My latest whacky blowing it up strategy

[elindholm]

Its based on watching him in college and being able to look at him and see that he's highly athletic and has a skill set that pertains to the game of basketball other than just being tall. Lopez is an unathletic, unskilled, slug and is the exact opposite of the type of player Id ever want on my team if I were a GM.

The scouts and Suns front office said Lopez was athletic too. I'll be the first to admit he hasn't shown much athleticism yet on an NBA court, but then neither has Clark.

Also Id like to know how it is you have some magical inside knowledge as to why he hasn't played more. Sure he's got a Hall of Famer and a really good role player (possible 6th man of the year) playing his position ahead of him, but no- that can't have anything to do with it.

Maybe it's because he's terrible every time he steps on the floor? You seem to be forgetting that Clark could also play PF, especially in the Suns' system -- which means he's also losing minutes to Amundson and, yes, Lopez.

Lets give the guy more than 42 games (28 of which he's actually seen the floor in) in his rookie year before we right the guy off.

Not my point. My point is, it makes no sense to prefer Clark to Lopez. On paper, their "potential" is the same, and so far only one of them has shown any glimpse of that potential. It is a minimal glimpse, to be sure, but at least it's something.

One of the misleading things about "potential" is that, the less anyone knows about you, the more you have. A random six-year-old in the Chicago projects has the "potential" to be the next Jordan -- or the next Obama, for that matter -- but that sure as hell doesn't make it likely.

 

[HooverDam]

I couldnt disagree more. Do you watch much college basketball? Im basing my opinions on Clark and Lopez on what they did in college where they got a lot of playing time and thats really all we have to judge them by so far. Clark did well in college, showed he could jump through the gym and was a good player. Lopez was a slug who never developed any skills and rode his talented brothers coat tails.

Other than being tall what skills does Lopez have? He can't run, he can't shoot, he can't pass. He's OK at blocking shots but thats likely a subset of him being tall more than a refined skill but really we haven't seen enough to know.

Clark at least can run the floor, was a decent passer in college, can take people off the dribble for his size, etc. Ill take skill and speed over size and strength any day of the week in basketball, but thats just my preference for how the game should be played.

 

[elindholm]

Do you watch much college basketball?

Nope, none.

Im basing my opinions on Clark and Lopez on what they did in college

I think that's a mistake. Performance is college is a pretty poor predictor of how someone will do in the pros, especially once you get past the first ten picks of any given draft. The list of guys who hit their drafts with great "potential" and never amounted to squat runs a mile long.

Other than being tall what skills does Lopez have? He can't run, he can't shoot, he can't pass.

Far be it from me to defend Lopez, since I think he's basically an oaf. But let's be fair and look at his last three games:

1/15 @ATL: 11 pts, 6 rebs, 6 blks in 31 min
1/16 @CHA: 14 pts, 2 rebs, 3 blks in 23 min
1/18 @MEM: 19 pts, 7 rebs, 3 blks in 29 min

The Charlotte game was a blowout, so at least some of his minutes there were garbage time. But the other two games were close, which means he was getting real minutes against very respectable opposition.

And if you just look at those numbers -- forgetting, for a moment, that we're talking about Robin Lopez -- you think, "Holy crap, the Suns might actually have a center!" They average out to 15/5/4 in 28 minutes. Not great, by any standard, but pretty darn respectable. And, it's worth noting that he has only two total turnovers in his last eight games, playing in perhaps the most turnover-prone offense in the league.

Again, it's not much to get excited about. But choosing Clark's college-based "potential" over Lopez's demonstrated performance just doesn't seem rational.

Clark at least can run the floor, was a decent passer in college, can take people off the dribble for his size, etc. Ill take skill and speed over size and strength any day of the week in basketball, but thats just my preference for how the game should be played.

Then I guess it's also your preference for wings over big men. Of course a 7' 1" guy isn't going to beat people off the dribble. On the other hand, 6' 10" guys who think they're guards are a dime a dozen. The only thing I've gotten a clear impression of during Clark's time in the NBA is his shooting mechanic, which is coyote fugly. I assume you've noticed the same thing from tracking his college career.

