn't jump out of the gym for not having a good feel for the game.

No, Lopez doesn't have the best feel for the game when he is being force fed on the low block.

First of all, I'm enjoying the back and forth... I love evaluating players...and seeing how it works out down the line.

Second, saying Love has a good feel for the game certainly has nothing to with any ability to "jump out of the gym".

Third, again, I think Lopez will be a solid role player center in the league.

It's these projections of him that I'm questioning. You can't evaluate a big man based on college production because it's almost always inflated because they are almost always tallest on the court...

I think you have to differentiate between being a great college player with being a pro prospect. It might sound bizarre, but it's not just about what a guy accomplished in college. There are plenty of accomplished college players who either never made it in the pros or are sitting on someone's bench. So all that is less important to me than watching how he actually plays.

Though a different position, Brandon Roy vs Adam Morrison is a perfect example of this. I saw both of them play many times in college and was at the game when they went head to head and Morrison scored 43 in a loss. Both very good college players. Dominant and arguably best in their conferences. When those guys came off the court, their teams suffered (UW was dysfunctional without Roy). Nobody would argue that either was a super athlete...Roy just seemed to know what to do in any situation, whereas Morrison had perfected doing some things very well at the college level (and I'm sure he'll eventually develop into a consistent NBA role player).

The Lopez/Love comparison is similar -- you look at both of them and one of them has perfected the college game and dominates that way, the other has a great feel for basketball and is able to pick his spots against college competition. You can just see it in a player and it makes a huge difference at the pro level.

It's the little things about Brook's game that you see from watching -- not just looking at box scores -- that makes me question his NBA potential. If you look at the way he plays -- not at what team he's playing on or what he's doing statistically -- that's where his flaws are.

Check this one out:
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegespo ... bin-lopez/

In contrast to B Lopez, who carries himself in a rigid, upright manner - watch his posture when he runs

[wilt]

about that "reliance on a few pet moves" : People have to realise that College Basketball is a competition in itself, not simply a "casting" for the NBA. This means that players have instructions by the Coaches, in Brook

[GSW2K4]

Yeah I agree he'll improve... and he's only 20... and no I don't expect him to take spinning jump shots...

But at some point, you also have to know when to adjust or deviate slightly from a coach's instructions -- they're people, not Pavlov's dogs.. As many coaches say: "I can't get out there and play the game for you." Players have to know how to play the game.

[giberish]

Though a different position, Brandon Roy vs Adam Morrison is a perfect example of this. I saw both of them play many times in college and was at the game when they went head to head and Morrison scored 43 in a loss. Both very good college players. Dominant and arguably best in their conferences. When those guys came off the court, their teams suffered (UW was dysfunctional without Roy). Nobody would argue that either was a super athlete...Roy just seemed to know what to do in any situation, whereas Morrison had perfected doing some things very well at the college level (and I'm sure he'll eventually develop into a consistent NBA role player).

The Lopez/Love comparison is similar -- you look at both of them and one of them has perfected the college game and dominates that way, the other has a great feel for basketball and is able to pick his spots against college competition. You can just see it in a player and it makes a huge difference at the pro level.

The other way to look at this is that in college Roy was very good/great on both offense and defense while Morrison was great on offense and average/poor on defense. Love was great on offense and rebounding but he has serious defensive questions heading into the NBA (his rebounding along with his youth compared to Ammo make him a better prospect than Morrison). Lopez was very good on offense and rebounding and also a very good/great defender.

Lopez will be a very good defensive c/pf in the NBA. While the questions about Love are about his defense the questions about Lopez are about offense - how well can he play from the high post?, and how well can he pass out of double teams?[/quote]

[ilikecb4]

well look guys i think Lopez will be a very nice player

He's got nice post game, he's a nice player

However he should not go top 5

if you pick him #10 that's where he should be realistically speaking

[JMillott]

I have no issue with a team being more than happy to draft Brook Lopez and i don't think the guy is a stiff by any means. I do think his upside is limited and don't think he'll be a great starting center.

I have a problem when people say teams who are still building from the ground up like Minnesota or Seattle should be drafting for need over best player availible.

Take a true look at those franchises.

The Wolves have either a franchise player in Al Jefferson or a fantastic #2 to build around. They need a second building block to of the roster type player and OJ Mayo is that guy.

The Sonics again have a franchise player in Kevin Durant but again no second allstar or future #2 type guy. Well here they stand with a chance to get a allstar calibur scoring PG in Jerryd Bayless who has the type of shooting touch that will punish teams for cheating to defend Durant.

This is how you build teams, you don't just say ok we need a center lets draft the best one availible. When building a team from the bottom up its about finding core players who compliment each other and then as you get better you fill in the holes.

Teams that just try and fill in the holes instead of getting that core right end up in the 35 to 45 win range too good to get a core star to get better and not good enough to truely contend.

[old rem]

I would honestly go with the upside pick if I was the Grizzlies and take a shot that Deandre Jordan ends up living up to his physical talents.

You couldn't ask for a better physical skillset at the center position for a team that wants to run up and down the court than Jordan.

In my opinion drafting Brook Lopez would make the Pau Gasol trade even dumber then it already is.

D Jordan is a draft mistake waiting to happen. Skillset? Not much. He has physical tools and damn little skillset or perhaps just can't grasp what to do with stuff he's been taught. Lopez is inconsistant but he CAN shoot from 20. He does bust his ass and get results on D,on the boards. He has the awareness and he's self propelled. You don't need to prod him to werk on his game. B Lopez needs to learn to finish better in a crowd. Jordan? He still has to learn basic reactions to what's going on. I'd take J McGee above Jordan at this point.

