# Question for Brook Lopez Defenders



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

Can you explain to me how a 7-foot post player who is supposedly the second or third best center in the league has shot 8-33 from the floor over the past two games (14-50 over the past three and under 40% for the year). Oh and he's grabbed 14 boards in those three games combined. Must've been busy playing the suffocating defense he's known for :rotf:


----------



## Adam (Jan 28, 2003)

hobojoe said:


> Can you explain to me how a 7-foot post player who is supposedly the second or third best center in the league has shot 8-33 from the floor over the past two games (14-50 over the past three and under 40% for the year). Oh and he's grabbed 14 boards in those three games combined. Must've been busy playing the suffocating defense he's known for :rotf:


I just want to know how he has been blocked at the rim while dunking by Dwyane Wade three times in the last year :laugh:

Last year (check time and score):






Last night:


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

I would imagine it's because he's gone up against two of the top defensive teams in the league and they keyed in on him as the focal point of the nets offense.

I mean who do you have better than Lopez besides Howard?


----------



## roux (Jun 20, 2006)

futuristxen said:


> I would imagine it's because he's gone up against two of the top defensive teams in the league and they keyed in on him as the focal point of the nets offense.
> 
> I mean who do you have better than Lopez besides Howard?


Lopez isnt as good as Bogut


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

roux2dope said:


> Lopez isnt as good as Bogut


I'd agree with that. Isn't he a lot younger than Bogut though?


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

It's sort of between Bynum, Marc Gasol, and Lopez for third best center, right?


----------



## roux (Jun 20, 2006)

futuristxen said:


> I'd agree with that. Isn't he a lot younger than Bogut though?


yeah he's about 3-4 years younger.. but bogut is only about 26 years old..not like he's ancient or anything


----------



## Adam (Jan 28, 2003)

futuristxen said:


> It's sort of between Bynum, Marc Gasol, and Lopez for third best center, right?


What makes him any better than a guy like Chris Kaman? Aside from the age. Kaman is probably the better rebounder as well.


----------



## roux (Jun 20, 2006)

futuristxen said:


> It's sort of between Bynum, Marc Gasol, and Lopez for third best center, right?


well..depends if you consider pau gasol a center.. if you do id ranke them

1.Howard
2.P.Gasol
3. Bogut
4. Lopez
5.Bynum
6. Noah
7. M.Gasol

if you dont consider pau a center than bump everyone up a notch


----------



## Adam (Jan 28, 2003)

I want my centers defending, rebounding, and finishing strong at the rim. He somewhat does the third but doesn't do the first two better than many other centers.

As Dre would say, I put him in the same tier as a Chris Kaman. They're basically the same player. No way is he better than Bogut, Gasol, Noah, Howard, Yao, Oden, and Bynum. It's debatable whether he is better than Al Jefferson, Al Horford, Nene, and Kaman.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

roux2dope said:


> well..depends if you consider pau gasol a center.. if you do id ranke them
> 
> 1.Howard
> 2. Bogut
> ...


I don't consider Gasol a center. So I adjusted this. I agree with this for the most part. Not sure I'd go with Noah ahead of Gasol though. But it's debatable. Kaman might be in that group too.

I agree with the sentiment about wanting defense and rebounding out of the five spot. I'd be tempted to move Perkins into the top 5 because I think he defends the post at that position better than anyone.

Long story short the NBA center position is so weak that Lopez could be how he is warts and all and I could understand some people considering him top 3...just because of how weak the field is.

It really is Howard, Bogut...and everyone else.


----------



## roux (Jun 20, 2006)

futuristxen said:


> I don't consider Gasol a center. So I adjusted this. I agree with this for the most part. Not sure I'd go with Noah ahead of Gasol though. But it's debatable. Kaman might be in that group too.
> 
> I agree with the sentiment about wanting defense and rebounding out of the five spot. I'd be tempted to move Perkins into the top 5 because I think he defends the post at that position better than anyone.
> 
> ...


Noah's offense is going to knock him down on some lists, but in terms of defense and rebounding he is probably the third best center in the league behind howard and bogut


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Al Horford should've been mentioned real early. I'd take him over Horford without thinking twice.

But yeah he's third tier. It's slim pickings...but it's Howard, then a Healthy Yao and Bogut, then the other guys sort of fall in line until you get to Erick Dampier or some ****.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

I still feel like Horford is a power forward playing out of position.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Well technically so is Tim Duncan..the other way around of course.

But Horford's been playing Center for what 3 years now...


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

A guy goes to NBA.com and immediately deduces he knows all about a player....hilarity!

Dwight owns him but guess what, if you are NOT Kendrick Perkins, who else doesn't Dwight embarrass?

Brook is too skilled to stay in the low 40s, and unlike Kaman he actually has a high bball IQ. Couple of unfortunate games, but me I'd rather take the words of guys who actually play the game and coach the game that have touted his skills, than some message board posters. Thats just me though.

It hasn't shown up in the win column, but you'd have to be dense to not realize one of the major reasons why the Nets are playing better than they did last year is the attention their big man gets down low. Not many teams can play him one on one.

One thing Brook needs to stop doing though, is the weak shots around the basket.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

LOL...funny thread.

If you watch Brook Lopez you would see he is almost helpless against tough doubles. Want to know what happened? Teams took the Nets seriously and game planned Lopez. The Nets now need a perimeter difference maker. Lopez will be a good piece of a good team. He is not the primary player he seems to be right now. Once they start rolling he will take the role that most centers in this league are taking. 2nd or 3rd option at best. My guess is he settles into a 14/8 type player.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Roy Hibbert is better than him IMO. Roy actually plays defense and can help the team in other ways besides just scoring.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Roy's NOT better than him.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

HB said:


> Roy's NOT better than him.


They're about in the same tier. I'd say Lopez is more gifted offensively, but Hibbert has a more complete skillset.


----------



## Noyze (Oct 7, 2010)

Did Lopez come to camp out of shape or something. He's shooting a really low % for a center


----------



## SheriffKilla (Jan 1, 2004)

Lopez is very good, who cares if he is a little cold to start the season and they played some very tough defenses.
Here are my top 10 centers

1. Dwight Howard
2. Al Horford - I don't know what his "real" position is but he has played center his whole career so far, he is big enough to be a center and he plays like a center, so he is a center
3. Andrew Bogut - I think a bit overrated at this point if people are saying he is CLEARLY the 2nd best besides Howard but still a very good player.

These next 3 are about equal and I think Lopez has the best potential out of them 3 considering Bynum's injury history.
4. Joakim Noah
5. Andrew Bynum
6. Brook Lopez

7. Marc Gasol
8. Roy Hibbert
9. Nene
10. Yao Ming/ Marcus Camby/ Greg Oden/ Chris Kaman/ Kendrick Perkins - Hard to say with these guys injury history and incosistent play.


----------



## roux (Jun 20, 2006)

SheriffKilla said:


> Lopez is very good, who cares if he is a little cold to start the season and they played some very tough defenses.
> Here are my top 10 centers
> 
> 1. Dwight Howard
> ...


well Bogut has stepped out and clearloy become the 2nd best defensive center in the league behind howard..combine that with being an efficient and talented post scorer and a double digit rebounder he has emerged as probably the 2nd best center in the league..also Horford is boguts equal in 2/3 (scoring,rebounding) of their game..Bogut's defense is what makes him better than Horford


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

So silly whole me went to NBA.com and lo and behold I realize Brook is putting up *18.8ppg*. So here's what I don't get, the giggling guy who started this thread surely failed to mention that? I actually thought this guy was having a horrible season from the way the thread starter described it. Smdh at this board. 5 or 6 games in and you make a thread about a guy's shooting percentage knowing damn well that two or three good games and those numbers will go back up. Sigh!

As for Bogut clearly being the second best center in the league, his team is 2 and 5, the Nets are 2 and 4, whoop de damn doo. Bogut is a better rebounder than Brook, thats about it.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

Bogut isn't a much better defender than Horford.

I still would probably take Noah over every center not named Howard. When I watch games, Noah makes a lot of winning plays and he doesn't wilt.


----------



## Kidd (Jul 2, 2009)

MemphisX said:


> LOL...funny thread.
> 
> *If you watch Brook Lopez you would see he is almost helpless against tough doubles.* Want to know what happened? Teams took the Nets seriously and game planned Lopez. The Nets now need a perimeter difference maker. Lopez will be a good piece of a good team. He is not the primary player he seems to be right now. Once they start rolling he will take the role that most centers in this league are taking. 2nd or 3rd option at best. My guess is he settles into a 14/8 type player.


True story.

I'm a Nets fan and I've never understood guys calling him the 2nd best center in the league. I'd take Bogut over him any day.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

HB said:


> So silly whole me went to NBA.com and lo and behold I realize Brook is putting up *18.8ppg*. So here's what I don't get, the giggling guy who started this thread surely failed to mention that? I actually thought this guy was having a horrible season from the way the thread starter described it. Smdh at this board. 5 or 6 games in and you make a thread about a guy's shooting percentage knowing damn well that two or three good games and those numbers will go back up. Sigh!
> 
> As for Bogut clearly being the second best center in the league, his team is 2 and 5, the Nets are 2 and 4, whoop de damn doo. Bogut is a better rebounder than Brook, thats about it.


...and you claim I'm the one going onto NBA.com and thinking I know a player. You babbled for an entire paragraph about a meaningless 18.8 number. Lopez wasn't just owned by Howard either, the game wasn't close enough for Dwight to even set foot on the floor and Lopez was struggling against Gortat. Like MemphisX said, this is the result of teams actually caring enough to game plan against him. I agree that he's no better than Roy Hibbert.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Fortunately or maybe its unfortunately I watch a lot of Nets games. I am not looking for boxscores or how many points so and so score at the end of the game. But I'll go from what I saw against Dwight, the guy got decent looks just wasn't converting for some reason and the ones where he was owned by Dwight was mostly due to him trying cute shots around the rim. Needs to go up much stronger. If there are any centers in the NBA with a more complete offensive game than Brook, I'd like to know them.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

Brook is far from a finished product. He had very little coaching last season and Avery is still experimenting with how he is using him. The way he gets flustered by double teams is painful to watch.

So far this season, he can't guard a chair and he has been relying on his touch instead of taking the ball up strong. He looks and is playing like a guy that lost a lot of weight from Mono and hasn't recovered any of his strength. 

In short, he isn't playing like a top 10 center, but I have faith that he will improve under the coaching of Popeye and Larry as the season progresses.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

HB said:


> Fortunately or maybe its unfortunately I watch a lot of Nets games. I am not looking for boxscores or how many points so and so score at the end of the game. But I'll go from what I saw against Dwight, the guy got decent looks just wasn't converting for some reason and the ones where he was owned by Dwight was mostly due to him trying cute shots around the rim. Needs to go up much stronger. If there are any centers in the NBA with a more complete offensive game than Brook, I'd like to know them.


Brook took a ton of bad shots against the Magic. 

Complete offensive game???? - Brook has tremendous touch, but he doesn't have that many post moves in his bag of tricks. His passing hasn't been good either.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

cpawfan said:


> Brook is far from a finished product. He had very little coaching last season and Avery is still experimenting with how he is using him. The way he gets flustered by double teams is painful to watch.
> 
> So far this season, he can't guard a chair and he has been relying on his touch instead of taking the ball up strong. He looks and is playing like a guy that lost a lot of weight from Mono and hasn't recovered any of his strength.
> 
> In short, he isn't playing like a top 10 center, but I have faith that he will improve under the coaching of Popeye and Larry as the season progresses.


This is who he is and is the reason why I criticized him as an offensive 7 foot center who shot 47% in college.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

MemphisX said:


> This is who he is and is the reason why I criticized him as an offensive 7 foot center who shot 47% in college.


No, it is not who he is. Brook is not playing like he did last season or his rookie season. There is far, far more to this than tossing out something untrue like it is who he is. 

You were higher on Brook in that draft that I was. I bashed him non stop and know all the negatives from his play in college. I didn't want the Nets to draft him.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Bump.

Lopez looks like **** again tonight.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

:lol:


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

6-18 from the field? Yikes. This guy has no excuse for shooting this poorly.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Maybe Miami should send Bosh to New Jersey for Favors, Farmar, and Outlaw. Could you imagine the defensive _ossumness_ of a Lopez/Bosh defensive front?


----------



## Adam (Jan 28, 2003)

I would trade Bosh for George Lopez at this point. I'm not sure TBS would do it.


----------



## Jakain (Sep 8, 2006)

Both Lopez brothers are off to a pretty ****ty start. They'd get eaten alive in the 90's.


----------



## eddymac (Jun 23, 2005)

his play is indefensible he is way too soft and he gets pushed around by lesser players.


----------



## SheriffKilla (Jan 1, 2004)

Yeah basically the problem right now is he doesn't get a lot of easy looks. That's partly because of his teammates and the offense but a lot of it is his fault. He isn't very good at getting into good position w/o the ball. Every great center besides having a great post game and/or jump shot or w/e go to move they had with the ball, also always gets a bunch of easy dunks because they knew how to position themselves in the proper angles for the guards to get them the ball, Lopez isn't good at that. He is also not very good at the roll part of the pick-n-roll. While those 2 parts of the game are very important for points per game/fg% and obviously help the team as well, they aren't very tough to learn either. He probably will never be as good at it as someone like Amare but I think he will improve. At the same time that was also a problem throughout Rasheed Wallace's career and he never quite got the hang, that's one of the reasons for all his talent Rasheed never average 20+ points a game for a whole season.

EDIT:
I thought about it, and Brook does get into good position where the guards could get him the ball outside 5 feet but he sucks at it close to the basket, so now I'm thinking the problem isn't that he doesn't understand how to do it. The problem is he is too much of a pussy. That isn't a good sign, he might never overcome that. Of course, Pau Gasol was a bitch too at one point but he really toughened up. Gasol's problem had more to do with rebounding and defense though, so we'll see if Lopez will ever "go hard in the paint".


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

Pau might have been soft but he was nothing like Lopez.

However, it has been nailed on the head. He simply doesn't fight for optimal position.

38.8%...even just 7 games in this is alarming.


----------



## roux (Jun 20, 2006)

suprised nobody jumped at the chance to rip on lopez after another dud tonight


----------



## Wade County (Jun 22, 2003)

Sounds like Avery has seen enough after tonight's effort. Brook will hopefully bounce back.


----------



## roux (Jun 20, 2006)

Wade County said:


> Sounds like Avery has seen enough after tonight's effort. Brook will hopefully bounce back.


I like Brook alot.. and i am very suprised by his regression this year..i hope he turns it around too


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

roux2dope said:


> suprised nobody jumped at the chance to rip on lopez after another dud tonight


Nobody likes kicking puppies.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Lopez was brutal again tonight.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

roux2dope said:


> Noah's offense is going to knock him down on some lists, but in terms of defense and rebounding he is probably the third best center in the league behind howard and bogut


Noah is a better rebounder than Bogut, and a better (quicker) help defender as well. Noah is also terrific at defending many guards and wing players on those pick and rolls, one of the best bigs in the league at that.

Bogut is a better post defender (stronger), and of course the bigger threat in the low-post. 

Both are very good passers, though the way Noah can handle the ball in the open court and find guys is unique and a big boost to the team's energy. Bogut cannot do that.

In general I call those 2 guys complete equals, with different strengths and weaknesses. Both have same overall impact on the game.

Oh right this thread is about Brook Lopez...personally I think Lopez is the prototypical "good stats on team" big man. I can't emphasize enough how much easier it is to score and rebound when your team is constantly down by 10+ points. That said, he could still be a very good starting center but needs a superstar badly. He is nowhere near a superstar himself.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

HB said:


> So silly whole me went to NBA.com and lo and behold...


that is silly of you basketball reference and 82 games are better sites


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Lebronathon said:


> Both Lopez brothers are off to a pretty ****ty start. They'd get eaten alive in the 90's.


and they wouldnt even see court time in the 80s


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

e-monk said:


> and they wouldnt even see court time in the 80s


Please, David Greenwood was a starting center in the 80s. They both would have had starting jobs.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

E.H. Munro said:


> Please, David Greenwood was a starting center in the 80s. They both would have had starting jobs.


I think you mean forward or do you have Artis Gilmore at the 4 spot?


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Rigor Artis spent the 80s (for the most part) in San Antonio. David Greenwood was their starting center after he left.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

there were plenty bad centers in the 80s of course.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

E.H. Munro said:


> Rigor Artis spent the 80s (for the most part) in San Antonio. David Greenwood was their starting center after he left.


Greenwood started all 82 games just one time, in 81-82 when he played next to Gilmore in Chicago (for the record Gilmore logged 18/10 on 65% shooting that season) - the next season Greenwood started 61 games in 79 appearances and played less than 2400 minutes - the Bulls starting center for that season and the next was Dave Corzine - certainly nothing flashy but an effective enough bruiser

after that Greenwood was mainly a bench rider except in 86-87 where he once again played next to Gilmore and Mychal Thompson (that was the season Thompson got traded to the Lakers you'll recall) - Greenwood may have logged the occasional minutes at center but he was always a PF as a starter - anyway he was a decent enough rebounder in the mold of a latter day Haslem or such


----------



## Adam (Jan 28, 2003)

yodurk said:


> Noah is a better rebounder than Bogut, and a better (quicker) help defender as well. Noah is also terrific at defending many guards and wing players on those pick and rolls, one of the best bigs in the league at that.
> 
> Bogut is a better post defender (stronger), and of course the bigger threat in the low-post.
> 
> ...


Bogut is clearly better than Noah. He's one of the best defenders in the league and he has a post game. Noah is no slouch but he isn't as good as Bogut who is probably the #2 center in the game.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

kflo said:


> there were plenty bad centers in the 80s of course.


of course the original statement was hyperbole but so was the 90s comment - my point would be that the center position was even better in the 80s when there were more good to great centers and less teams to water down the position - things have been sliding down hill ever since - the 90s obviously had some peaks but plenty of Greg Ostertag, Olden Polynice style valleys of it's own and now we're all valley and we're talking about Brooke Lopez being in the top 5


----------



## Adam (Jan 28, 2003)

It's kind of sad that the big white stiff has gone the way of the buffalo. Today's generation doesn't appreciate the road paved by pioneers like John Koncak.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Adam said:


> Bogut is clearly better than Noah. He's one of the best defenders in the league and he has a post game. Noah is no slouch but he isn't as good as Bogut who is probably the #2 center in the game.