 

[HooverDam]

1/15 @ATL: 11 pts, 6 rebs, 6 blks in 31 min
1/16 @CHA: 14 pts, 2 rebs, 3 blks in 23 min
1/18 @MEM: 19 pts, 7 rebs, 3 blks in 29 min

Im honestly shocked he's played that well recently. I wouldve bet everything that Robin Lopez would never score 20 points a game in his career now its looking entirely plausible. I guess even a blind squirrel finds a nut, but he's found 3.

Then I guess it's also your preference for wings over big men. Of course a 7' 1" guy isn't going to beat people off the dribble. On the other hand, 6' 10" guys who think they're guards are a dime a dozen. The only thing I've gotten a clear impression of during Clark's time in the NBA is his shooting mechanic, which is coyote fugly. I assume you've noticed the same thing from tracking his college career.

Yah Clarks never been a great shooter but a lot of bigger guys coming out of college (or back in the day HS) aren't. Heck Amare is probably one of the top 5 or 10 shooting big guys in the league and if you recall his first few years his shooting was abysmal. I do think Clark can be a good passer and sort of a point forward (as much as I hate that term). Since we haven't seen him enough to judge him in the NBA, all I really have to go on is his time at L'Ville.

What annoys me about the selections of Lopez and Clark in consecutive years is it shows exactly how the Suns have NO PLAN. The selection of Lopez tells you that they want to go more traditional, a lumbering traditional center, slow things down etc (as did the hiring of Porter and everything Kerr stated for a year). Then they can Porter, hire Gentry, and draft Clark which says they want to go uptempo like they have for most of their history. If the team just had a plan, any plan, I'd be happy. They may chose a plan I don't like but I wish I could tell they at least had a plan beyond tomorrow, it seems that they don't and that drives me insane.

 

[elindholm]

Im honestly shocked he's played that well recently.

Me too!

Heck Amare is probably one of the top 5 or 10 shooting big guys in the league and if you recall his first few years his shooting was abysmal.

Stoudemire is a weird example, though, because he was never in a stable program (and of course did not go to college).

What annoys me about the selections of Lopez and Clark in consecutive years is it shows exactly how the Suns have NO PLAN.

No argument there.

They may chose a plan I don't like but I wish I could tell they at least had a plan beyond tomorrow, it seems that they don't and that drives me insane.

Yep, I think there's very little to be optimistic about right now -- not even Lopez's three consecutive acorns. It's pretty brutal.

 

[mojorizen7]

E just debating to debate.

With the frame of mind that you're going to blow up your team,and given the choice to only keep one of the two men?(Lopez or Clark) you keep the more athletic,versatile player with the higher ceiling IMO.

Unless your plan is to build a team with Greg Ostertag or Bryant "Big country" Reeves types at center that is......then Lopez is your guy.

Clark has had very little chance to grow here thus far, which is a fact. The rookie has looked raw and lost at times IMO. I'm not sure the SUNS know what his role is(if any) on this team.
Lopez since being drafted has been involved in the rotation,fallen out of the rotation and been ineffective 95% of the time. Lopez' role here has been well defined since day 1 and he has failed miserably.

 

[elindholm]

I'm amazed that anyone can be so passionate about Clark based on his college career. I'll just leave it at that.

 

[Chaplin]

I'm amazed that anyone can be so passionate about Clark based on his college career. I'll just leave it at that.

But on the other hand, it's hard to write a guy off when he's gotten very little playing time as well.

As far as who to choose between Lopez and Clark if you had to, then I'd probably choose Clark because he can do a lot more than Robin. Or at least, potentially can do a lot more than what Robin does right now.

 

[elindholm]

If forced to choose, I'll stick with Lopez.

 

[krazyasiankid]

Earl Clark over Lopez for me. Clark has a more versitile offncive game. All Robin can really do is shoot wide open 5 foot jumpers.

 

[SirStefan32]

I agree with Eric. Lopez is showing us something. Granted, it's not very much, but he is showing us some of that "potential" that everyone is always talking about. Clark, on the other hand, is not showing us anything. I guess Clark may have more "potential", but we sure as hell haven't seen any of it.