[old rem]

well look guys i think Lopez will be a very nice player

He's got nice post game, he's a nice player

However he should not go top 5

if you pick him #10 that's where he should be realistically speaking

True....however everyone who SHOULD fill the 5-9 slots declared and bailed last year. That's why a lot of lotto teams are talking trade down but there's not a lot of takers.

[KennerLeaguer]

Lopez was very good on offense and rebounding and also a very good/great defender.

He never shot 50% from the field against college players despite his height and the fact that defenses also had to keep one body on his brother Robin. His fg% sucks. If he got 20 points it typically took him at least 15 shots to score that much. That's my concern about him.

[GJense4181]

-= original quote snipped =-



D Jordan is a draft mistake waiting to happen. Skillset? Not much. He has physical tools and damn little skillset or perhaps just can't grasp what to do with stuff he's been taught. Lopez is inconsistant but he CAN shoot from 20. He does bust his ass and get results on D,on the boards. He has the awareness and he's self propelled. You don't need to prod him to werk on his game. B Lopez needs to learn to finish better in a crowd. Jordan? He still has to learn basic reactions to what's going on. I'd take J McGee above Jordan at this point.

[Cruel_Ruin]

-= original quote snipped =-



D Jordan is a draft mistake waiting to happen. Skillset? Not much. He has physical tools and damn little skillset or perhaps just can't grasp what to do with stuff he's been taught. Lopez is inconsistant but he CAN shoot from 20. He does bust his ass and get results on D,on the boards. He has the awareness and he's self propelled. You don't need to prod him to werk on his game. B Lopez needs to learn to finish better in a crowd. Jordan? He still has to learn basic reactions to what's going on. I'd take J McGee above Jordan at this point.

Deandre Jordan should just donate his size and athleticism to Kevin Love. It'll go to better use there.

[giberish]

Lopez was very good on offense and rebounding and also a very good/great defender.

He never shot 50% from the field against college players despite his height and the fact that defenses also had to keep one body on his brother Robin. His fg% sucks. If he got 20 points it typically took him at least 15 shots to score that much. That's my concern about him.

Brook drew a lot of fouls (and made free throws), so even at a poor % from the field he didn't need that many shots to score.

Stanford's offense was badly skewed last year, resulting in some generally wierd stats. It's rare when a top 10-15 team is as focused on one player as much as Stanford was so the results look unusual just looking at the #'s.

The only useful offensive skill the rest of Stanford had was offensive rebounding. The other post players (Robin or Taj Finger) were great offensive rebounders, and SFs Hill and Washington were good as well. As a result Stanford's offense was extremely predictable. Get the ball to Brook in the post, have Brook shoot - no matter how many defenders collapse on him - and have the other post and SF crash the glass. Do it again (almost) every possesion. As effective as Brook was as the focal point of this style says that he was a very good offensive player last year.

[Det the Threat]

The Sonics again have a franchise player in Kevin Durant but again no second allstar or future #2 type guy. Well here they stand with a chance to get a allstar calibur scoring PG in Jerryd Bayless who has the type of shooting touch that will punish teams for cheating to defend Durant.

The Sonics got Jeff Green and he's got the potential to be a #2 guy on an NBA team.

Though, if you look at the big picture for the Sonics it might very well still be the best option to take a guard(Mayo or Bayless) at #4, which is what i'm hoping for, and use all those other picks to fill the hole at the center position with guys like Robin Lopez, DeVon Hardin etc...

[BMiller52]

-= original quote snipped =-



The Sonics got Jeff Green and he's got the potential to be a #2 guy on an NBA team.

Though, if you look at the big picture for the Sonics it might very well still be the best option to take a guard(Mayo or Bayless) at #4, which is what i'm hoping for, and use all those other picks to fill the hole at the center position with guys like Robin Lopez, DeVon Hardin etc...

Isn't that what they've done the last 5 years?

[Det the Threat]

-= original quote snipped =-
Isn't that what they've done the last 5 years?

No, Rick Sund used picks #12(Swift), #25(Petro) and #10(Sene) on 3 centers, 3 years in a row.

Petro has shown some signs last season and i also expect Sam Presti to trade up with all those trade pieces we've got, to add another pick somewhere in the 10 - 20 range.

[Jonathan Watters]

-= original quote snipped =-



Brook drew a lot of fouls (and made free throws), so even at a poor % from the field he didn't need that many shots to score.

Stanford's offense was badly skewed last year, resulting in some generally wierd stats. It's rare when a top 10-15 team is as focused on one player as much as Stanford was so the results look unusual just looking at the #'s.

The only useful offensive skill the rest of Stanford had was offensive rebounding. The other post players (Robin or Taj Finger) were great offensive rebounders, and SFs Hill and Washington were good as well. As a result Stanford's offense was extremely predictable. Get the ball to Brook in the post, have Brook shoot - no matter how many defenders collapse on him - and have the other post and SF crash the glass. Do it again (almost) every possesion. As effective as Brook was as the focal point of this style says that he was a very good offensive player last year.

It doesn't matter how many times you say it. Somebody will always not bother to read the first 8 times it was mentioned on the thread and come back with the same tired argument, not even attempting to answer the questions that have already been posed. Maybe just keep this post on your clipboard for the next person who shows up and posts it. Ctrl+V is a lot easier than trying to find another angle to approach things...

[LPKingsFan]

-= original quote snipped =-



It doesn't matter how many times you say it. Somebody will always not bother to read the first 8 times it was mentioned on the thread and come back with the same tired argument, not even attempting to answer the questions that have already been posed. Maybe just keep this post on your clipboard for the next person who shows up and posts it. Ctrl+V is a lot easier than trying to find another angle to approach things...

OJ Mayo is da bomb! Brooke Lopez sux!