No, he is not "clearly" better. (Bogut as one of the best defenders in the game? He's no slouch there, but that is far from true)

I certainly acknowledge there have been times, especially a long stretch of last season, where Bogut has been better. No doubt about that.

But right now, I don't know how you can make that statement. In fact, Noah has arguably been a notch better than Bogut so far this season.

Add it all up, and they are right in the same tier.


----------



## Adam (Jan 28, 2003)

yodurk said:


> No, he is not "clearly" better. (Bogut as one of the best defenders in the game? He's no slouch there, but that is far from true)
> 
> I certainly acknowledge there have been times, especially a long stretch of last season, where Bogut has been better. No doubt about that.
> 
> ...


Quite a resume. An entire one-tenth season of dominate play. Don't forget Bogut is still rehabbing also.

Bogut's post game is worth too much to put Noah in his tier. That's not something you can gloss over.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

I'd like to see Noah do what Bogut did on the Bucks last year. People have a horrible habit of placing complimentary players up there with core players because of similar numbers.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

e-monk said:


> Greenwood started all 82 games just one time, in 81-82 when he played next to Gilmore in Chicago (for the record Gilmore logged 18/10 on 65% shooting that season) - the next season Greenwood started 61 games in 79 appearances and played less than 2400 minutes - the Bulls starting center for that season and the next was Dave Corzine - certainly nothing flashy but an effective enough bruiser


Since you're forcing me to look it up, Greenwood started 61/79 games in '83, 76/78 the year after. In other words, after Rigor Artis left, he was their starting center. And Corzine was not only "nothing flashy" he was garbage. He wouldn't get time over Semih Erden, much less good NBA big men now. (Pretty much his only skill was blocking out.)



e-monk said:


> of course the original statement was hyperbole but so was the 90s comment - my point would be that the center position was even better in the 80s when there were more good to great centers and less teams to water down the position


Not really, there have never been a lot of good big men. All that's changed is the number of teams. If anything there are more good players in the 6'10" and up category now, but for the last fifteen years or so the big men have developed different skills to adapt to NBA defenses and the rule changes.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

I have Bogut as a top 20 player in this league. Noah isn't even in the same zip code with him, homerism not withstanding. Bogut is one of the best team players in the league. He literally has one of the most unique skillsets in the NBA with his ability to score, pass, rebound and defend at a high level. Noah is a very good player. Noah is not a great player.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Adam said:


> Quite a resume. An entire one-tenth season of dominate play.


Noah was pretty damn good all of last season. Bogut just happened to be better for the latter half.




> Don't forget Bogut is still rehabbing also.


So what, Noah played through a bad case of plantar fascitis from all-star break and beyond; in fact, that was precisely when Bogut was tearing everyone up. Now the tables have turned and suddenly Bogut is the disadvantaged one? Not exactly fair.



> Bogut's post game is worth too much to put Noah in his tier. That's not something you can gloss over.


Bogut has a good post game, but let's not pretend he's Hakeem out there. Likewise, let's not pretend Noah is Dennis Rodman in the low post. The two are closer offensively than you're making them out to be. 

How is this any different than people saying Rajon Rondo is equal to (or even better than) Russell Westbrook or Derrick Rose (guys who score more, but aren't as good in other areas)? The more I think about it, it's the exact same argument.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

E.H. Munro said:


> Since you're forcing me to look it up, Greenwood started 61/79 games in '83, 76/78 the year after. In other words, after Rigor Artis left, he was their starting center. And Corzine was not only "nothing flashy" he was garbage. He wouldn't get time over Semih Erden, much less good NBA big men now. (Pretty much his only skill was blocking out.)
> 
> *good big men of today?*
> 
> ...


between 1964 (not just 1983) and 2008 the average height in the NBA has increased about an inch - the increase in size is all weight - there are a lot less true centers than there used to be and the skill set in the middle and bottom tiers is worse

and we were talking centers not just 'big men', at most previous posters have flirted with including Pau and Duncan in the conversation but even those two have been rebuffed - I would include them - of course I do realize why you'd want to expand the conversation but it has nothing to do with the point that I was putting across regarding the paucity of actual Centers

as for developing different skills for the new era - I dont buy it - I think just about any team would kill to have a Tim Duncan or Pau Gasol playing post up and creating a high efficiency point of attack that forces the defense to collapse - there just arent a lot of guys like that today and that's the real point - Timmy (with the skills of a true center) trumps Dirk (with the skills of a new era 'big') all day long


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Dre™;6404865 said:


> I'd like to see Noah do what Bogut did on the Bucks last year.


He couldn't. I said it above, Bogut's 2nd half of last year was a level Noah can't reach, and probably never will. But that's not what I was commenting on.

My only point is that it's not last year anymore. It's ashame Bogut got hurt, it really is, but he's not at that level anymore. For all we know, it might've been an extended hot streak. It's happened plenty of times to plenty of players. Heck, his own teammate John Salmons is just like that. Looks like an all-star for 40 games and a bench player the next 40 games. I can name many others.

I thought we're ranking players based on who they are right now (the current NBA season), not 6-8 months ago. The sample size is small of course, but it's growing by the day and as time goes on we can make more accurate assessments.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

e-monk said:


> cneters, conversation has been all about centers so far


In the modern era the differences between the C/PF position have shrunk just as the differences between the SG/SF have. So there are seven footers these days that we don't classify as centers, like Garnett & Nowitzki. But if you dropped them into the middle of 1983 coaches would have moved them to the C spot.



e-monk said:


> Gilmore, Moses, Kareem, Parish, Laimbeer, Dan Issell (21/8), Jeff Ruland (19/11), Alvan Adams, Jack Sikma, Mychal Thompson, (even) Joe barely Cares (24/9) - 11 decent to all-time great centers


With all due respect, you just named a man whose nickname was earned by his inability to move (and this was pretty much true of his 80s career), three 6'8"/6'9" guys (Thompson, Issell & Adams) that wouldn't play a single second as defensive anchor these days (Alvin Adams? You may as well try to sell me Brad Miller as a "great center"). Issell & Thompson would be listed as PFs if you dropped them into 2011. (Which is my point about the artificial distinction, you're counting guys that would not play a single second as "center" in the modern NBA in your list of "greats")

That leaves you with Kareem, Moses, Parish, who were all time greats, and Bill Laimbeer, Jack Sikma, Jeff Ruland, & Joe Barry Carroll, who most certainly weren't. (And I should note that I loved Jack Sikma, but like Dave Cowens he was a product of his era, neither would have been able to survive as great starting "centers" thirty years down the road.) In the last decade, in the 6'10" and over category, there have been Timmeh, Shaqopotamus, Dwight Howard, Garnett, Dirk, Amar'e, Yao Ming, Rasheed Wallace, Jermaine O'Neal (who sucks now but was pretty good before injuries took their toll), Andrew Bogut, Pau Gasol, Chris Bosh, Al Jefferson (who's a biblically bad defender, but hey, that wouldn't have been an impediment in the 80s!), Zydrunas Ilgauskas, Joey Noah, and Emeka Okafor. And if I get to include undersized players, I get to toss in Al Horford & David Lee. And we haven't gotten to the Pervis Never in Service Ellison All Stars Bynum & Oden. Of course, there are now 30 teams so they're spread somewhat thinner. But that's really the only difference.



e-monk said:


> between 1964 (not just 1983) and 2008 the average height in the NBA has increased about an inch


That's not really terribly relevant to the discussion.



e-monk said:


> and we were talking centers not just 'big men', at most previous posters have flirted with including Pau and Duncan in the conversation but even those two have been rebuffed


See, you're not fooling me, I was there in the 80s. In the modern game the differences between the the 4 & 5 have become largely semantic, as has the difference between the 2 & 3. You have guys like Boozer that get qualified as PFs even though Chicago may just end up using him as their primary post defender to take advantage of Noah's potential impact as a primary help defender. How about Al Jefferson? He's really not capable of being anything but a poor defensive anchor in a modern defensive set. And if you dropped any of those guys into the 80s, _they would have been moved to the center spot_.



e-monk said:


> as for developing different skills for the new era - I dont buy it - I think just about any team would kill to have a Tim Duncan or Pau Gasol playing post up and creating a high efficiency point of attack that forces the defense to collapse - there just arent a lot of guys like that today and that's the real point - Timmy (with the skills of a true center) trumps Dirk (with the skills of a new era 'big') all day long


I was unaware that Tim Duncan was a star of the 80s. I was under the misimpression that he was a star of the modern era. Silly me. (And Duncan's face up game is superior to most of your list of "great bigs" of the 80s.)


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

Dre™ said:


> I'd like to see Noah do what Bogut did on the Bucks last year. People have a horrible habit of placing complimentary players up there with core players because of similar numbers.



Wait...what? What is difference between Bogut and Noah's role on NBA teams. Noah is a core part. He can definitely be the 3rd best player on a contender.

I'd take Noah over Bogut on my team.


----------



## ATLien (Jun 18, 2002)

Wait, so Noah is definitely clearly better than Al Horford? I didn't realize that was the consensus. I had them on the same tier but now reading this thread I guess he's on 1 tier above.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

ATLien said:


> Wait, so Noah is definitely clearly better than Al Horford? I didn't realize that was the consensus. I had them on the same tier but now reading this thread I guess he's on 1 tier above.


No, it's not the consensus. (In fact I'm pretty sure there's never consensus on this board  )

But me personally, I absolutely put Al Horford right there. Same tier as Noah and Bogut. And yeah even Lopez.

It's worth noting, btw, that Slam's Top 50 rankings had:

#45 Horford
#43 Noah
#39 Bogut
#33 Lopez

That's a fair ranking, it places them all in the same tier, as they should be. 

Also worth noting that they talent and impact between #20 and #40 is very, very small (generally speaking).


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Bet you if you ask how many of those guys you'd start a team with, Horford and Noah wont be ahead of Bogut and Lopez.


----------



## ATLien (Jun 18, 2002)

I used to think of it as Bogut being clearly a tier above the other guys in this discussion. Then in 2nd Horford/Noah, and Lopez after them.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

Adam said:


> Bogut's post game is worth too much to put Noah in his tier. That's not something you can gloss over.


I love how there is apparently a Bogut tier, that Noah isn't a part of.

The only great tier for NBA Centers Should go

*Tier 1* Howard (Gasol and maybe old Timmy if you consider them Centers)

Tier 2 There is at least 5 guys here and Noah, Horford, and Bogut are all certainly here. 

I'm not sure how anyone could put Bogut in a different class then Noah. 
Silly.

And on a side note Noah does get you a couple buckets a game on drives from the ft line and also a basket or 2 on jump hooks from the post. He can also grab a rebound and start your fast break by bringing the ball up the court.

Noah provides offense to a team it is not all garbage buckets and put backs. Although he certainly gets you a few points per game there that other C's don't.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

HB said:


> Bet you if you ask how many of those guys you'd start a team with, Horford and Noah wont be ahead of Bogut and Lopez.


Who would want to start a team with any of them???
LOL

You take bogut or Lopez. I'll take Lebron and then we will build from there...

Fact is any team started with these players and then going down in talent from there is not going to be any good.

All of these guys have to be third options for a truly good team. So when you look at it that way who would you rather have be your third option between these guys??? I think a strong case could be made for all of them.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Diable said:


> I have Bogut as a top 20 player in this league. Noah isn't even in the same zip code with him, homerism not withstanding. Bogut is one of the best team players in the league. He literally has one of the most unique skillsets in the NBA with his ability to score, pass, rebound and defend at a high level. Noah is a very good player. Noah is not a great player.


Which Andrew Bogut are you talking about?

Presumably the one from last year.

Certainly not the one from this year, and definitely not the one from 2005-2009 who was basically an average to slightly-above-above center.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

caseyrh said:


> Who would want to start a team with any of them???
> LOL
> 
> You take bogut or Lopez. I'll take Lebron and then we will build from there...
> ...


Is Lebron on that list? Thanks


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

HB said:


> Bet you if you ask how many of those guys you'd start a team with, Horford and Noah wont be ahead of Bogut and Lopez.


That's not the same thing we're talking about, nor is it the most important.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

HB said:


> Is Lebron on that list? Thanks


Doesn't matter. Your talking about starting a team with 4 players who are going to make a terrible team if you start with them. What's the point?
No sane NBA GM would start a team with any of the guys you mentioned.

Maybe you want to make a run at the euro cup?


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

ATLien said:


> I used to think of it as Bogut being clearly a tier above the other guys in this discussion. Then in 2nd Horford/Noah, and Lopez after them.


Key words being "used to". Let's see Bogut return to his form of last season. 

Until last year, his career was defined by mediocrity. If he gets back to doing what he was doing pre-injury, let's revisit the discussion and I can revise my rankings.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

caseyrh said:


> Doesn't matter. Your talking about starting a team with 4 players who are going to make a terrible team if you start with them. What's the point?
> No sane NBA GM would start a team with any of the guys you mentioned.
> 
> Maybe you want to make a run at the euro cup?


Lol so the other teams that dont have a shot at Bron should do what?


----------



## ATLien (Jun 18, 2002)

yodurk said:


> Key words being "used to". Let's see Bogut return to his form of last season.
> 
> Until last year, his career was defined by mediocrity. If he gets back to doing what he was doing pre-injury, let's revisit the discussion and I can revise my rankings.


Well, the season isn't even 3 weeks old. so I'm still using what I saw last season when I say that. 

To my surprise when I looked up those guys 2010-11 stats, Horford is the leading scorer but yeah. I need more sample size to go on this season & this season alone.


----------



## Adam (Jan 28, 2003)

yodurk said:


> Key words being "used to". Let's see Bogut return to his form of last season.
> 
> Until last year, his career was defined by mediocrity. If he gets back to doing what he was doing pre-injury, let's revisit the discussion and I can revise my rankings.


You're using stats to interpret Bogut's career. Even before when you said he might have just caught fire like Salmons. If you watch Bogut he has been consistent his entire career. The only thing that changed was the system and the culture of the team. People that actually watched him knew he what he could do.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

HB said:


> Lol so the other teams that dont have a shot at Bron should do what?


Pretty sure Lebron was just an example.

His point was you go out and find a legit cornerstone for your franchise in any way possible, and use guys like Bogut, Horford, Lopez, Noah, etc, as your supplements to the cornerstone.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Adam said:


> You're using stats to interpret Bogut's career. Even before when you said he might have just caught fire like Salmons. If you watch Bogut he has been consistent his entire career. The only thing that changed was the system and the culture of the team. People that actually watched him knew he what he could do.


Several of my best friends are from Milwaukee and hardcore Bucks fans, I can say with certainty they were disappointed w/ Bogut up until last season. 

I'm sorry, when you're the #1 overall pick, you aim for a bit more than 12 pts, 9 rebounds, regardless how many intangibles or defensive qualities you bring to the table.

Yeah he's always been consistent and a decent NBA center, just not an all-star type of guy until he started to really get it. The real question is, was it really a breakout or an extended hot streak?


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

yodurk said:


> Pretty sure Lebron was just an example.
> 
> His point was you go out and find a legit cornerstone for your franchise in any way possible, and use guys like Bogut, Horford, Lopez, Noah, etc, as your supplements to the cornerstone.


And I am saying there arent that many, maybe 5-7 guy tops. What are the other 23 or so teams supposed to do?


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

ATLien said:


> Well, the season isn't even 3 weeks old. so I'm still using what I saw last season when I say that.
> 
> To my surprise when I looked up those guys 2010-11 stats, Horford is the leading scorer but yeah. I need more sample size to go on this season & this season alone.


Give me a pick between these 4 guys, and Al Horford is my top choice. And that says something b/c I am a big Noah fan as you probably gathered. 

IMO, Horford is the best defender out of them all, and an underutilized scorer. I'm not surprised at all by his production this year and always thought he'd eventually be a 20-10 guy.


----------



## Adam (Jan 28, 2003)

yodurk said:


> Several of my best friends are from Milwaukee and hardcore Bucks fans, I can say with certainty they were disappointed w/ Bogut up until last season.
> 
> I'm sorry, when you're the #1 overall pick, you aim for a bit more than 12 pts, 9 rebounds, regardless how many intangibles or defensive qualities you bring to the table.
> 
> Yeah he's always been consistent and a decent NBA center, just not an all-star type of guy until he started to really get it. The real question is, was it really a breakout or an extended hot streak?


And several of my friends have hated the way Milwaukee has terrible regimes and guards who take all the shots and don't feed a very skilled big man.

It's not his fault he played with PG's who didn't pass. He always had the ability. The box score doesn't tell the story.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

HB said:


> And I am saying there arent that many, maybe 5-7 guy tops. What are the other 23 or so teams supposed to do?


Well they're screwed, is what they are. It's very hard to build a team backwards (pick your worst players first, and best players last). 

Realistically a GM without a true franchise player will go for best talent available while trying to make skill sets match/supplement each other. 

Depending on what you have in place, I might choose Noah. In other cases, I'll take Bogut, Lopez, or Horford.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

HB said:


> And I am saying there arent that many, maybe 5-7 guy tops. What are the other 23 or so teams supposed to do?


I think Yodurk got my point here. And pretty much explained it for you.

All I'm saying is that nobody should build a team starting with the 4 centers you mentioned. So whats the point?

What's the point in saying these 2 guys are better than those 2 guys because their strengths make them better suited to be a teams best player, when it is blatantly obvious that any of those guys shou;ld never be a good teams best player?

That's all. 

Who cares who makes the better_ best_ player on a team? Look at them for what they all are; good 3rd options.

So if I am building a team and my 3rd pick is one of these guys who do I choose?

That's more relevant.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Brook Lopez is 22, remember that. His upside is pretty good.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

Rebounding and defending are about wanting to rebound and defend. Lopez is 22 and he doesn't want to rebound and defend. When he's 23 will he want to rebound and defend?


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

HB said:


> And I am saying there arent that many, maybe 5-7 guy tops. What are the other 23 or so teams supposed to do?



This has been the history of the NBA. some teams simply have no chance. Even Detroit needed a playoff injury to Karl Malone to break through. The likely hood that you can navigate through 16 postseason wins without one of those top 10 guys (heavily supported) is very small. Which is why I always say that there is no price to great to get one of these players.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

MemphisX said:


> Wait...what? What is difference between Bogut and Noah's role on NBA teams. Noah is a core part. He can definitely be the 3rd best player on a contender.
> 
> I'd take Noah over Bogut on my team.