16 points per game on 71% shooting, with 5.5 rebounds and 2.5 blocks per game in the last 4 games (in 29 minutes per game). Hell, he even looks competent on defense.

I will take that over Clark's "potential" right now.

 

[krazyasiankid]

I guess Clark may have more "potential", but we sure as hell haven't seen any of it.

Thats because he isnt getting any playing time at the moment. But I really hope he gets more soon, I want to see him play, and show everyone his potential.

 

[SirStefan32]

Thats because he isnt getting any playing time at the moment. But I really hope he gets more soon, I want to see him play, and show everyone his potential.

Again, there is a reason he isn't playing.

 

[Chaplin]

Again, there is a reason he isn't playing.

Yeah, their names are Grant Hill and Jared Dudley. Robin Lopez has... Channing Frye? You can't deny that there are a lot more opportunities available for Lopez than with Clark with our current team.

 

[elindholm]

Yeah, their names are Grant Hill and Jared Dudley.

And Lou Amundson, since Clark could also play PF. That's the guy he can't beat out for minutes.

Are you really saying that, if you had to pick one or the other right now, you'd want Clark?

 

[Chaplin]

And Lou Amundson, since Clark could also play PF. That's the guy he can't beat out for minutes.

Are you really saying that, if you had to pick one or the other right now, you'd want Clark?

What would the context be? For this season (and maybe the next), then Robin might be the better option. However, for going beyond this season and for the next several years, Clark would be the better option.

I've never been that high on Robin. Yes, I've given him credit where credit is due in the past, even though people here consistently thought he was a waste, but I never thought we'd see 4 straight games of what he's done. I'd like to reserve judgment until the end of next week, but it's hard to get your hopes up about him since he has shown next to nothing until now. I'm crossing my fingers that this isn't a fluke.

I know you're not that impressed with Dragic, Eric, but I think he's earned the playing time he's gotten--Lopez needs the same timeframe to earn his. So far, so good, but he's far from being an everyday starter yet. I'm sure you'd agree.

 

[ASUCHRIS]

Luckily, this isn't an either or proposition...

 

[mojorizen7]

Yeah, their names are Grant Hill and Jared Dudley. Robin Lopez has... Channing Frye? You can't deny that there are a lot more opportunities available for Lopez than with Clark with our current team.

+1
I also agree about allowing for more time and sustained effectiveness from Lopez before we all decide he's finally "turned the corner." (like the rest of this season maybe?)

If the light has suddenly come on for Lopez then that will make a transition to move away from this aging,not-so-hungry team that much easier IMO.

Lets give Clark 15 minutes per(at Grant Hill's expense) and see what we've got there. To claim that he's not played because he can't play is a tad ignorant IMO.

IIRC didn't we draft E.Clark BEFORE G.Hill decided to return as a FA? Maybe someone can assist with that...

 

[HooverDam]

Im glad Lopez is playing well lately, lets hope he can keep it up and maybe itll help is trade value a little bit!

Are you really saying that, if you had to pick one or the other right now, you'd want Clark?

99 out of 100 basketball fans would take Clark. I dont know why you are finding that hard to believe.

 

[elindholm]

99 out of 100 basketball fans would take Clark. I dont know why you are finding that hard to believe.

Well, let's see, of the five or six fans actively participating in this thread, two (SirStefan and I) would take Lopez, and Chaplin is on the fence. So I'm finding your claim of 99% on one side of the debate to be a bit improbable.

 

[ASUCHRIS]

Im glad Lopez is playing well lately, lets hope he can keep it up and maybe itll help is trade value a little bit!



99 out of 100 basketball fans would take Clark. I dont know why you are finding that hard to believe.

99 is a ridiculous number. Clark was a good college player, but also known as soft and nothing he's done at the next level proves otherwise. Lopez has great size, but poor skills. (albeit improving skills) I

'm not saying I'd definitely take Lopez, but you can't teach his size. Large swingmen who are primarily shooters are a dime a dozen in the NBA. Either way, it's far too early to pass judgement on them, or to proclaim one is obviously better than the other.