So Noah could be the third best player on the Heat, Celtics or Lakers and they'd still be the Heat, Celtics and Lakers?


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

um, no


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

Dre™;6405693 said:


> So Noah could be the third best player on the Heat, Celtics or Lakers and they'd still be the Heat, Celtics and Lakers?


Noah instead of Odom or Bynum would improve the lakers.

Noah instead of Bosh would certainly improve the Heat. (Does anyone question this??)

Noah instead of Allen would be an improvement (they would have to reorganize their team to accommodate though.)


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Where'd the Lopez supporter(s) go?


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

caseyrh said:


> Noah instead of Odom or Bynum would improve the lakers.
> 
> 
> *Noah instead of Odom? I realize he's wildly inconsistent but when Odom is on we are unbeatable - I'm not even sure what 'on' for Noah looks like - it certainly doesnt look like a baseline to baseline 6'10" guard who rebounds like a powerforward, can take anyone at his position off the dribble, hit 3s and D up out to the arc
> ...


*you mean they would need to add a guy who does what Allen does and who would be the third best player on the team? yes I agree but that makes Noah not the third best player on the team*


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Joey Noah doesn't have Odom's shooting range, but he'd be a better defender for LA (as the Lakers could let Gasol & Bynum man the post), and he most certainly can pass and take opposing bigs off the dribble. Defensively, if Chicago had found a post defender to play behind him, Noah is capable of having a Garnettesque impact on the game.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

E.H. Munro said:


> Joey Noah doesn't have Odom's shooting range, but he'd be a better defender for LA (as the Lakers could let Gasol & Bynum man the post), and he most certainly can pass and take opposing bigs off the dribble. Defensively, if Chicago had found a post defender to play behind him, Noah is capable of having a Garnettesque impact on the game.


I disagree with the implication that Odom cant guard out to the perimeter - he does it all the time

I also dont think Noah is anywhere close to Odom in terms of ball handling or passing

I dont think we're watching the same guy at all

the Noah I've seen is a post defender/primary rebounder who has an ok jump shot but gets most of his looks inside (67% in fact)- his handle is positionally average, his assists mostly opportunistic - I dont see him leading a break the way Odom can or dropping 15-20% of his team's assists the way Odom has in the past - I dont think they're at all similar


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

e-monk said:


> I disagree with the implication that Odom cant guard out to the perimeter - he does it all the time


I'm not implying that, I'm saying that Noah's better at it when he gets the chance.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

e-monk said:


> *you mean they would need to add a guy who does what Allen does and who would be the third best player on the team? yes I agree but that makes Noah not the third best player on the team*


Apparently you love Odom. I actually like his game also. But he is not as good or as valuable as Noah. If you believe that, fine, but it is just simply not true.

As for the Celtics, Noah is certainly a better player than Allen. It's just that Allen is such a good fit there and they obviously play 2 completely different positions so it is hard to compare.

I forgot about Rondo anyways so for the sake of the discussion let's just do old Garnett v Noah, since they play similar positions and similar roles.

I don't think the Celtics would be a worse team if they traded Garnett for Noah straight up. I think a lot of people tend to think of young Garnett, but that's not what he is anymore.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

caseyrh said:


> I don't think the Celtics would be a worse team if they traded Garnett for Noah straight up. I think a lot of people tend to think of young Garnett, but that's not what he is anymore.


I understand what you're getting at and I agree with the principle of it, but Garnett is such a good fit that it's complicates a comparison like that. Garnett's ability to space the floor with a long-range jumper is a big part of what the Celtics do, it'd be very difficult to play Perkins and Noah together effectively on offense. If Boston had the opportunity to rework the front court a little bit to account for the swap, then yes, I agree. Rondo and Noah getting out on a break together would be a thing of beauty.


----------



## Game3525 (Aug 14, 2008)

caseyrh said:


> *Noah instead of Odom or Bynum would improve the lakers.
> *
> Noah instead of Bosh would certainly improve the Heat. (Does anyone question this??)
> 
> Noah instead of Allen would be an improvement (they would have to reorganize their team to accommodate though.)


No, he doesn't.

Noah is a great hustle player, but give me Odom's versatility and although Drew can never stay healthy, it is rare to find two actually good post players.


----------



## Game3525 (Aug 14, 2008)

caseyrh said:


> Apparently you love Odom. I actually like his game also. But he is not as good or as valuable as Noah. If you believe that, fine, but it is just simply not true.
> 
> As for the Celtics, Noah is certainly a better player than Allen. It's just that Allen is such a good fit there and they obviously play 2 completely different positions so it is hard to compare.
> 
> ...


He isn't prime KG, but he is still a better overall player then Noah. IMO, he is still one of the best defenders in the league.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

Game3525 said:


> No, he doesn't.
> 
> Noah is a great hustle player, but give me Odom's versatility and although Drew can never stay healthy, it is rare to find two actually good post players.


Honestly the Noah V Odom argument is one-sided. I get that you are a laker fan and all but Odom is simply not a better or a more valuable player then Noah. I won't even spend the time going in depth with this argument, because everything of consequence points to Noah being better. He's better at what's measurable(stats) and he's better at what's immeasurable (defense), he's clearly a better rebounder. The only thing Odom is better at than Noah is ball-handling. 

As for the bynum thing I would rather just avoid it, the guy has received a ton of unwarranted hype and so it is tough to argue with people about him because his name recognition is so much greater than his impact. Just to simplify my stance with out getting into it, I think Noah is much better than Bynum. And it's not just Noah, I think there are quite a few Centers in the NBA better than Bynum (10ish).


----------



## Game3525 (Aug 14, 2008)

caseyrh said:


> Honestly the Noah V Odom argument is one-sided. I get that you are a laker fan and all but Odom is simply not a better or a more valuable player then Noah. I won't even spend the time going in depth with this argument, because everything of consequence points to Noah being better. He's better at what's measurable(stats) and he's better at what's immeasurable (defense), he's clearly a better rebounder. The only thing Odom is better at than Noah is ball-handling.
> 
> As for the bynum thing I would rather just avoid it, the guy has received a ton of unwarranted hype and so it is tough to argue with people about him because his name recognition is so much greater than his impact. Just to simplify my stance with out getting into it, I think Noah is much better than Bynum. And it's not just Noah, I think there are quite a few Centers in the NBA better than Bynum (10ish).


You don't get it, for the Lakers it is about pieces fitting together, Odom simply is a better fit on this team, and it is because of his versatility. There are not many 6-11 guys out there who can dribble like a guard, rebounding like 4, and has decent range. 

He is the prefect 6 man for this team.

Bynum's problem is he is never healthy, but when he is healthy he is difference maker out there, and is huge for the team.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

caseyrh said:


> Apparently you love Odom. I actually like his game also. But he is not as good or as valuable as Noah. If you believe that, fine, but it is just simply not true.
> 
> *You seem to think Noah is pretty special - so let me ask you, with Boozer out and Rose and Deng the only viable offensive options on the team why isnt he stepping into the void and scoring more than 16ppg on junk and put-backs? he is what he is, which is fine but he's a post defender, primary rebounder with limited offensive game who gets by on intensity and hustle. he's not that versatile and he's not that special - believe whatever you want *
> 
> ...


Noah is not nearly as battle tested and game wise as KG and he doesnt have half the tools that KG still has at his disposal


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

The problem with the argument is that Noah, KG, Odom, Jesus and Bindhim are such unique talents with unique roles for their current teams it is hard to imagine them replacing each other and playing different roles.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

e-monk said:


> Noah is not nearly as battle tested and game wise as KG and he doesnt have half the tools that KG still has at his disposal


Whats up with you quoting me and then answering inside my quote but in bold? It just confuses the discussion.

Just quote different parts of my comment and then respond outside of the quotes.


Anyways why doesn't Noah score more than 16 ppg?

I don't know that's kind of a lot for a third option right???

How many would you like him to score? 20?

Really bad argument against Noah.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

e-monk said:


> Noah is not nearly as battle tested and game wise as KG and he doesnt have half the tools that KG still has at his disposal
> 
> no he isnt - when is the last time Noah lit up an opponent for 35 points? how about last night? did he do it last night? oh, sorry no that was Ray Allen


Oh and he did score 26 points against the *Celtics* this year and he did it on only 13 fg attempts.

So is that impressive or does he have to get 35?


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

caseyrh said:


> Whats up with you quoting me and then answering inside my quote but in bold? It just confuses the discussion.
> 
> Just quote different parts of my comment and then respond outside of the quotes.
> 
> ...


What is Bynum? How much did he score? On a championship team?

Noah doesn't score because he can't. And if he had any success teams would plan for it and he would reek of inefficiency.


----------



## Game3525 (Aug 14, 2008)

MemphisX said:


> The problem with the argument is that Noah, KG, Odom, Jesus and Bindhim are such unique talents with unique roles for their current teams it is hard to imagine them replacing each other and playing different roles.


Exactly.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

Jamel Irief said:


> What is Bynum? How much did he score? On a championship team?
> 
> Noah doesn't score because he can't. And if he had any success teams would plan for it and he would reek of inefficiency.


Noah is scoring 16 ppg as a teams 3rd option. How does that make him not able to score?

If they aren't planning for his offense then they probably should. Because Chicago needs every single one of those 16 he brings to the table.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Diable said:


> Rebounding and defending are about wanting to rebound and defend. Lopez is 22 and he doesn't want to rebound and defend. When he's 23 will he want to rebound and defend?


Lol he doesn't want to defend? Okie dokie


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

HB said:


> Lol he doesn't want to defend? Okie dokie


Thats all you can come with at this point?


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

I could bring up quotes by him, his coach and others who differ. There's one thing to not want to play defense, there's another to not have the ability to play defense. He's just not as quick on his feet as his brother. He will never be a good defender.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

caseyrh said:


> Noah is scoring 16 ppg as a teams 3rd option. How does that make him not able to score?
> 
> If they aren't planning for his offense then they probably should. Because Chicago needs every single one of those 16 he brings to the table.


well here's the thing - it's 16ppg on junk and put-backs - they cant run plays for him, he's not a shot maker, Thibadeau is not sitting there thinking "now how can I spring Noah a look at the elbow?" - maybe the P&R but hell, he just doesnt seem to be all you're cracking him up to be


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

caseyrh said:


> Whats up with you quoting me and then answering inside my quote but in bold? It just confuses the discussion.
> 
> *I guess you are easily confused*
> 
> ...


he's limited, does two things well - will be the 4th best option on a team that wont get past the second round when Boozer gets back 

so how about that one for an argument? - he'll be the 4th best player on the Bulls behind Deng, Rose and Boozer and they arent getting past the second round - that's the trump to your whole 3rd best player on a serious championship contender argument right there, because even if you want to say he's better than Deng that makes him the third option you propose and guess what? second round - not serious contention


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Jamel Irief said:


> What is Bynum? How much did he score? On a championship team?
> 
> .


if memory serves as a second option while Pau was out it was something like 20ppg on excellent efficiency - Bynum healthy is about conservatively ">> and a half another >" better than Noah (of course Bynum healthy is the question isnt it?)


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

Dear E-monk,

You clearly have a bad understanding of Noah's game. You also seem to not value defense and rebounding. Furthermore, you are out of touch with what how many points 3rd options score.

not worth arguing with you,

peace


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

e-monk said:


> if memory serves as a second option while Pau was out it was something like 20ppg on excellent efficiency - Bynum healthy is about conservatively ">> and a half another >" better than Noah (of course Bynum healthy is the question isnt it?)


Yep. There are only 3 centers in the NBA I feel that can average 20-10 as a first or second option. Yao, Bynum and Howard. 

I wouldn't feel confident Noah would average 20 if the team begged him to.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

I know the thread starter is watching Lopez right now. That's why you dont make such silly threads just 9 games into the season, this guy is too good of an offensive player to keep playing poorly. Notice how he has pretty much taken Dwight to school tonight. Just a vastly superior offensive player.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

Good to see Brook starting to get over his fear of Dwights. That 12ppg on 40% shooting for his career against Howard was becoming kind of sad.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

caseyrh said:


> Dear E-monk,
> 
> You clearly have a bad understanding of Noah's game. You also seem to not value defense and rebounding. Furthermore, you are out of touch with what how many points 3rd options score.
> 
> ...


here's the deal - you are wrong and simply saying that I am wrong doesnt prove anything 

for my part to back up my argument I can quote statistics - I am sure you will not like me quoting my statistics because they are somehow 'besides the point' or not as good as watching the game (which of course amounts to the same thing as not good for your argument)

but what if I watch the same game as you and you and I draw clearly different conclusions as to what's happening? well I say, let's let the stats do some talking

for instance I can tell you that 67% of Noah's shots come from inside and that about only a third of his shots are jumpers and that he's not that efficient at the mid-range (45% from 12'-18') 

I can tell you that there are at least 3 Bulls recieving significant minutes more likely to terminate a possession with a shot - by my lights that makes him the 4th offensive option

I can tell you that he's pulling down 13% of his team's offensive rebounds and 20% of their rebounds overall 

I can tell you that half his shots come in the first 12 seconds of the shot clock (dont you just love 82 games?) and that the later in the clock he holds the ball the bigger the chance that he's about to get his shot stuffed back in his face (the likelihood triples)

these are facts, statistically speaking - they describe the player I've described in my previous posts and have little or nothing to do with the delusional bs you've been plying

he's a limited offensive 4th option who gets most of his points on junk and put backs who does his team's dirty work down low (leads the team in defensive win share, blocks, rebounds etc) there have been many like him over the years - very valuable in their way

but dont kid yourself about who understands what - that smell is your own crap and the reason it's so pervasive has to do with where you've decided to stick your head


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

HB said:


> I know the thread starter is watching Lopez right now. That's why you dont make such silly threads just 9 games into the season, this guy is too good of an offensive player to keep playing poorly. Notice how he has pretty much taken Dwight to school tonight. Just a vastly superior offensive player.


5 rebounds in 37 minutes?


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Pretty sure we all know he is a weak rebounder, but he is the most skilled big man in the game not named Pau Gasol.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

HB said:


> Pretty sure we all know he is a weak rebounder, but he is the most skilled big man in the game not named Pau Gasol.


lol, I don't know about that.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Who's better? Kevin Love? :laugh:


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

HB said:


> Pretty sure we all know he is a weak rebounder, but he is the most skilled big man in the game not named Pau Gasol.


Freaking homer...lmao.


----------



## Wade County (Jun 22, 2003)

I would say Kevin Love is a better player than Brook Lopez.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

:laugh: You think Pat Riley would take Love over Lopez? #okbye


----------



## Wade County (Jun 22, 2003)

I didn't say Pat Riley would. I said I would.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Which is why we are both posting on a message board thankfully


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Love is such an incredible rebounder (and no I'm not basing this just off 30/30 rock) I'd have to say I'd rather have him playing in my lineup than Lopez.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

e-monk said:


> here's the deal - you are wrong and simply saying that I am wrong doesnt prove anything
> 
> for my part to back up my argument I can quote statistics - I am sure you will not like me quoting my statistics because they are somehow 'besides the point' or not as good as watching the game (which of course amounts to the same thing as not good for your argument)
> 
> ...


LOL who are you even comparing him too?

All you did was list obscure stats without any relevance. you list all of these stats without comparing them to anyone...

You also say he's the 4th option. And I know is he is the third leading scorer right now. But who cares what option he is. He certainly is the second _best_ player on the bulls. And isn't that the point.

He's also not even a stat guy, like say AMare is a stat guy. Noah is the type of player that does all of the dirty work a team needs their bigs to do. He is also an excellent defender.

But if you want to measure him statistically then he is averaging 14 rebounds. Scoring 16 ppg. And has a 21.32 PER.

This is before the game tonight in which he just had 21 and 9.

Anyways I'm not sure who you are trying to say is better than him. But go ahead and put forth a name and then we can take a gander at their stats and see how they matchup...

If it's Bynum you want to compare... Go ahead and use last years stats against Noah this year (since he's injured _again_). But please realize 2 things. Bynum played 30 mpg last year Noah plays 39 mpg this year. Noah is also a much better defender which isn't statistically measureable.

But from what I can tell even in considerably more minutes Noah is still more efficient statistically than Bynum which says quite a bit about this comparison.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Wade County said:


> I would say Kevin Love is a better player than Brook Lopez.


Pretty much. Seems like someone is in denial. Lets do a poll Lopez vs. Love.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Lopez might make the all-star team, lol and Love is somehow better? Y'all think Love could have frustrated Dwight like Brook did tonight? Get real! You can run your offense through Brook, can the same be said about Love? I'll take the words of guys like KG, TD, Shaq etc HOF bigs who have all praised Brook's game to a bunch of stats watchers on a message board #okbye


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

HB said:


> Lopez might make the all-star team, lol and Love is somehow better? Y'all think Love could have frustrated Dwight like Brook did tonight? Get real! You can run your offense through Brook, can the same be said about Love? I'll take the words of guys like KG, TD, Shaq etc HOF bigs who have all praised Brook's game to a bunch of stats watchers on a message board #okbye


LMAO...Chris Kaman made the All Star team in the West.

Yeah, you can run the offense through Brook, if you want to win 25 games or so. I am sure the same can be done with Kevin Love.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

HB said:


> I know the thread starter is watching Lopez right now. That's why you dont make such silly threads just 9 games into the season, this guy is too good of an offensive player to keep playing poorly. Notice how he has pretty much taken Dwight to school tonight. Just a vastly superior offensive player.


Actually I wasn't, but by the looks of it Howard barely played half the game due to foul trouble, but congrats to Brook for making more than half his shots for the first time since opening night. What an accomplishment for a 7 footer. Do you think I started this thread thinking Lopez would shoot under 40% for the entire year? It's pathetic for him to have a stretch of games like that, ever. No need for you to blow a load over 23 and 5 (in a loss) for a guy you claim is one of the best big men in the league.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

The coaches selected Kamam to the team, it's not like clueless fans voted him in....I guess Zbo wasn't deserving too right? Smdh. Actually put Lopez on the clippers with that type of talent and they are automatically better. Love the way you dodged the KG, TD and Shaq portions of my post though. As for hobojoe it's pointless going through this with you if you didn't watch the game. It's the way Brook scored. This guy was scoring from all over, even WITH Dwight in the game. I'll be shocked if his FG% doesn't dramatically increase in the next 5 games. Lopez is getting little to no help from his teammates, Harris is the only other reliable player on that roster.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

There's due time for everything. We will see one way or the other.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

HB said:


> Lopez might make the all-star team, lol and Love is somehow better? Y'all think Love could have frustrated Dwight like Brook did tonight? Get real! You can run your offense through Brook, can the same be said about Love? I'll take the words of guys like KG, TD, Shaq etc HOF bigs who have all praised Brook's game to a bunch of stats watchers on a message board #okbye


Lopez might make the All-Star team? Dude, you are way bigger homer of the Nets than even I am of the Zags. Its that bad. 

Love wouldn't have guarded Dwight tonight, because he's a PF and Lopez is a C. Dwight isn't exactly skilled offensively. Push him out of the block and he has problems.

Dude's playing the 5 spot and averages 6 rebounds a game and shoots 38% from the field despite being a legit 7 footer. Shoot, off the top of my head Howard, Hibbert, Horford, Bogut, Noah and maybe even McGee are all better bigs than Lopez in just the Eastern Conference.

Give me some links of those guys praising Lopez. I want to read it.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

HB said:


> The coaches selected Kamam to the team, it's not like clueless fans voted him in....I guess Zbo wasn't deserving too right? Smdh. Actually put Lopez on the clippers with that type of talent and they are automatically better. L*ove the way you dodged the KG, TD and Shaq portions of my post though.* As for hobojoe it's pointless going through this with you if you didn't watch the game. It's the way Brook scored. This guy was scoring from all over, even WITH Dwight in the game. I'll be shocked if his FG% doesn't dramatically increase in the next 5 games. Lopez is getting little to no help from his teammates, Harris is the only other reliable player on that roster.


Not a dodge, don't think it is relevant to my argument. Players always speak fondly of young players when the young players local media guys ask about him.

Like I said from the start of this thread, Brook Lopez will look decent as long as the other team does not take the Nets seriously. I didn't watch the game but I am willing to bet that Orlando didn't double team him at all.

You say Lopez is not getting any help...HE SHOULD BE FREAKING HELPING THE OTHER PLAYERS GET GOOD LOOKS. 

How can I take you seriously when you say he is the 2nd most skilled big in the league, yet he has a whopping 10 assists in 9 games while shooting sub 40%? I mean are you just being funny or what? He isn't even in the top 20 of most skilled bigs in the NBA right now.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

LOL Orlando rarely doubles any bigs, why would they when they've got Dwight BUT I can guarantee you other teams will double Brook of which you do make a good pt, he still doesn't pass well out of double trans bit guess what though he's still 22, still room for improvement. As for getting other teammates open looks, Outlaw and Humphries benefit from dude.

As for Lovefan, Slam and I believe ESPN said he will make the all-star team this year, many publications last year said he shoulda made it because of the Nets record. Posting from my phone can't get the links yet.

Ps Amare can't get 10rbs a game, you gon take Love over him?


----------



## rayz789 (Oct 30, 2008)

MemphisX said:


> Not a dodge, don't think it is relevant to my argument. Players always speak fondly of young players when the young players local media guys ask about him.
> 
> Like I said from the start of this thread, Brook Lopez will look decent as long as the other team does not take the Nets seriously. I didn't watch the game but I am willing to bet that Orlando didn't double team him at all.
> 
> ...


*At this moment i feel Lopez as far as offenence is concern with his post up, fadeaways, hook shots, midrange jump shots. I think he's also the second best most skilled big man. It doesn't mean he's the best player or the best center. It means just by his offensive skills alone.*


----------



## rayz789 (Oct 30, 2008)

zagsfan20 said:


> Lopez might make the All-Star team? Dude, you are way bigger homer of the Nets than even I am of the Zags. Its that bad.
> 
> Love wouldn't have guarded Dwight tonight, because he's a PF and Lopez is a C. Dwight isn't exactly skilled offensively. Push him out of the block and he has problems.
> 
> ...


The Mcgee, Horford? Hibbert are better bigs then Lopez???? LMFAO!!!!! First off Horford is not a true center and he's not the 2nd, 3rd, 4th option with The Hawks. Hibbert? lol man stfu. Mcgee? Come on seriously are you stupid? I wouldn't argue with Bogut but i feel Lopez offense is more complete then Bogut. The only think Noah has over Lopez is basically rebounds and a bit better in blocks. <<But that don't proved he's better then Lopez.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

Nazr MOhammed is better too.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

rayz789 said:


> The Mcgee, Horford? Hibbert are better bigs then Lopez???? LMFAO!!!!! First off Horford is not a true center and he's not the 2nd, 3rd, 4th option with The Hawks. Hibbert? lol man stfu. Mcgee? Come on seriously are you stupid? I wouldn't argue with Bogut but i feel Lopez offense is more complete then Bogut. The only think Noah has over Lopez is basically rebounds and a bit better in blocks. <<But that don't proved he's better then Lopez.


I was stretching with McGee. But, Horford and Hibbert absolutely. Without a doubt.

Look at their numbers, watch them a couple times. Then get back to me. RayZ and HB must be clinching to the hope that Lopez is the franchise savior from out there in the swamp lands.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

HB said:


> LOL Orlando rarely doubles any bigs, why would they when they've got Dwight BUT I can guarantee you other teams will double Brook of which you do make a good pt, he still doesn't pass well out of double trans bit guess what though he's still 22, still room for improvement. As for getting other teammates open looks, Outlaw and Humphries benefit from dude.
> 
> As for Lovefan, Slam and I believe ESPN said he will make the all-star team this year, many publications last year said he shoulda made it because of the Nets record. Posting from my phone can't get the links yet.
> 
> Ps Amare can't get 10rbs a game, you gon take Love over him?


I want actual links of Shaq and KG giving him props. I think you're full of it.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Horford is shooting nearly double what Lopez is from the floor. Horford is making buckets at a 64% clip to Lopez' 38%. Averages more boards a game and is a much, much better defender.

Hibbert is averaging 16ppg, while shooting at a 47% clip, 9 boards a game, almost 4 assists a game and over 3 blocks a game!!!

Lopez is probably the 5th or 6th best Center in the East. If the AS game was tomorrow, Hibbert should be Dwight's backup.


----------



## GrandKenyon6 (Jul 19, 2005)

Brook Lopez isn't making the All-Star team this season. Why would he get selected ahead of Noah, Horford, Stoudemire, even an injured Bogut..heck, Roy Hibbert is putting up better numbers.

I like Brook Lopez. He is a very good building block to have at the hardest position to fill, but Nets fans are deluding themselves in thinking that he is a franchise player.

Lopez is dreadful at reading double teams, is a poor rebounder, poor defender, and has trouble establishing position down low. When he does establish position he often gets pushed out by smaller players. Many of his shots are forced and his moves are predictable and mechanical. He's very weak around the basket.

He's a very good shooter with range out to the top of key, he's a terrific free throw shooter, and his post moves are improving, but he's not someone a good team is ever going to run an offense through. He's never going to be a take over the game type player.

I see Lopez as a third option or maybe a second option if he improves significantly and slightly above an Ilgauskas/Brad Miller level player (which is not a knock as they both made a couple All-Star teams).


----------



## rayz789 (Oct 30, 2008)

GrandKenyon6 said:


> Brook Lopez isn't making the All-Star team this season. *Why would he get selected ahead of Noah, Horford, Stoudemire, even an injured Bogut..heck, Roy Hibbert is putting up better numbers.*
> I like Brook Lopez. He is a very good building block to have at the hardest position to fill, but Nets fans are deluding themselves in thinking that he is a franchise player.
> 
> Lopez is dreadful at reading double teams, is a poor rebounder, poor defender, and has trouble establishing position down low. When he does establish position he often gets pushed out by smaller players. Many of his shots are forced and his moves are predictable and mechanical. He's very weak around the basket.
> ...



Lopez gets double team alot for a reason cause he is a very good player. Does Hibbert, Noah, Horford gets double team more then Lopez? Behonest. Lopez show last night that when he's on, he's the best second big with great skills behind Pau. Hell last night Most of Lopez points were by Howard guarding him. Has Noah, Horford, Hibbert score alot of points on Howard? If Lopez was traded to the hawks for horford i bet lopez would be in the second option on that team. Not the 4th option like horford who is is the 4th option behind johnson, smith, crawford.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Why would anyone doubleteam anyone on the Nets? They're going to lose anyway. I guess Nets fans have to act like their presence in an arena isn't a jogging night for most opposition, but everyone else knows better.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

YOu double team some guys because they're good. Other guys you double because they are incapable of dealing with a double team. Lopez is a guy you double to force turnovers and bad decisions. WHen JJ Hickson was at NC State everyone doubled him constantly, because he was a young kid who didn't know what he was supposed to do about it and he always made a mistake.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

:laugh: at stats watchers telling guys that watch the game who is being doubled or not. See this is what ticks me off about this board. You sit behind your comfy comps, go to NBA.com and make judgments. I understand dude is shooting poorly, but do you really think a guy that skilled is going to keep doing that for long? They double team him because he will destroy most defenders in single coverage. If you watched the game against Dwight the best interior defender in the game, you'd know this. You can take shots about his defense, about his rebounding but don't question his offense if you dont watch games. You are comparing him to role players like Horford and Noah, system guys that will never get doubled. Puhhlease. Again if you surround Brook with the type of talent say Dwight has, you can run your offense through him because teams have to pay attention to him in the paint. The only guy y'all have mentioned that makes sense is Hibbert, but the Pacers aren't exactly piling on wins either. There's a reason why they compare Brook to Duncan and as for Lovefan

*Shaq*



> "Reminds me of ... I'm going to go with Tim Duncan," O'Neal said. "Classy guy. You'll never hear about him getting in trouble. Great moves, great composure, and you're really not going to faze him. A couple guys will probably try to rough him up, but that's not going to faze him. Good player. Good player."


*Doc Rivers (Sorry I got it wrong on that, it was not KG that heaped praises on him, that guy doesn't like anyone)*



> "Brook Lopez is going to be great if he continues to work," Celtics coach Doc Rivers said. "Right now Brook is the picture of the Nets. He is the guy.


*Duncan and others chime in
*



> “He’s a very promising rookie,” Duncan said. “He’s got good touch, I think he played even better the second time than he did the first time and I think it’s just about him getting some experience. I think he’s headed in the right direction; I don’t think there’s any pointers he needs in that respect. It’s just about continuing to work and not being satisfied with where you’re at.”


Oh wait, Love's coach is in on this too



> Rookies coach Kurt Rambis, Phil Jackson’s head assistant on the Los Angeles Lakers, believes Lopez has all the characteristics necessary to succeed as an NBA post player. He praised Lopez’s rebounding and willingness to bang inside, which requires a physicality often intimidates young players.
> 
> Lopez took over as a starter when incumbent Josh Boone suffered a bone bruise in the season’s seventh game. The younger player has unquestionably claimed the role as his own, evidenced by season averages of 12.3 points (.508 FG%), 8.3 rebounds and 1.9 blocks. His defense has steadily improved, and his offense has progressed enough that Nets coach Lawrence Frank reoriented his offense to feature more screen-and-rolls with Lopez and guards Devin Harris and Vince Carter.
> 
> ...





> “He’s pretty good,” Scola said. “He’s having a great season, he’s a good player. I like him a lot.”












Now some clown will tell me I am a homer for actually bringing facts to the table instead of opinions. Jokers.

Stats are nice, but you sometimes watching games clears up a lot of things, A LOT! Lopez is not Duncan, he's not as strong, neither is he as nimble. But its clear to anyone who watches both that Lopez tries to emulate Duncan. Its an insult to Lopez that he is being compared to players like Love, Horford and Noah. The GMs of the teams those guys play on will gladly take him over those guys.

P.s. no one said he is a franchise player btw. Dont know where y'all get this wild ideas from.


----------



## King Joseus (May 26, 2003)

I'm not getting involved, but I found this funny:


> *Doc Rivers (Sorry I got it wrong on that, it was not KG that heaped praises on him, that guy doesn't like anyone)*
> 
> 
> 
> > "Brook Lopez is going to be great if he continues to work," Celtics coach Doc Rivers said. "*Right now Brook is the picture of the Nets.* He is the guy.


Is that really a good thing? :laugh:


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Well for a guy most publications call the second best center in the East or is it the NBA....whichever, how exactly is that a bad thing? You have to surround him with talent


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

LMAO...he did appear promising as a rookie. Now he is just a guy. Currently he has to much role for his game. The Nets season should be over in a month and his stats will go up.

Curiously, no free agents or trade targets are in a hurry to ride Lopez to NBA success. I couldn't imagine Dwight Howard's team having so much capspace and only being able to lure Travis Outlaw.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Lol so now its Lopez' fault that FA didn't want to go and play in NJ. Yeah Newark is such an appealing place. Wait till they get to Brookyln wont ya.

As for Lopez, again its 9 games into the season, if we go by your logic, might as well just call the season over now, thankfully Avery is a different breed of coach. He doesn't pack it in. Even if they don't win games, that team will be competitive as evidenced by last night's game.

Weird how a Grizzlies fan is talking so much smack though, lol shouldn't y'all be worried about Conley's contract or something?


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

I'd take Horford over Lopez every day of the week. Stats so far this season: 
Al Horford 16.3 ppg 9 boards 66.7 ts% 3.3 assists per game
Brook Lopez 17.3 ppg 5.9 rebounds 47.4 ts% 1.1 assists per game

Horford is also a much better defender. He's not as a good shotblocker but he's a great man to man defender and constantly pressures the ball. I don't know why you pretend to be insulted that Lopez is compared Horford. Horford has improved his shooting efficiency ever year in the league and a great complimentary big man. He's also one of the best passing big men in the league.


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

I don't really buy this Lopez is a great player because he gets double teamed argument. Maybe they double team him because they know he's going to either a) force a bad shot b) make a bad decision with the ball. Most top end post players that get double teamed often are able to get 2 to 3 assists per game by finding the open man when they get double teamed. It doesn't speak well about Lopez that he is double teamed and is unable to do anything productive for his team when that happens.


----------



## ATLien (Jun 18, 2002)

Horford is also an all-star. 28 & 10 today. This guy is nothing to sneeze at. He could be averaging even more if he played on a loser team like Nets or Wolves.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

:laugh: Its easy to say stuff like this when you have the luxury of playing on the 4th best team in the East. I won't go down that route with you. Horford is a nice player, but he's not better than JJ or Smith on that team. Pretty sure teams are more concerned about shutting those two down instead of him. Put Lopez on a team where's the 3rd option and see how easy scoring becomes for him.

I would think Kenneth would be smart enough to know the difference between the 3rd option on a team and the primary offense on another, and how different defenses play them.


----------



## ATLien (Jun 18, 2002)

So he's the third option and putting up better numbers than Lopez who is the first option on his team, & thats why Lopez is better. Makes sense to me


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

One guy gets open looks A LOT, one guy will be damn lucky if he gets any open looks all game long. I'll try to take this down to elementary level for you, who do you think will put up more effective numbers, the guy who defenses arent out to shut down, or the one that gets defenses harassing all game long?


----------



## ATLien (Jun 18, 2002)

Defense and rebounding has nothing to do w/ open looks tho.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Well I give him that, he's a better rebounder and defender, but again Horford is playing with some talented dudes. Josh Smith should have made the all star game last year.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

lol. HB calls people NBA.com watchers. I watch just as much of the league as you do. I have league pass and take in a couple games a night. I've seen the Nets 3 or 4 times this year. As I've seen most teams about that amount. 

Lopez is a typical case of a player being exposed for his weaknesses the more he plays. During a players 3rd year in the league he should be figuring it out and numbers gradually increasing. Lopez' numbers have been slipping. Those quotes were taken on the premise that Lopez' would do what most prospects do and gradually get better. 

To act like everybody in here just reads stats from NBA.com and doesn't watch the games is silly. Do I catch every game of the players that I'm comparing to Lopez? No. But, neither do you. I know the league well though, I'm an NBA geek. Lopez is a solid player, not spectacular and way too many holes in his game to want to build around him. He's got a feathery touch, sure. Can't rebound or defend for **** (something that you always dog Love about) and looks flustered when he's see's a double team. 

He reminds me a lot of LaMarcus Aldridge of my Blazers. A good player, but way over-hyped by his fanbase.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

I am telling you its 9 games into the season and if he plays like he played against Dwight last night, there's no way he isnt putting up at least 20ppg shooting over 50% from the field for the rest of the season. Nice how you arent saying I am full of it once I dropped a bunch of FACTS to back up my earlier points. Smdh


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

HB said:


> I am telling you its 9 games into the season and if he plays like he played against Dwight last night, there's no way he isnt putting up at least 20ppg shooting over 50% from the field for the rest of the season. Nice how you arent saying I am full of it once I dropped a bunch of FACTS to back up my earlier points. Smdh


I brought up facts too. You ignore the facts I bring up. Those quotes are cool and all, but a couple years old. Its all about what have you done for me lately in this league.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

Facts aren't cool, they make you an NBA.com watcher.

But hey HB look on the bright side, he's not the only 7-footer struggling with his offensive efficiency; Darko is officially shooting under 30% from the floor now.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

See you after all star break Joe :laugh:


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

HB said:


> See you after all star break Joe :laugh:


The fact that you think I'm going to be shocked when Lopez strings together some good games and nice stat lines proves you don't get it.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Get what? The thread is dumb, you start a thread about a guy shooting poorly after 5 games and then say the fact that if he strings together a couple of good games he wont be shocked. You know damn well by the time the season is over he will be shooting well in the 50s. What exactly is your point then?

Dude you didnt even watch the Nets when they played your home team Orlando, I am somehow supposed to believe that your information from Brook isn't from NBA.com?


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

Most people are not going off stats in this thread though. I'm using personal observation since his college years. He ain't changed. He is a somewhat offensively skilled 7 footer who will score well if left to roam but struggles any time defenses focus on him. This is not 9 games...it is year 5.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

That's actually pretty ignorant to say he hasn't changed since his college years. The ONLY move he had in his college year was the hook shot. That was it. He used his size and height to bully people. Somewhat offensively skilled NBA center? Lol this guy has got range up to the perimeter, he can pull off a series of moves in the post, actually look at rayz' post on how much he can do on offense, how is that anything like what he did in college? 