 

[HooverDam]

Well, let's see, of the five or six fans actively participating in this thread, two (SirStefan and I) would take Lopez, and Chaplin is on the fence. So I'm finding your claim of 99% on one side of the debate to be a bit improbable.

I think if someone admits they don't watch college hoops, and says evaluating someone based on their college production is useless shouldn't really be trusted for their scouting ability of young players.

Clarks got a vastly higher up side than Lopez, he may not have capitalized on it yet, but to say thats the same as saying an 8th grader has upside is silly.

 

[elindholm]

and says evaluating someone based on their college production is useless

But that's self-evident. Even though I don't watch college sports, scouts and front-office men do, all the time. Those are the people who make draft choices. So what's your analysis that explains why so many mid-first round picks don't amount to anything?

Clarks got a vastly higher up side than Lopez

Then why did they go at basically the same spot in their respective drafts? Apparently your feeling is that the Suns goofed with Lopez but hit a home run with Clark, and your reason for believing that is that your judgment of their college careers is superior to that of the Suns' brass. And you think I'm the one overstepping my bounds of knowledge?

 

[HooverDam]

But that's self-evident. Even though I don't watch college sports, scouts and front-office men do, all the time. Those are the people who make draft choices. So what's your analysis that explains why so many mid-first round picks don't amount to anything?

Because people make mistakes, players decide not to work hard, some Scouts and GMs stink at their jobs, etc. But you act like evaluating and scouting a player is some sort of mysticism and you may as well just pick anyone because looking at their college careers is useless. For every Michael Redd and Jeff Hornacek that slip through the draft cracks there's a lot more Tim Duncans, LeBrons, Carmelos, etc.

Then why did they go at basically the same spot in their respective drafts? Apparently your feeling is that the Suns goofed with Lopez but hit a home run with Clark, and your reason for believing that is that your judgment of their college careers is superior to that of the Suns' brass. And you think I'm the one overstepping my bounds of knowledge?

Yes my judgement is better than Steve Kerrs. I feel I would be (and you probably would to) be a much better GM than he is. I feel he's wholly unqualified and incompetent, he got the job because he's got RINGS! from riding the coat tails of Jordan and Duncan. The guy is a freakin' joke.

And you cant just compare the fact that Clark and Lopez went in similar spots in their draft classes, each draft is different, some deeper than others.

 

[elindholm]

But you act like evaluating and scouting a player is some sort of mysticism and you may as well just pick anyone because looking at their college careers is useless. For every Michael Redd and Jeff Hornacek that slip through the draft cracks there's a lot more Tim Duncans, LeBrons, Carmelos, etc.

No, no, I said it becomes close to useless once you get out of the top ten picks or so. Duncan, James, Anthony etc. were all very high picks, and for good reason.

Yes my judgement is better than Steve Kerrs. I feel I would be (and you probably would to) be a much better GM than he is.

Well, I think either you or I would avoid some of the mistakes that he made, but overall, he's probably better qualified than either of us. But all I meant was, evaluating a player's college career is apparently pretty difficult, because you have some NBA front offices who really want a guy at #12 and others who wouldn't take the same guy even at #19. (These discrepancies are often explained by the teams having different needs, but I think that's only a tiny part of the reason.)

And -- no offense -- I would guess that the Suns' scouting staff is better at evaluating college players than you are. They're sure as hell better at it than I am, which is why I wouldn't trust my own assessment of a player's college career even had I followed it.

If you think that Clark's college career predicts better success than Lopez's, that's fine. But I don't think it's fair to say that Clark's superiority is obvious. It wasn't obvious to the guys who do this for a living, so even if they made a mistake, it probably wasn't an obvious mistake.

Besides, if you read Lopez's profile on nbadraft.net, it describes him as "more mobile and athletic than Brook" and as having "quickness and explosive leaping ability." So apparently Lopez's college career wasn't quite so hapless as you're making it out to be. Either that, or all of these scouts are completely full of it, even with respect to the fairly simple task of assessing how a guy did in college.