Look these NBA blogs, publications, writers etc arent just calling this guy the 2nd best center in the East/league for nothing. This is going by what they have seen. He still needs to work on rebounding, but even if he isn't a great rebounder, he can make up for that with more effort on the defensive end. You clearly don't know what you are talking about though (since you think he is pretty much the same player for the last 5 years), guy's PPG, RPG and APG have improved every year, I don't see any reason why this year wont be any different.


----------



## rayz789 (Oct 30, 2008)

Horford is really the 4th option behind Johnson, Smith, Crawford with the hawks. If Lopez was traded to the hawks for horford i bet lopez would either be the 2nd option or the 3rd option. Horford a better defender? lol. He doesn't even avarage much of 1 block per games lol but he's better defender? HAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!! Horford gets most of his points by shooting midrange jumpshots when he's open. Horford clearly doesn't work his way to get his points like Lopez does. So whats next Horford is better then Dirk cause he avarage more rebounds and is so called a better defender? lol Come on.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

lol, cause blocking shots is the sign of a great defender. Chuck Hayes never blocks shots and is a generous 6'6", but he is one of the best post defenders in the league. Lopez is a good weakside help defender, but he's a garbage post defender. I've seen that with my own two eyes, this isn't something I just pulled off NBA.com.

Horford is great at defending the post.


----------



## rayz789 (Oct 30, 2008)

zagsfan20 said:


> lol, cause blocking shots is the sign of a great defender. Chuck Hayes never blocks shots and is a generous 6'6", but he is one of the best post defenders in the league. Lopez is a good weakside help defender, but he's a garbage post defender. I've seen that with my own two eyes, this isn't something I just pulled off NBA.com.
> 
> Horford is great at defending the post.


If Horford is great at defending then his hawks should win atleast 1 game in the second round in the playoffs. Big z abuse Horford in that series. Howard just murder Horford badly. It was like watching a man vs a child. Perkins who is a real post defender gave Howard hell in last year playoff series. Horford defense? Please.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

rayz789 said:


> If Horford is great at defending then his hawks should win atleast 1 game in the second round in the playoffs. Big z abuse Horford in that series. Howard just murder Horford badly. It was like watching a man vs a child. Perkins who is a real post defender gave Howard hell in last year playoff series. Horford defense? Please.


Horford was an All-Star last year for a reason.



> Horford was a rarity this season--an All-Star selected primarily on the strength of his defense. Not that Horford can't score, mind you, but his development into a defensive anchor has been even more rapid. His numbers are uniformly solid. Horford is quick enough to defend on the perimeter and physical enough to defend in the paint.


http://www.basketballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=1071



> Defensively, he’s more important than either position. Al rarely gets his due because of Josh Smith’s out-of-control defensive reputation and the perception that Joe Johnson has retained his defensive adequacy from the wonder years, but there should be no question that the Hawks’ defensive competence hinges on Horford.





> Smith is a tremendous help-side shot-blocker, but it’s Horford that’s properly hedging, switching when necessary, and rotating to help every one of his teammates.


http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/11/10/where-does-al-horford-fit-in-the-positional-revolution/


This is the truth, I'm not just pulling it out of my ass.


----------



## hroz (Mar 4, 2006)

I feel Horford is playing out of position too.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Horford isnt a center


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

HB said:


> Horford isnt a center


Fact is he plays Center. He plays it well too.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Horford plays so much actual Center you really have no choice but to compare him to other Centers.


----------



## GrandKenyon6 (Jul 19, 2005)

Lopez had his first double digit rebounding game of the season today.


----------



## jmk (Jun 30, 2002)

He's really struggled this season, but hopefully it's just a result of him still recovering from mono.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

HB said:


> Get what? The thread is dumb, you start a thread about a guy shooting poorly after 5 games and then say the fact that if he strings together a couple of good games he wont be shocked. You know damn well by the time the season is over he will be shooting well in the 50s. What exactly is your point then?
> 
> Dude you didnt even watch the Nets when they played your home team Orlando, I am somehow supposed to believe that your information from Brook isn't from NBA.com?


My point is the only thing that indicates Lopez is a good player are his stats. Anyone who watches him (and yes I watch him, not sure why me not watching one game is so fascinating to you) knows he's not as good as the stats indicate. Which leads me to the point of this thread -- Now, even his stats suck, yet people like you think he's an elite big man.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

hobojoe said:


> My point is the only thing that indicates Lopez is a good player are his stats. Anyone who watches him (and yes I watch him, not sure why me not watching one game is so fascinating to you) knows he's not as good as the stats indicate. Which leads me to the point of this thread -- Now, even his stats suck, yet people like you think he's an elite big man.


So you are saying all the people in the blogosphere, media (including talent evaluators like Thorpe and stats gurus like Hollinger) who have raved about the guy don't know what they are talking about? What are your qualifications again?


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

HB said:


> So you are saying all the people in the blogosphere, media (including talent evaluators like Thorpe and stats gurus like Hollinger) who have raved about the guy don't know what they are talking about? What are your qualifications again?


You know your argument sucks when you have to put words in my mouth to make a so-called point. He's a decent player with some talent, don't act like he's something he's not, that's all.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

I am not the one who called him the second best center in the league or is it East, I keep mixing them up....but anyhoo I am going by what those folks have said, and of course what I have seen. I still think he needs to get stronger, learn to pass out of doubles and improve on his rebounding, but guess what he's still only 22.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

HB said:


> I am not the one who called him the second best center in the league or is it East, I keep mixing them up....but anyhoo I am going by what those folks have said, and of course what I have seen. I still think he needs to get stronger, learn to pass out of doubles and improve on his rebounding, but guess what he's still only 22.


Who cares what you think, what are your credentials again?


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

3/9 7 points 10 boards...another loss...supastah


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

HB just admit you feel like you have to ride for him because he's a Net. 

A center who can't rebound, defend, or pass out of double teams is not good because he can put up 21 on a weak defender. People look at points as some end all in some cases, but that's only one portion of what makes a player.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

hobojoe said:


> Who cares what you think, what are your credentials again?


King of this board.



> HB just admit you feel like you have to ride for him because he's a Net.
> 
> A center who can't rebound, defend, or pass out of double teams is not good because he can put up 21 on a weak defender. People look at points as some end all in some cases, but that's only one portion of what makes a player.


Admittedly I don't even follow the Nets like that anymore, I do watch their games, but I like Brook as a player not because he's a Net. I think he's pretty skilled for a big man and when he seems like a high IQ player. This bad stretch is a fluke, he'll get over it eventually.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

HB said:


> I do watch their games, but I like Brook as a player not because he's a Net.


Nobody believes you. You are the same guy that felt Sean and Marcus Williams would be stars.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

You realize Vince was on the team then right


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

HB said:


> You realize Vince was on the team then right


You really expect anyone to believe that you aren't a Nets fan anymore? Then again you are the guy that claimed you didn't watch a game of the NBA finals and expected us to believe that to.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

I didnt say I wasn't, I just said I am not as die hard as before.


----------



## GrandKenyon6 (Jul 19, 2005)

Al Horford (who plays center) has 20 points, 20 rebounds, 5 assists, 3 blocks, 1 steal and 0 turnovers while shooting 10-11 from the field.


----------



## GrandKenyon6 (Jul 19, 2005)

Lopez was pathetic last night. If you look at the boxscore it will look like he had a good game, but that was one of the weakest, softest performances I've seen in a long time.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

GrandKenyon6 said:


> Al Horford (who plays center) has 20 points, 20 rebounds, 5 assists, 3 blocks, 1 steal and 0 turnovers while shooting 10-11 from the field.


More evidence why if given the choice of 1 guy between Noah, Horford, Bogut, Lopez...I'd choose Al Horford. The guy is finally getting his shot to score, and still gets it done on the glass and defensively.


----------



## Sliccat (Oct 16, 2004)

hobojoe said:


> Can you explain to me how a 7-foot post player who is supposedly the second or third best center in the league has shot 8-33 from the floor over the past two games (14-50 over the past three and under 40% for the year). Oh and he's grabbed 14 boards in those three games combined. Must've been busy playing the suffocating defense he's known for :rotf:


Ah yes. Because Brook Lopez is the only good player to ever struggle in a stretch of games. Ever.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

^It seems that logic is sometimes lost on here


----------



## GrandKenyon6 (Jul 19, 2005)

We're approaching 1/4 of the season. After how many games is it more than just a stretch?

Anyway, the issues I have with Brook Lopez are the same issues I've had with him since his rookie season.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Its not even 15 games into the season or is it? Don't you have to wait till after all star break to give up on the season?


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

I guess there won't be any updates from the folks bashing him tonight after destroying Horford in the post


----------



## Maravilla (Jul 6, 2010)

HB said:


> I guess there won't be any updates from the folks bashing him tonight after destroying Horford in the post



Heard that..


----------



## Wade County (Jun 22, 2003)

I knew you'd bump this now. 

He's having a great game - doesn't make him a franchise center.


----------



## ATLien (Jun 18, 2002)

The fact that you had to bump this tells me all I need to know. If he was a franchise center, this would be a normal type game and would therefore not have been bumped!


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

If he had a bad game especially against Horford, the clowns would update that


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

there is only one 'franchise center' in this league at the moment and even he isnt much more than Alonzo Mourning


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

Is this where I post that scrubs always get up to play All Stars?


I kid, I kid.


----------



## rayz789 (Oct 30, 2008)

[email protected] many here saying Horford is a better center then Lopez. Lopez tonight not only got the win for the nets over the hawks but damn lopez completely abuse horford. So much of horford being better then lopez.


----------



## Wade County (Jun 22, 2003)

Yeah. Cause he played better in one game, he's clearly better than Al Horford. Who was an All-Star last year. And has played better this season to date.

:yep:


----------



## rayz789 (Oct 30, 2008)

Wade County said:


> Yeah. Cause he played better in one game, he's clearly better than Al Horford. Who was an All-Star last year. And has played better this season to date.
> 
> :yep:


Who has a better roster Horfords hawks? Or Lopez Nets? Hell Horford is not even the 3rd best player on the hawks. 


I look at the nets vs the hawks game from last year to tonight. And you know what i found? In total of the last 4 games they play against each other, horford never out play lopez at all in which lopez always score more then him. Oh and lopez gets more blocks then horford. So horford is still better????????? lol.


----------



## Wade County (Jun 22, 2003)

You do realise that Lopez is the 1st option on a pretty bad Nets team right?

How many times did Lopez outrebound Horford? Shoot a better percentage than Horford?

I forgot that scoring points is the only useful facet of a basketballer. Especially when they do it inefficiently.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

He outplayed Horford. He usually does actually. I suppose that's a bad matchup for Horford.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Again Horford isnt a center, he is playing out of position. You guys are just wasting time though, the only guy really on Brook's level, okay make that two would be Bogut and Roy Hibbert. Dwight's the clear cut number 1, when Brook is at his best, those other two are the guys he should be compared to.


----------



## rayz789 (Oct 30, 2008)

Wade County said:


> You do realise that Lopez is the 1st option on a pretty bad Nets team right?
> 
> 
> ^^^^You made my point. So how can you say Horford is better when he's on a way better hawks team with a much better roster????? And Horford is not a 3rd option for the hawks.
> ...


^^^Not only that but Lopez gets way more blocks then Horford when they meet against each other.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

Them and whoever you consider the center on the Lakers. With Bynum out, Gasol has played center all year and been as good as anybody including Dwight at the position. With Gasol at PF, Bynum is in that 2nd tier conversation.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Shoulda mentioned in the East.


----------



## Wade County (Jun 22, 2003)

HB said:


> Again Horford isnt a center, he is playing out of position. You guys are just wasting time though, the only guy really on Brook's level, okay make that two would be Bogut and Roy Hibbert. Dwight's the clear cut number 1, when Brook is at his best, those other two are the guys he should be compared to.


He might not be a true center, but it's the position he has played basically his entire NBA career to date. 

Lopez is talented offensively, capable shot blocker...I just think he doesn't rebound well enough or defend well enough. That plus he shoots a poor percentage.

He's like Andrea Bargnani to me, really.

If i'm ranking the East centers:

Howard
Horford
Noah
Bogut
Hibbert
*Lopez*
Bargnani
McGee
Varejao
Shaq
Mohammed
Wallace
Hawes
Turiaf
Ilgauskus


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

HB said:


> Again Horford isnt a center, he is playing out of position. You guys are just wasting time though, the only guy really on Brook's level, okay make that two would be Bogut and Roy Hibbert. Dwight's the clear cut number 1, when Brook is at his best, those other two are the guys he should be compared to.


Fact is, he plays Center though. I don't care where a guy is supposed to play based on size or style. If your matching up with Centers every night and play as a center on offensive sets. You sir, are a center.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

rayz789 said:


> ^^^Not only that but Lopez gets way more blocks then Horford when they meet against each other.


When they meet against each other? gtfo.

Your logic is horrible. You might be good at some things son, but convincing people that Lopez is better than Horford isn't one of them.


----------



## Wade County (Jun 22, 2003)

zagsfan20 said:


> Fact is, he plays Center though. I don't care where a guy is supposed to play based on size or style. If your matching up with Centers every night and play as a center on offensive sets. You sir, are a center.


It's like when people say 'Tim Duncan is the greatest PF of all time'. Everyone knows he's a really a center, but that statement still rings true.


----------



## rayz789 (Oct 30, 2008)

zagsfan20 said:


> When they meet against each other? gtfo.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I already prove my facts that lopez is a better center then horford.


----------



## rayz789 (Oct 30, 2008)

Wade County said:


> It's like when people say 'Tim Duncan is the greatest PF of all time'. Everyone knows he's a really a center, but that statement still rings true.


How is Duncan really a center? Because of his size? lol. Is that mean Pau Gasol is really a center? Pau clearly has the same size as Duncan. Look Duncan play most of his career as a pf in which he is the number 1 greatest pf of all times. Horford is not really a true center. Look if Horford was really a true center then why the hawks try so hard to get shaq on that team when he was a free agent? You know why? Cause they wants Shaq to start as a center so that Horford can start in the pf position. In which moves Josh Smith as sf. I'm a huge nba fan in which i follow that sports for 17 or 18 years. I know exactly what i'm talking about.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Dont get it twisted, if the Hawks had a legit big man, they'd be playing Horford at the 4. The Pachulia experiment failed a long time ago.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

So I went and checked Roy Hibbert's stats, because I know he has been playing well and the Pacers have been doing good, but lo and behold, he barely puts up better numbers than Brook Lopez. Roy's at 47%FG, Brook's at 44%....I dont think any of the geniuses on here that have been bashing Brook would also call Roy a bad player right?


----------



## ATLien (Jun 18, 2002)

How was anyone bashing Brook? All I remember is saying that he, Al, Noah, Bogut are all on the same tier if you will. A tier below Howard & Gasol. Thats it. Hardly would call that bashing.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Read through the thread, particularly the motive for the thread starter starting this. P.s. no one is disputing Gasol or Howard as the top centers in the game.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

HB said:


> Dont get it twisted, if the Hawks had a legit big man, they'd be playing Horford at the 4. The Pachulia experiment failed a long time ago.


But, the fact remains. He's played Center most his career. Is someone in denial?


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

HB said:


> So I went and checked Roy Hibbert's stats, because I know he has been playing well and the Pacers have been doing good, but lo and behold, he barely puts up better numbers than Brook Lopez. Roy's at 47%FG, Brook's at 44%....I dont think any of the geniuses on here that have been bashing Brook would also call Roy a bad player right?


Hibbert is a better all around player though. He averages 9 rebounds to Lopez 6, and double the amount of assists and blocks.

If your idea of a better player, is someone with great touch, but doesn't really bring anything else to the table. Than sure, Lopez is the greatest 7 footer in the game.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Heh Lopez was averaging about 8 rpg the last two seasons, he's not a great rebounder but this year his numbers have dropped because Kris Humphries is simply a better rebounder. There's not much difference between Lopez and Hibbert offensively, but you can go ahead and nitpick. As for Horford, dont really care what position he has played most of his career, I do know this, it doesn't bode well for the Hawks having him play out of position.


----------



## Wade County (Jun 22, 2003)

rayz789 said:


> How is Duncan really a center? Because of his size? lol. Is that mean Pau Gasol is really a center? Pau clearly has the same size as Duncan. Look Duncan play most of his career as a pf in which he is the number 1 greatest pf of all times. Horford is not really a true center. Look if Horford was really a true center then why the hawks try so hard to get shaq on that team when he was a free agent? You know why? Cause they wants Shaq to start as a center so that Horford can start in the pf position. In which moves Josh Smith as sf. I'm a huge nba fan in which i follow that sports for 17 or 18 years. I know exactly what i'm talking about.


Duncan is a bigger body than Gasol, who is longer. Both of them could be center's in today's NBA, and often are for long stretches of games.

The fact remains Horford is playing center. Has played center most his career. By default - he is a center. Doesn't mean he wouldn't play better at PF.

That last line made me :laugh:.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Wade County said:


> Duncan is a bigger body than Gasol, who is longer. Both of them could be center's in today's NBA, and often are for long stretches of games.
> 
> The fact remains Horford is playing center. Has played center most his career. By default - he is a center. Doesn't mean he wouldn't play better at PF.
> 
> That last line made me :laugh:.


this and

what's your definition of center? defensive anchor, low post, back to the basket offense, primary rebounder, help defender in the paint etc? or just the guy who the coach pencils in on the card? if the latter then they're right he's a PF but if your definition has anything to do with roles?


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Wade County said:


> If i'm ranking the East centers:
> 
> Howard
> Horford
> ...


This is a good list, based on what I've observed this season. Hibbert certainly has worked his way up that list and deserves some credit for keeping the Pacers at .500+.


----------



## rayz789 (Oct 30, 2008)

Wade County said:


> Duncan is a bigger body than Gasol, who is longer. Both of them could be center's in today's NBA, and often are for long stretches of games.
> 
> The fact remains Horford is playing center. Has played center most his career. By default - he is a center. Doesn't mean he wouldn't play better at PF.
> 
> That last line made me :laugh:.


Who in the hawks that are really starting center not name Horford? Jason Collins? lol. There's a reason why Horford is a starting center cause he can score. But if the hawks had gotten shaq, you know where horford will be? In the starting pf position in which should tell you all you need to know that horford is really a pf not a center.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

HB said:


> So I went and checked Roy Hibbert's stats, because I know he has been playing well and the Pacers have been doing good, but lo and behold, he barely puts up better numbers than Brook Lopez. Roy's at 47%FG, Brook's at 44%....I dont think any of the geniuses on here that have been bashing Brook would also call Roy a bad player right?


Show me where anyone said Lopez is a bad player.



HB said:


> Read through the thread, particularly the motive for the thread starter starting this. P.s. no one is disputing Gasol or Howard as the top centers in the game.


I think you've proven several times already that you don't understand my motive and are way too sensitive about your boy catching some criticism.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

HB said:


> Heh Lopez was averaging about 8 rpg the last two seasons, he's not a great rebounder but this year his numbers have dropped because Kris Humphries is simply a better rebounder. There's not much difference between Lopez and Hibbert offensively, but you can go ahead and nitpick. As for Horford, dont really care what position he has played most of his career, I do know this, it doesn't bode well for the Hawks having him play out of position.


You're going to blame Lopez rebounding woes on Humphries? lol ok.

Horford has been thriving playing "out of position", an all-star and the best defensive player on his team.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

zagsfan20 said:


> You're going to blame Lopez rebounding woes on Humphries? lol ok.
> 
> Horford has been thriving playing "out of position", an all-star and the best defensive player on his team.


Again the last two seasons, Lopez was at 8rpg. How many times do I have to repeat, he is NOT a great rebounder. With that said, in limited minutes Humphries cleans up the boards.

As for Horford and the Hawks, JOSH SMITH is their best defensive player. Get your facts straight man.


----------



## CosaNostra (Sep 16, 2010)

Brook Lopez is what he is. He can score, has a nice touch on his jump shot, but he's pretty soft. He blocks some shots but I wouldn't say he is a good defender. Part of the reason why his shooting percentage is so low is because the team around him is so crappy. He is more of a natural second option, but has been thrust into the first option role.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

HB said:


> Again the last two seasons, Lopez was at 8rpg. How many times do I have to repeat, he is NOT a great rebounder. With that said, in limited minutes Humphries cleans up the boards.
> 
> As for Horford and the Hawks, JOSH SMITH is their best defensive player. Get your facts straight man.


lol, you don't watch much ball do you? Help defense is just one aspect of defending. Smith might collect all the 'sexy' stats, but anyone who watches a lick of the Hawks realizes that Horford is the anchor of that defense.

Its also funny that you bring up Kris 'freakin' Humphries as the reason that Lopez blows at rebounding.


----------



## CosaNostra (Sep 16, 2010)

zagsfan20 said:


> lol, you don't watch much ball do you? Help defense is just one aspect of defending. Smith might collect all the 'sexy' stats, but anyone who watches a lick of the Hawks realizes that Horford is the anchor of that defense.
> 
> Its also funny that you bring up Kris 'freakin' Humphries as the reason that Lopez blows at rebounding.


Smith is not just a stat stuffer on defense, that's kind of ridiculous to say. Josh Smith's versatility on defense has to be one of his best attributes. His speed and athleticism bother big men, while his length and strength disturbs wings. He's also an outstanding rebounder. Horford and Smith together make a very formidable defensive team.


----------



## rayz789 (Oct 30, 2008)

zagsfan20 said:


> lol, you don't watch much ball do you? Help defense is just one aspect of defending. Smith might collect all the 'sexy' stats, but anyone who watches a lick of the Hawks realizes that Horford is the anchor of that defense.
> 
> Its also funny that you bring up Kris 'freakin' Humphries as the reason that Lopez blows at rebounding.


You talk like you don't watch much of basketball. Ever since Humphries has been playing very good minutes in which is alot, Lopez rebounds has been dropped cause Hump is a far better rebounder. I'm 31 so that means i watch basketball way more then you have so i know what i'm talking about. Anybody that is a true nba fan should know easily that Horford is really a true pf. If he was a true center then WHY DID THE HAWKS TRY TO GO AFTER SHAQ IN THE FIRST PLACE IN THE OFFSEASON?????????? Oh i know cause The Horford IS NOT THE TRUE CENTER!!!!!! Hell even Barkley, Smith, Johnson, Gundy and the rest even said The Hawks line up is SMALL!!!!!!! Why they said that? Take a wild guess zag.


----------



## Kidd (Jul 2, 2009)

Can you stop telling people that you're 31? No one's buying that ****.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

In the last 8 starts, Humphries has averaged a double double. I don't even like posting stuff like this because geniuses that can't comprehend that will take it as 'overrating' Humph.


----------



## rayz789 (Oct 30, 2008)

Brian said:


> Can you stop telling people that you're 31? No one's buying that ****.


Why would i lie about my age? I was born in february of 1979.


----------



## Kidd (Jul 2, 2009)

Same reason why you keep repeating it over and over again in threads and using it as if it somehow supported your basketball-related arguments. :laugh:


----------



## rayz789 (Oct 30, 2008)

Brian said:


> Same reason why you keep repeating it over and over again in threads and using it as if it somehow supported your basketball-related arguments. :laugh:


Hey Brian, is Boone even playing this season? You know the same Boone that you think did well for the nets 2 years ago? lol.


----------



## Kidd (Jul 2, 2009)

He's in China now. He isn't a great player and is definitely not a starter in this league but Boone played well for the Nets for a season and a half when he had a small and specific role to play and nothing else was expected of him.

You can deny it all you want but it's true.


----------



## rayz789 (Oct 30, 2008)

Brian said:


> He's in China now. He isn't a great player and is definitely not a starter in this league but Boone played well for the Nets for a season and a half when he had a small and specific role to play and nothing else was expected of him.
> 
> You can deny it all you want but it's true.


Yea Boone play so well for the nets that no other nba team wants him. <<<Lmao!!!!


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

rayz789 said:


> You talk like you don't watch much of basketball. Ever since Humphries has been playing very good minutes in which is alot, Lopez rebounds has been dropped cause Hump is a far better rebounder. I'm 31 so that means i watch basketball way more then you have so i know what i'm talking about. Anybody that is a true nba fan should know easily that Horford is really a true pf. If he was a true center then WHY DID THE HAWKS TRY TO GO AFTER SHAQ IN THE FIRST PLACE IN THE OFFSEASON?????????? Oh i know cause The Horford IS NOT THE TRUE CENTER!!!!!! Hell even Barkley, Smith, Johnson, Gundy and the rest even said The Hawks line up is SMALL!!!!!!! Why they said that? Take a wild guess zag.


Cool! You're 31! Your cat scratch is hard to read. 

The Hawks went after Shaq the same reason the Celtics who already had a Center did. To solidify their frontcourt in hopes to compete with elite Centers and have some kind of a rotation. Hoping that Shaq can play on the regular and not miss significant chunks of the season is naive. They weren't going to bring him in to be the starter. You should realize that, you know, with your 31 years of watching basketball and all. 

Your building strawmans with this whole Horford deal. I never stated that he was a natural 5. All I'm saying is thats what he's played throughout his career and he's been damn good at it. An All-Star in fact.

Back to the topic, away from the tangent. Horford is a better C than Lopez.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

CosaNostra said:


> Smith is not just a stat stuffer on defense, that's kind of ridiculous to say. Josh Smith's versatility on defense has to be one of his best attributes. His speed and athleticism bother big men, while his length and strength disturbs wings. He's also an outstanding rebounder. Horford and Smith together make a very formidable defensive team.


Horford is the anchor of that defense. He has been for a while now. Similar to how KG plays it, he calls plays like a quarterback.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

HB said:


> In the last 8 starts, Humphries has averaged a double double. I don't even like posting stuff like this because geniuses that can't comprehend that will take it as 'overrating' Humph.


There's plenty of rebounds to go around. I'm not buying that logic.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

zagsfan20 said:


> There's plenty of rebounds to go around. I'm not buying that logic.


Umm all you need do is watch a guy like Dwight or heck your very own Camby.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

zagsfan20 said:


> Horford is the anchor of that defense. He has been for a while now. Similar to how KG plays it, he calls plays like a quarterback.


Guy you are still on this? Smith is their best defender. No one watching that team will tell you Horford is. Horford's a good defender no doubt, but Smith can guard everyone from 2 guards to PFs


----------



## rayz789 (Oct 30, 2008)

zagsfan20 said:


> Cool! You're 31! Your cat scratch is hard to read.
> 
> The Hawks went after Shaq the same reason the Celtics who already had a Center did. To solidify their frontcourt in hopes to compete with elite Centers and have some kind of a rotation. Hoping that Shaq can play on the regular and not miss significant chunks of the season is naive. They weren't going to bring him in to be the starter. You should realize that, you know, with your 31 years of watching basketball and all.
> 
> ...


Umm do you realize that the reason the celtics went after shaq (very late in the offseason btw) cause to replace perkins who's out until feb or march of 2011? The Hawks wanted to get Shaq badly cause they wanted a true starting center in which Horford can play the pf and put Smith to sf. Why the hawks doing this? Cause of the way Howard EASILY destroyed Horford down low.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

HB said:


> Guy you are still on this? Smith is their best defender. No one watching that team will tell you Horford is. Horford's a good defender no doubt, but Smith can guard everyone from 2 guards to PFs





> Defensively, he’s more important than either position. Al rarely gets his due because of Josh Smith’s out-of-control defensive reputation and the perception that Joe Johnson has retained his defensive adequacy from the wonder years, but there should be no question that the Hawks’ defensive competence hinges on Horford.





> Smith is a tremendous help-side shot-blocker, but it’s Horford that’s properly hedging, switching when necessary, and rotating to help every one of his teammates.


http://www.basketballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=1071

I guess I'm not alone in thinking this, guy.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

rayz789 said:


> Umm do you realize that the reason the celtics went after shaq (very late in the offseason btw) cause to replace perkins who's out until feb or march of 2011? The Hawks wanted to get Shaq badly cause they wanted a true starting center in which Horford can play the pf and put Smith to sf. Why the hawks doing this? Cause of the way Howard EASILY destroyed Horford down low.


Howard destroys most C's down low. Whats your point? Horford is hardly the reason that the Hawks always get crushed by the Magic.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

HB said:


> Umm all you need do is watch a guy like Dwight or heck your very own Camby.


Humphries has put together a string of nice games, cool. He's not in Howard or Camby's league of rebounding. Not even close.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

zagsfan20 said:


> Humphries has put together a string of nice games, cool. He's not in Howard or Camby's league of rebounding. Not even close.


He's never had those minutes and no he's probably not as good a rebounder as they are, but on the team he is, he's the best rebounder.


----------



## rayz789 (Oct 30, 2008)

zagsfan20 said:


> Howard destroys most C's down low. Whats your point? Horford is hardly the reason that the Hawks always get crushed by the Magic.


If Horford is a very good low post defender then he could atleast guard howard decent in 1 of those series correct? Perkins guard Howard WAY WAY better then horford did.


----------



## rayz789 (Oct 30, 2008)

HB said:


> He's never had those minutes and no he's probably not as good a rebounder as they are, but on the team he is, he's the best rebounder.


HB, why bother arguring with zag? He obviously thinks Hump has play many minutes for years and year in which shows he's not a great rebounder lol.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

rayz789 said:


> HB, why bother arguring with zag? He obviously thinks Hump has play many minutes for years and year in which shows he's not a great rebounder lol.


Say what?


----------



## GrandKenyon6 (Jul 19, 2005)

Kris Humphries is not a reason for Lopez's poor rebounding. That is a completely ridiculous argument.

Lopez averaged 8 rebounds in 37 minutes last year. That's not good. The Nets were also one of the worst rebounding teams in the NBA last year, if not the worst. That makes it even worse.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

I wish people would read before just making assumptions. Geez saves everyone a lot of this going back and forth. From the get go, I (dont know about others) has said repeatedly that Brook isn't a good rebounder but he did average 8 for the past two seasons. Humphries is simply a better rebounder.


----------



## GrandKenyon6 (Jul 19, 2005)

rayz789 said:


> Ever since Humphries has been playing very good minutes in which is alot, Lopez rebounds has been dropped cause Hump is a far better rebounder.



Please.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Just a little food for thought statistic.

Lopez PER: 16.9

Horford PER: 25.1

Hibbert PER: 21.3

McGee PER: 19.5

Noah PER: 21.1

Just a little something. I've always been a firm believer in PER as the best statistic in overall efficiency.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

^ And considering that Lopez is probably the weakest defender out of the bunch (save McGee, I haven't watched him enough to have an opinion) further alludes to the fact that Brooke has been extremely average on a terrible team this year. He was overrated coming into season.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Lol McGee is like the taller version of Lee minus the passing ability (actually in Lee's defense, McGee's offensive skillset is mediocre). He gets a lot of points of broken plays and dunks. You CANNOT run anything through him. When you are taking gimmes of course you are going to put up efficient numbers.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

HB said:


> Lol McGee is like the taller version of Lee minus the passing ability (actually in Lee's defense, McGee's offensive skillset is mediocre). He gets a lot of points of broken plays and dunks. You CANNOT run anything through him. When you are taking gimmes of course you are going to put up efficient numbers.


I don't give a **** how you get it done, as long as you get it done. Should we fault Centers for playing in the paint rather than shooting up 16-20 ft. jumpers on the reg?

You're really grasping at straws. Do you still think that Lopez is the 2nd best Center in the league?


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

I never said that though. Its Dwight and Pau. If you go back in this thread I said Hibbert and Brook are on the same level. That's somewhere between 3-5.

And what do you MEAN you dont care how it's done? Lol you can't run an offense through one guy because he has little to no post game or any type of offensive game for that matter and the other guy's pretty much got every move covered for a big man on offense. What do you mean you don't care how you get it done? Peep the Amare vs Lee debate will ya.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

16.9 PER on a losing team is not good for the 3-5 best Center in the league.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Kind of funny the same people talking about Horford as a PF are putting Pau in at C based on a couple weeks with the original starter out.


----------



## GrandKenyon6 (Jul 19, 2005)

Whether Horford is a natural 4 is irrelevant. The fact is that he plays center and he plays it at a higher level than Lopez.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

I agree, that's my whole point.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

As for zagsfan you act like PER is the be all tell all for NBA players.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

HB said:


> As for zagsfan you act like PER is the be all tell all for NBA players.


Um, its best rating of per minute productivity. I'd say without a doubt its the best way to figure a players offensive efficiency, without a doubt. 

This stat doesn't even take into account Lopez' horrible defense. 

The fact that Lopez' PER is as low as it is, is really telling to me. He's not that 3-5 best center that you imagine him as.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Meh, the Center spot is the weakest in the NBA. Who are you going to pick before him Okafor, Dalembert, Camby?


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

HB said:


> Meh, the Center spot is the weakest in the NBA. Who are you going to pick before him Okafor, Dalembert, Camby?


Center's I'd take over Lopez:

Howard, Horford, Hibbert, Noah, Duncan (yes, he's been playing C this year), Al Jefferson and McGee (who has figured it out in the last 10 games or so). 

Maybe even Nene from a defensive standpoint.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

McGee and Nene? LOL


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

HB said:


> McGee and Nene? LOL


Both those guys are probably a push to me. McGee has really came into his own in the last 10 games or so and is still so young. Nene has had a lot of injury problems and his offense is down a bit this year, but defensively he's a top 3 Center.


----------



## GrandKenyon6 (Jul 19, 2005)

McGee and Nene ahead of Lopez? Uh, no. Not even close.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

GrandKenyon6 said:


> McGee and Nene ahead of Lopez? Uh, no. Not even close.


I think its closer than you think.


----------



## GrandKenyon6 (Jul 19, 2005)

Nene is a passive player allergic to rebounding. He is grossly over-rated.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Maybe I should bring back the HKF post on Nene, pretty much summed up Nene. Nene is an underachiever.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

HB said:


> Maybe I should bring back the HKF post on Nene, pretty much summed up Nene. Nene is an underachiever.


Your going to cite your sources with an HKF post? I'm not saying Nene is great, but he's a damn good defender.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

GrandKenyon6 said:


> Nene is a passive player allergic to rebounding. He is grossly over-rated.


Were ripping on Nene about bad rebounding? He's on Lopez level of bad rebounding.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

zagsfan20 said:


> Your going to cite your sources with an HKF post? I'm not saying Nene is great, but he's a damn good defender.


I dont know what to say man, we've had enough time to judge Nene by now. There's no upside, he is what he is. An injury prone center with a limited offensive game, solid rebounder, solid defense. I'd take McGee over him just because of the upside.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

I don't really see much difference from Nene and Lopez in terms of strengths and weaknesses.. 

But Nene is far from limited offensively. It's kind of amazing the knack he has for getting a quick (good) shot off if he has the right positioning, it's like clockwork. A couple years ago if he had the same opportunity Lopez had he *could* have averaged 18 a game too, but at this point he's like a dog that's just been trained into passivity being on those Nuggets teams all those years, so even as a guy who could get all the shots he want he'd be fine with his little 14 and 7. He's a better passer than Lopez too. Overall a smart, gifted player but he doesn't have the best mindset to optimize his talents.

Can't completely blame the guy, he beat cancer, so maybe he's just sacrilegious enough to be a guy who doesn't base his life by how aggressive he is on a basketball court anymore.


----------



## rayz789 (Oct 30, 2008)

Zag you just proved you don't know what the hell you're talking about. You rather choose Mcgee over Lopez? lmfao!!!!! If Lopez wasn't a great center and all that Zag then explain to me why the last 2 games both teams of the Blazers and The Knicks were double teaming Lopez like there's no tommorow?


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

rayz789 said:


> Zag you just proved you don't know what the hell you're talking about. You rather choose Mcgee over Lopez? lmfao!!!!! If Lopez wasn't a great center and all that Zag then explain to me why the last 2 games both teams of the Blazers and The Knicks were double teaming Lopez like there's no tommorow?


Because he's the best option offensively on a bad NJ team. Your best argument for him being good is that he gets a double team? Alright Ray, you win! 

lol


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Like Diable said there's some players you double team because they're threats and there's some you double team because you have the luxury and you can force them into turnovers. 

Lopez is the latter. I just wonder when an above average amount of PPG and nothing more will stop getting people to cream and fight for people to the death. These guys aren't playing one on one out there.


----------



## Najee (Apr 5, 2007)

What's funny is half of the guys on here bashing Brook Lopez went to the wall rationalizing and defending the greatness of Greg Oden.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Give it up Najee


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Najee said:


> What's funny is half of the guys on here bashing Brook Lopez went to the wall rationalizing and defending the greatness of Greg Oden.


What do the two have in common?


Thats what I thought, absolutely nothing.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Dre™;6422896 said:


> Like Diable said there's some players you double team because they're threats and there's some you double team because you have the luxury and you can force them into turnovers.
> 
> Lopez is the latter. I just wonder when an above average amount of PPG and nothing more will stop getting people to cream and fight for people to the death. These guys aren't playing one on one out there.


Actually this is false. Lopez is simply too big and too strong for most guys in the post. You can knock his rebounding and his defense but offense is what he is good at. Not many teams can play him straight up. I guess no one watched him put 36 on the Knicks yesterday.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

HB said:


> Actually this is false. Lopez is simply too big and too strong for most guys in the post. You can knock his rebounding and his defense but offense is what he is good at. Not many teams can play him straight up. I guess no one watched him put 36 on the Knicks yesterday.


Too strong? lol

He's big for sure, but not strong. He's a talented low post player because he's got probably the best footwork in the NBA and a soft touch. He's hardly a rugged C who relies on strength. I see Lopez get pushed out of his spot on a regular basis. Often times thats why he's outside hoisting up his feathery jumper, from 16-20 ft. out.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Lol at this guy talking like he knows anything about the Nets. They have him shooting those 17 footers so as to open up the lanes for his teammates, not because he isn't strong enough. Lopez actually likes to play inside, when he should shoot more jumpers because he's pretty good at it. Why do I keep arguing with a guy who just saw the Nets play last week against his Blazers?


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

HB said:


> Lol at this guy talking like he knows anything about the Nets. They have him shooting those 17 footers so as to open up the lanes for his teammates, not because he isn't strong enough. Lopez actually likes to play inside, when he should shoot more jumpers because he's pretty good at it. Why do I keep arguing with a guy who just saw the Nets play last week against his Blazers?


lol, your supposed strong argument you always try to make is always that the person your debating with doesn't watch said team play. Just checks boxscores. Bro, I got league pass, I've watched every team atleast a handful of times, so save it brotha.

Opening up lanes? Your arguments are always weak. Riiiiight and Lopez gets 5 rebounds the other night because the master of rebounding Kris Humphries was stealing all his rebounds away from him...D'okay. Listen, I watched Shaq win multiple Championship being a boss hog downlow with guys like Kobe and Wade penetrating on a regular basis. He never "opened up the lanes" for guys to penetrate. Fact is, Lopez is soft and can't handle going down in the paint and battling for position night in and night out. Thats why he settles for his jumpshots. As I said, he's a highly skilled offensive big man, great touch and a silky jumper. But, one thing he is not, is strong.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Nah sorry you aint fooling me man, not especially after your comments in that game discussion thread. You are not going to go around acting like you know the offensive schemes of the team.

Lol at comparing Shaq to Lopez. I guess everyone else who doesn't play like Shaq is a loser. Talk about making a stupid point. You play to your strengths. Yao being able to hit that 18 to 20 feet jumper was somehow bad for the Rockets? How about Duncan? Or maybe Pau? Look guy, when a center can do that, it forces the guy guarding him to step away from the paint. Does this click for you? One thing Brook has also developed is the pump fake but again how would you know all this? P.s. if Brook is getting all those doubles thrown at him, you realize his ability to hit that jumper makes a lot of sense right? Especially when the guy running the pick and roll is a speedy point like Devin.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

HB said:


> Nah sorry you aint fooling me man, not especially after your comments in that game discussion thread. You are not going to go around acting like you know the offensive schemes of the team.
> 
> Lol at comparing Shaq to Lopez. I guess everyone else who doesn't play like Shaq is a loser. Talk about making a stupid point. You play to your strengths. Yao being able to hit that 18 to 20 feet jumper was somehow bad for the Rockets? How about Duncan? Or maybe Pau? Look guy, when a center can do that, it forces the guy guarding him to step away from the paint. Does this click for you? One thing Brook has also developed is the pump fake but again how would you know all this? P.s. if Brook is getting all those doubles thrown at him, you realize his ability to hit that jumper makes a lot of sense right? Especially when the guy running the pick and roll is a speedy point like Devin.


Your building strawman arguments. Comparing Lopez to Shaq? I never compared the two. The point I made was that you don't need to have a big man shooting jumpers to get penetration. Thats a horrible argument. I can think of many Centers who made their living in the paint and it didn't effect teammates penetrating. Shaq is the first and most obvious that comes to mind. Your trying to make arguments for me that I never intended to make. I guess thats what its come to.

Again, what does the pump fake have to do with anything? Congrats he has a pump fake. I wouldn't know this lol. Your a funny guy. You know who was the master of the pump fake? Dale Davis. That didn't make him a great all around Center.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Do you understand the concept of the pick and roll? I seriously doubt you do.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

HB said:


> Do you understand the concept of the pick and roll? I seriously doubt you do.


I guarantee I've played more organized hoops than you have. NJ runs pick and pops for Lopez. I rarely see him roll to the basket.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Lol funny because you seem to be clueless about how it works. Lets go through this again, when a guy like Harris calls for a pick from Lopez, because of his SPEED, defenses usually collapse on him as he goes into the paint, leaving Lopez wide open a lot of times on the perimeter. I have already seen Lopez take Ibaka into the paint a couple of times tonight, using the baby hook but he's also shot the ball a couple of times from the perimeter because of the pick and roll. Does this make any sense to you?

Is Hibbert also soft for shooting from the perimeter?


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

HB said:


> Lol funny because you seem to be clueless about how it works. Lets go through this again, when a guy like Harris calls for a pick from Lopez, because of his SPEED, defenses usually collapse on him as he goes into the paint, leaving Lopez wide open a lot of times on the perimeter. I have already seen Lopez take Ibaka into the paint a couple of times tonight, using the baby hook but he's also shot the ball a couple of times from the perimeter because of the pick and roll. Does this make any sense to you?
> 
> Is Hibbert also soft for shooting from the perimeter?


You act like your teaching me something lol. Its called a pick and pop. Bibby and Webber perfected that in Sacramento in the early 00's. The fact that they run it has more to do with Lopez soft touch than anything. A 15 foot medium range jumper from a big is one of the toughest shots to guard in the NBA. You aren't going to convince me that Lopez' is strong, because he isn't. Nothing about his game tells me, oh that guy is a beast.

Hibbert is similar in offense to Lopez. The difference between them as overall talents though is that Hibbert is a better defender, rebounder and passer. Thats all.


----------



## Najee (Apr 5, 2007)

zagsfan20 said:


> What do the two have in common?
> 
> 
> Thats what I thought, absolutely nothing.


I didn't say they had anything in common. I just find you and others' arguments laughable. 

People like you, rocketeer and Dre perennially dog Brook Lopez on everything while he's been a productive big man since coming into the NBA. Conversely, you and those guys overrated everything Oden did when he wasn't missing a lot of games from injuries or was in perennial foul trouble/generally ineffective in the few games he did play -- and he was not the player Lopez is.

It's really hard to take people like you seriously when they have obvious biases and a general lack of perspective.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Perennially my ass. I have probably never even mentioned dude past this thread. Find me one thing I said in here that was actually untrue about him.

I don't know what your deal is with Oden but you're the last person that needs to be talking biases.


----------



## Najee (Apr 5, 2007)

You were on the recent Greg Oden thread rationalizing his fate/taking pot shots at people who predicted his fate, Dre.

I just find it amusing some of the same people on this site riding Brook Lopez are some of the same people who keep coming up with every excuse in the book to rationalize Oden's comparatively worse career. Seriously, do you not see the double standard here? You can't slavishly overrate an inferior player while taking shots at a more superior contemporary and expect you won't get called out on it.

I have no problem with Oden. I have a problem with the people on this site that perennially overrated him and attacked those that didn't have his jersey sent to Springfield already. Big difference, son.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Najee said:


> I didn't say they had anything in common. I just find you and others' arguments laughable.
> 
> People like you, rocketeer and Dre perennially dog Brook Lopez on everything while he's been a productive big man since coming into the NBA. Conversely, you and those guys overrated everything Oden did when he wasn't missing a lot of games from injuries or was in perennial foul trouble/generally ineffective in the few games he did play -- and he was not the player Lopez is.
> 
> It's really hard to take people like you seriously when they have obvious biases and a general lack of perspective.


Look at Lopez PER. Thats just not that good. When Oden actually played he had a PER of 19.5 

As much as it ruins your crusade against Oden being this absolutely horrible player. When he was actually on the court he produced, despite still being very raw. Lopez is what he is, a big man with a nice offensive repertoire, but doesn't really do anything besides score buckets. Sorry, but 6 rebounds a game out of your 7 footer is just sad.

Its funny you bring up biases, thats like pot calling kettle black. I have no bias one way or the other with Lopez. In fact, I appreciate him for what he is. A skilled offensive big man, that doesn't really bring much else to the table. I loved him at Stanford. Read threads in the draft section, I raved about how good he was going to be. But, to me, he's a young Kevin Duckworth. A good C, but not great. Its funny that people would say he's a top 3 Center.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

Lopez is averaging six rebounds a game and hasn't had a double double yet this year. Let's stop pretendling like he's an all star calibur player alright? Bigs that can't rebound or defend are useless in this league, and his scoring isn't even as good as it was last year.

I'm sure his offense will start clicking eventually, but it doesn't change the fact that he hasn't been a top five center this year, hell he's not even a top five center in the conference.


----------



## jmk (Jun 30, 2002)

VanillaPrice said:


> *Lopez is averaging six rebounds a game and hasn't had a double double yet this year.* Let's stop pretendling like he's an all star calibur player alright Bigs that can't rebound or defend are useless in this league, and his scoring isn't even as good as it was last year.
> 
> I'm sure his offense will start clicking eventually, but it doesn't change the fact that he hasn't been a top five center this year, hell he's not even a top five center in the conference.


Actually, he had a double-double last nite. Took him 3 OTs to get it, but a double-double nonetheless.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

jmk said:


> Actually, he had a double-double last nite. Took him 3 OTs to get it, but a double-double nonetheless.


lol ok.


----------



## GrandKenyon6 (Jul 19, 2005)

Terrible terrible terrible performance. He gets softer every day. WTF is going on.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

GrandKenyon6 said:


> Terrible terrible terrible performance. He gets softer every day. WTF is going on.


3-10 from the floor and TWO boards in 39 minutes?! :laugh:


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Alright guys, there comes a time when one must be objective....something is wrong. He's just not the same guy from last year.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

HB said:


> Alright guys, there comes a time when one must be objective....something is wrong. He's just not the same guy from last year.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

HB said:


> Alright guys, there comes a time when one must be objective....something is wrong. He's just not the same guy from last year.


----------



## Juggernaut (Jul 20, 2010)

> *Brook Lopez shattered expectations* in Friday's win over the Bobcats, *tying a season-high with 11 rebounds* to go with 31 points on 14-of-27 shooting, one assist, one steal, and one block.
> 
> *Twitter was on fire with news of his second double-double of the season*, and he made a *concerted effort to crash the boards tonight*. Yes, it's funny to say, but he is an interesting buy-low candidate right now, with tonight's effort begging the question of whether or not the light bulb flickered.


31/11/1/1/1 !!!

Yeah dawg.


----------



## Dissonance (Jul 21, 2004)

:laugh:


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

11 rebounds...he must be on an IV at the hospital right now


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

:laugh:


----------



## Dissonance (Jul 21, 2004)

Dre™ said:


> 11 rebounds...he must be on an IV at the hospital right now


Good god. I didn't even realize he avged 5.6 rebs a game in 34 mins this yr. He makes Amare look like a rebounding machine.


----------



## roux (Jun 20, 2006)

If you are 7 feet tall, and playing 35 minutes a night you should be able to grab at least 8 rebounds a game.. even if by accident.. just saying


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Brooke hired Mark Blount as his personal rebounding coach last summer...


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

LMAO...I remember Grizz fans saying Rudy was a weak rebounding SF because he couldn't get at least 6 a game...jeebus weebus.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Lopez is the next Rik Smits. Which isn't all that bad really, but people who wanted to call him the second best center in the league are fools.


----------



## Vuchato (Jan 14, 2006)

> During the post game Lopez was talking about his double-double and he said something pretty interesting. He mentioned how he doesnt get a ton of rebounds cause he usually taking off down the floor looking for the early seal by design.


That's at least part off the reason he's getting so few defensive boards, along with the mono, and also why Humphries is getting so many. His offensive rebounding's taken a dip too, but he's still solid there, with a higher orb% than guys like Millsap, Nene, Kaman, and Marc Gasol.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

Hmmm...aren't I supposed to be regretting making this thread by now? 2nd best center in the league :laugh:


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

Vuchato said:


> That's at least part off the reason he's getting so few defensive boards, along with the mono, and also why Humphries is getting so many. His offensive rebounding's taken a dip too, but he's still solid there, with a higher orb% than guys like Millsap, Nene, Kaman, and Marc Gasol.


Those guys play on teams and with teammates that are significant offensive rebounders.


----------



## OneBadLT123 (Oct 4, 2005)

Damn, I thought I was being generous by calling him Shareef Abdur-Rahim part 2


----------



## Vuchato (Jan 14, 2006)

MemphisX said:


> Those guys play on teams and with teammates that are significant offensive rebounders.


not like Brook is playing with the guys with the 5th and 6th highest orb% among players with at least 1000 minutes this season


----------



## Dissonance (Jul 21, 2004)

And he follows it up with 4 rebs tonight...


----------



## ProBskbllTalk (Feb 9, 2011)

He is just tall and awkwardly slow. His own GM stated he will never be a 10 rebound a game guy.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Nope but this isn't exactly the first time the Nets have dealt with a center who doesn't rebound well, heck not sure they've had a center who's had a 10 rpg season in the last 10 years.


----------



## Juggernaut (Jul 20, 2010)

> Brook Lopez double-doubled for the second time in three outings on Monday, scoring *11 points* on 5-of-16 shooting with *10 rebounds*, two assists, two steals, and three blocks in the Nets' 102-85 loss against the Spurs.
> 
> We called him an interesting buy-low candidate after Friday's 11-rebound outing, and then he followed up with a four-rebound outing on Saturday, but tonight's result suggests a more concerted effort toward cleaning the glass. If he gets that straightened out, he could be in for a big finish.


Maybe we were wrong about him?

:2ti:


----------



## BenDengGo (Feb 1, 2004)

...but 5-16 shooting is unacceptable for a center.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

ummm that was against Tim Duncan who played excellent defense


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

Doesn't change the fact that he has underpreformed this year.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Okay! Didnt know that post was about his performance this year....gotcha!

You do realize Brook is putting up 19.4ppg this year right?


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

HB said:


> Okay! Didnt know that post was about his performance this year....gotcha!
> 
> You do realize Brook is putting up 19.4ppg this year right?


Which looks pretty nice compared to his 5.8 rebounds per game. 5.8. Do you realize how ****ing awful that is? That and he's one of the worst anchors in the leauge, he's simply not a good NBA player. Big men that can't rebound or defend the paint are useless.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Yawn!!!!

Like you folks didnt know he was a weak rebounder prior to this season, again if his front court teammates are solid rebounders why does it matter? Someone is getting the rebounds right as long as its not the opposing team. Favors and Humphries are pretty good rebounders for their position. Its not like this is a Kidd type situation where the point has to rebound. I bet you didnt know he was putting up 19.4ppg you just wanted to say some slick stuff about how he was under performing. This same under performing center would be on the list of most GMs of big men they'd like on their teams. 

P.s. Does Gasol defend the paint? Or his rebounding makes up for that?


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

Any center with an offensive pulse can put up 19 points in 34 minutes on 15 shots if you are willing to be one of the worst teams in the league.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

:laugh: here we go again. Wonder how many 20ppg seasons Okafor has had


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

HB said:


> Yawn!!!!
> 
> Like you folks didnt know he was a weak rebounder prior to this season, again if his front court teammates are solid rebounders why does it matter? Someone is getting the rebounds right as long as its not the opposing team. Favors and Humphries are pretty good rebounders for their position. Its not like this is a Kidd type situation where the point has to rebound. I bet you didnt know he was putting up 19.4ppg you just wanted to say some slick stuff about how he was under performing. This same under performing center would be on the list of most GMs of big men they'd like on their teams.
> 
> P.s. Does Gasol defend the paint? Or his rebounding makes up for that?


Trying to excuse a 7 foot center pulling down less than six rebounds a game is making you look stupid. It's embarassing for any post player to be pulling down that few and Lopez is no exception. You're just to blind to see that your boy Lopez has no place on a championship team. Oh, and do you honestly think that GMs would take Lopez over Dwight, Noah, Horford, Bynum, Griffin, Aldrige, Gasol ect. He's not a top ten big man in the leauge.

Oh, and Gasol rebounds and defends at a higher level then Lopez will ever, and that's a fact.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

LOL at no place on a championship team. Dallas wouldn't like to have a Brook Lopez? OKC? SA? MIA? ATL.....yes ATL! What the heck are you talking about man? Again he's a bad rebounder, its not like that is going to change over night, but newsflash the Nets are not losing because he isnt rebounding, there are two other guys that do a pretty good job on the boards. You are the one making excuses. There are only so many rebounds that can go around in the game.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

HB said:


> LOL at no place on a championship team. Dallas wouldn't like to have a Brook Lopez? OKC? SA? MIA? ATL.....yes ATL! What the heck are you talking about man? Again he's a bad rebounder, its not like that is going to change over night, but newsflash the Nets are not losing because he isnt rebounding, there are two other guys that do a pretty good job on the boards. You are the one making excuses. There are only so many rebounds that can go around in the game.


Dallas is better off with Tyson Chandler. They have more then enough scoring ut they need defense and rebounding, which are two things that Lopez is pathetic at. Oklahoma City isn't a contender and wouldn't be even if Lopez joined ship. The only possible one would be Miami, and that's because you have three allstars to compensate for him. He's not a good player and no amount of your homer tears is going to change that.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Me thinks you are now rowing on Denial. So OKC wouldn't become a contender with Lopez? Dallas would be worse with Lopez instead of Chandler? Lopez isn't a good player. Gotcha! Glad to see we have got some smart posters on here.

Funny how you skip your home team knowing damn well they are in need of a center. Oh wait you live in ATL but support the Lakers right? Maybe home team is wrong.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

HB said:


> :laugh: here we go again. Wonder how many 20ppg seasons Okafor has had


Okafor has never been an offensive player. 

Anyway trumpeting his ppg is the equivalent of trumpeting the ppg of a PG averaging 3 assists per game in 34 minutes. Who cares!


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

MemphisX said:


> Okafor has never been an offensive player.
> 
> Anyway trumpeting his ppg is the equivalent of trumpeting the ppg of a PG averaging 3 assists per game in 34 minutes. Who cares!


It was a response to the guy who said he has underperformed this season. (If Brook has underperformed, he sure has made Humphries and Favors look good.) I mean if we go by your logic, Blake is putting up empty stats on a losing team right? Its not like teams are just letting this guys get their way when they have the ball.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

HB said:


> Me thinks you are now rowing on Denial. So OKC wouldn't become a contender with Lopez? Dallas would be worse with Lopez instead of Chandler? Lopez isn't a good player. Gotcha! Glad to see we have got some smart posters on here.
> 
> Funny how you skip your home team knowing damn well they are in need of a center. Oh wait you live in ATL but support the Lakers right? Maybe home team is wrong.


Coming from the guy who posts more nonsense than Ballscientist? Okay. And no, Oklahoma City wouldn't be a contender with Lopez. They're fine offensively and Lopez couldn't play at their pace. What they need is an enforcer and a rebounder, not some pansy ass that can score at a okay amount of points on subpar efficiency. Absolutely, you can't name five players that are more important to their defensive schemes than Tyson is to Dallas. He's been fantastic this year. Always good to see the Admins taking the high road.

I'm from L.A. I was born and raised there and I grew up a Lakers fan. Since then I've lived in Orlando (and I support the Maigc, particurally Dwight) and now that I'm in Atlnata I support the Hawks to a lesser extent. The only two more frequent posters on the Hawks board then me are GregOden and ATLien. But keep running your mouth and pretending like you know what you're talking about.

As for the Hawks' situation, yeah, they need a big. But there's no sense in plugging in Lopez there instead of Horford/Smith when both of them are simply better basketball players. Both of them are more important offensively and defensively than Lopez has been in any part of his career and it's not debatable.


----------



## Spaceman Spiff (Aug 2, 2006)

6'6 Chuck Hayes plays 10 less minutes and averages more rebounds than him. And he has to go up against guys 5+ inches taller than him every night, so it's not like he's a guard going for boards against people his size either.

This **** is pathetic. I never checked his stats but I've been hearing about some apocalypse on the way after Brook gets a double double. Now I see why. I better prepare.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

VanillaPrice said:


> Coming from the guy who posts more nonsense than Ballscientist? Okay. And no, Oklahoma City wouldn't be a contender with Lopez. They're fine offensively and Lopez couldn't play at their pace. What they need is an enforcer and a rebounder, not some pansy ass that can score at a okay amount of points on subpar efficiency. Absolutely, you can't name five players that are more important to their defensive schemes than Tyson is to Dallas. He's been fantastic this year. Always good to see the Admins taking the high road.
> 
> I'm from L.A. I was born and raised there and I grew up a Lakers fan. Since then I've lived in Orlando (and I support the Maigc, particurally Dwight) and now that I'm in Atlnata I support the Hawks to a lesser extent. The only two more frequent posters on the Hawks board then me are GregOden and ATLien. But keep running your mouth and pretending like you know what you're talking about.
> 
> As for the Hawks' situation, yeah, they need a big. But there's no sense in plugging in Lopez there instead of Horford/Smith when both of them are simply better basketball players. Both of them are more important offensively and defensively than Lopez has been in any part of his career and it's not debatable.


You dont know much about basketball do you? Its not about better basketball, its about allowing those guys play their natural positions. For all the crap you have said about Brook, most GMs will agree that he is a pretty good offensive center. He will give those other guys more room to operate. On a very good team, Brook is a legit third option, maybe a good 2nd option. The Hawks would love a guy like Brook especially when they have good rebounders in Smith and Horford. He's a guy you can dump the ball into the post and he can get fouled or put the ball in the Net. I havent even talked about his perimeter game which will draw away the opposing center. The more I think about your post that he can't help a contender, the more I question your bball IQ.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

HB said:


> You dont know much about basketball do you? Its not about better basketball, its about allowing those guys play their natural positions. For all the crap you have said about Brook, most GMs will agree that he is a pretty good offensive center. He will give those other guys more room to operate. On a very good team, Brook is a legit third option, maybe a good 2nd option. The Hawks would love a guy like Brook especially when they have good rebounders in Smith and Horford. He's a guy you can dump the ball into the post and he can get fouled or put the ball in the Net. I havent even talked about his perimeter game which will draw away the opposing center. The more I think about your post that he can't help a contender, the more I question your bball IQ.


It's ironic that you're trying to downplay my basketball IQ while pimping a big man that can't defend or rebound. No team in the history of the NBA has won a championship with it's best post player averaging less then six boards a game. It just hasn't happened. Brook Lopez doesn't benefit his team in the way that wins games. It's why he's played on historically bad teams and has never even dreamed of treading water. He's an empty stats guy that plays one side of the court marginally well while being atrocious on the other side. But keep on trying to throw personal insults my way mr. Admin, because god knows you can't win an argument using logic.


----------



## Juggernaut (Jul 20, 2010)

Please don't tell me youre recommending putting Smith at SF. Because that is just horrible.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

VanillaPrice said:


> It's ironic that you're trying to downplay my basketball IQ while pimping a big man that can't defend or rebound. No team in the history of the NBA has won a championship with it's best post player averaging less then six boards a game. *It just hasn't happened. Brook Lopez doesn't benefit his team in the way that wins games. It's why he's played on historically bad teams and has never even dreamed of treading water. He's an empty stats guy that plays one side of the court marginally well while being atrocious on the other side. *But keep on trying to throw personal insults my way mr. Admin, because god knows you can't win an argument using logic.


LOL what personal insults have I thrown at you? I questioned your bball IQ, fair game going by some of what you've said. You don't see me throwing a tantrum when you compared me to BS. You said no contender can make use of him. Note, most contenders have more than one or two good big men on their rosters. You keep overrating rebounding like its all a big man should do. How are the Hawks doing with Pachulia? How about Oklahoma with Ibaka? Are the Mavs going to win a title with Chandler and Haywood? 
You keep saying stuff that continually baffles me. So its Brook Lopez' fault that the Nets have never surrounded him with good teammates? Its Brook Lopez' fault that the Nets are a bad team? That's why he keeps playing on historically bad teams? Really? I suppose you work in the NBA that's why you would know if good teams would want him or not. I do recall the Nuggets tried to get him in the Melo swap and where shot down quick. Guess there are other teams that want this empty stats guy on their team no?


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

HB said:


> LOL what personal insults have I thrown at you? I questioned your bball IQ, fair game going by some of what you've said. You don't see me throwing a tantrum when you compared me to BS. You said no contender can make use of him. Note, most contenders have more than one or two good big men on their rosters. You keep overrating rebounding like its all a big man should do. How are the Hawks doing with Pachulia? How about Oklahoma with Ibaka? Are the Mavs going to win a title with Chandler and Haywood?
> You keep saying stuff that continually baffles me. So its Brook Lopez' fault that the Nets have never surrounded him with good teammates? Its Brook Lopez' fault that the Nets are a bad team? That's why he keeps playing on historically bad teams? Really? I suppose you work in the NBA that's why you would know if good teams would want him or not. I do recall the Nuggets tried to get him in the Melo swap and where shot down quick. Guess there are other teams that want this empty stats guy on their team no?


Temper tantrum? Hardly. And it absolutely was not fair game to question my basketball IQ when you're the one trying to pimp a big that can't rebound or defend. I'm getting tired of repeating myself. You said that Lopez could be the second or third best player on a contender, when that's simply not true because he doesn't do anything at a high enough level to offput his weaknessess. A big man needs to be able to rebound, that's essential. You pretending like the ability to shoot a fifteen footer is more valuable is laughable. Pachulia doesn't start; but the Hawks are doing fine with Horford and Smith (both of whom are miles ahead of Lopez). Oklahoma City isn't a contender, and Chandler pulls down ten boards a game and plays alongside the best offensive big in the game.

Not my fault you can't grasp a simple concept. Brook Lopez should be held accountable that his team's have not won 30% of their games during his tenure on the team. I'm not asking him to lead them to 50 wins but the Nets can't even crack thirty.

Just give it a rest, at this point I think even you know that you're wrong but you're too stubborn to admit it. There isn't a person on this board that sees Brook to be half the player that you claim he is.


----------



## Pump Bacon (Dec 11, 2010)

Lopez is like a poor man's version of a *young *Pau Gasol. They both have plenty of overall basketball skills especially when it comes to moves on the offensive end but fall short when it comes to things like toughness, rebounding, and overall impact. I have no idea why Brook is struggling so much this season to get rebounds but he'd be averaging similar numbers that a young Gasol had otherwise, like he did last season FWIW.

It'd be interesting to see how he handles Avery's old school way of coaching. 

If the Nets grab a star player it'll also be interesting to see how that affects Lopez's game. Right now the Nets are basically playing without a real star player which just doesn't work even in the East.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Pump Bacon said:


> *Lopez is like a poor man's version of a young Pau Gasol.* They both have plenty of overall basketball skills especially when it comes to moves on the offensive end but fall short when it comes to things like toughness, rebounding, and overall impact. I have no idea why Brook is struggling so much this season to get rebounds but he'd be averaging similar numbers that a young Gasol had otherwise, like he did last season FWIW.
> 
> It'd be interesting to see how he handles Avery's old school way of coaching.
> 
> If the Nets grab a star player it'll also be interesting to see how that affects Lopez's game. Right now the Nets are basically playing without a real star player which just doesn't work even in the East.


B...bu..but why would any championship team want a guy like that?


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

Pau Gasol put his teams in the playoffs three years in a row, in the west. New Jersey is bad, even in the east. Lopez is a homeless mans Gasol.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

You don't want a big man who can't defend or rebound because it puts undue pressure on the ones next to him, and he's not a prolific enough scorer to where you take that risk. He's destined to be on 40 win teams if he's lucky.


----------



## jayk009 (Aug 6, 2003)

sooo whos better...2006-2007 Eddy Curry or this years version of Brook Lopez? 

Don't forget, Eddy Curry put up 19.5 points per game that year!


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

I'd pick Curry because he wasn't even playing up to his full potential then. Lopez doesn't rebound or defend because he's soft, Curry didn't care despite all the ability and physical gifts he had.

And Curry's post game was so advanced he gave half an effort and was bustin people down on the block. A real shame how he just gave up on his career.


----------



## Pump Bacon (Dec 11, 2010)

Sir Patchwork said:


> Pau Gasol put his teams in the playoffs three years in a row, in the west. New Jersey is bad, even in the east. Lopez is a homeless mans Gasol.


Yea homeless man is more on the money but don't forget that a young Gasol also "led" the Grizzlies to 23 and 28 win in his first 2 seasons and never won a playoffs game prior to the Lakers. I'd also rank the supporting cast he had for the playoffs Grizzlies as a significantly better one than the Nets FWIW. At the end of the day, a young early 20's Gasol or Lopez aren't franchise players and not even fringe stars, especially Lopez.

And about age, Lopez is only 22 years old (but soon to be 23 in April). Gasol didn't start getting All-Star nods and significant recognition until his mid/late 20's, mostly after joining one of the best sports organizations and stacked rosters ever aka Lakers. He then further developed his game and became one of the best bigs in the league. Of course thats an extreme example but I think its reasonable to say that the 22 year old Lopez has the potential to significantly improve his own game as well.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Pump Bacon said:


> Yea homeless man is more on the money but don't forget that a young Gasol also "led" the Grizzlies to 23 and 28 win in his first 2 seasons and never won a playoffs game. I'd also rank the supporting cast he had for the playoffs Grizzlies as a significantly better one than the Nets FWIW. At the end of the day, a young early 20's Gasol or Lopez aren't franchise players and not even fringe stars, especially Lopez.
> 
> And about age, Lopez is only 22 years old. Gasol didn't start getting All-Star nods and significant recognition until his mid/late 20's, mostly after joining one of the best sports organizations and stacked rosters ever aka Lakers. He then further developed his game and became one of the best bigs in the league. Of course thats an extreme example but I think its reasonable to say that the 22 year old Lopez has the potential to significantly improve his own game as well.


Please post more often on this board...please!


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Pump Bacon said:


> Yea homeless man is more on the money but don't forget that a young Gasol also "led" the Grizzlies to 23 and 28 win in his first 2 seasons and never won a playoffs game prior to the Lakers. I'd also rank the supporting cast he had for the playoffs Grizzlies as a significantly better one than the Nets FWIW. At the end of the day, a young early 20's Gasol or Lopez aren't franchise players and not even fringe stars, especially Lopez.
> 
> And about age, Lopez is only 22 years old (but soon to be 23 in April). Gasol didn't start getting All-Star nods and significant recognition until his mid/late 20's, mostly after joining one of the best sports organizations and stacked rosters ever aka Lakers. He then further developed his game and became one of the best bigs in the league. Of course thats an extreme example but I think its reasonable to say that the 22 year old Lopez has the potential to significantly improve his own game as well.


Not really that simple. 

Gasol was averaging 8 or 9 rebounds off the break, and he displayed the same pallet of skills that he shows now, he's just got more consistent and confident with them as he's aged. You can even put Brook Lopez on the Grizzlies back then and they surely don't win as many games or sneak into a fairly tough Western Conference playoff.

Lopez doesn't show the same potential to improve Gasol did...at all. Where his weaknesses are, he doesn't seem like he even acknowledges them to *improve*. Johnson gets on him all the time about rebounding and he whines and says "**** him" instead of owning up to his shortcomings. 

Lopez could improve significantly, but he won't, and even then he wouldn't be on the level of a Pau Gasol, that's just ridiculous. He's a soft guy who'll score enough garbage points to seem relevant but he's not a big man conducive to winning anything, and that's that.


----------



## Pump Bacon (Dec 11, 2010)

Dre™;6490293 said:


> Not really that simple.
> 
> Gasol was averaging 8 or 9 rebounds off the break, and he displayed the same pallet of skills that he shows now, he's just got more consistent and confident with them as he's aged. You can even put Brook Lopez on the Grizzlies back then and they surely don't win as many games or sneak into a fairly tough Western Conference playoff.


I'm not saying he's going to be as good as Gasol, my posts have said that Lopez now is basically a poor man's version of Gasol's younger self.

Lopez averaged 8.1 and 8.6 rebounds in his first two seasons and also has a palette of skills. You should expect Lopez to do worse than Gasol at basically everything, he's a poor man's version of a younger him.



> Lopez doesn't show the same potential to improve Gasol did...at all. Where his weaknesses are, he doesn't seem like he even acknowledges them to *improve*. Johnson gets on him all the time about rebounding and he whines and says "**** him" instead of owning up to his shortcomings.
> 
> Lopez could improve significantly, but he won't, and even then he wouldn't be on the level of a Pau Gasol, that's just ridiculous. He's a soft guy who'll score enough garbage points to seem relevant but he's not a big man conducive to winning anything, and that's that.


That kind of stuff was said about a young Gasol as well except cursing at the coaching. Gasol seemed to have loathed his time in the Memphis organization and thats a major reason why he was traded in the first place. And to reiterate I've never said that he'd be the level of a Pau Gasol; Lopez is like a poor man's/homeless man's version of a *young* Gasol. Compare them when they're similarly aged and they're both very skilled, finesse players that lack the rebounding, toughness, experience, etc. to get to their next level. Given more time, and especially put in the right circumstances like Pau eventually was, I think its reasonable that Lopez could significantly improve his own game.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

> Lopez could improve significantly, but he won't, and even then he wouldn't be on the level of a Pau Gasol, that's just ridiculous. He's a soft guy who'll score enough garbage points to seem relevant but he's not a big man conducive to winning anything, and that's that.


You know they said the same about Zbo i.e. he is not conducive to winning, and we all know how that turned out. When you make definitive statements like you are the alpha and omega of basketball, its just begging for a bump in the future. Will Lopez ever have 10rpg seasons, I highly doubt it. 7-8 might be his best of which he did his first two seasons. But to say the guy will never be conducive to winning because he's had the unfortunate choice of playing with the Nets is kinda silly. They've never surrounded him with teammates capable of going into the playoffs.



> Lopez averaged 8.1 and 8.6 rebounds in his first two seasons and also has a pallet of skills.


Thank you once again.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

I already said what I was gonna say. I do apologize for confusing your estimation of Lopez as a poor man's Gasol.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

I didnt say that though


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Talking to Bacon


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

HB said:


> You know they said the same about Zbo i.e. he is not conducive to winning, and we all know how that turned out. When you make definitive statements like you are the alpha and omega of basketball, its just begging for a bump in the future. Will Lopez ever have 10rpg seasons, I highly doubt it. 7-8 might be his best of which he did his first two seasons. But to say the guy will never be conducive to winning because he's had the unfortunate choice of playing with the Nets is kinda silly. They've never surrounded him with teammates capable of going into the playoffs.
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you once again.


WTF has Randolph won?


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

^The Grizz are 5 games above .500. Fighting for a playoff berth. That's winning basketball no?

BTW just thought I'd point this out, Andrea Barganini might even be a worse rebounder than Brook.


----------



## Adam (Jan 28, 2003)

HB said:


> ^The Grizz are 5 games above .500. Fighting for a playoff berth. That's winning basketball no?
> 
> BTW just thought I'd point this out, Andrea Barganini might even be a worse rebounder than Brook.


Nice try but Bargnani isn't a center and nobody has ever tried to call him a top three center.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Never said he was. Just making the point, that there's another 7 footer in the league who sucks at rebounding. P.s. you do realize Dirk is averaging 6.8 rpg right now, though I am not sure if that is a good thing lol


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

HB said:


> ^The Grizz are 5 games above .500. Fighting for a playoff berth. That's winning basketball no?
> 
> BTW just thought I'd point this out, Andrea Barganini might even be a worse rebounder than Brook.


Once the Grizz make the playoffs, then we can talk. Which won't happen.


----------



## GrandKenyon6 (Jul 19, 2005)

Watching this guy play is infuriating.


----------

