Someone explain to me how Brook Lopez was a good pick at number 10?

A soft, unathletic big man with average post moves is not a great lottery pick.

He is Chris Mihm part two. Similar skillset, same size, similar athleticism ect.

Mihm was a solid player in his first 2 seasons with the Lakers at about 10 ppg and 6 or 7 rpg but not worth a lottery pick.

Lopez is so soft that he shot 46.8% against much smaller college players. He also can't deal with physical play.

From Draft Express

[QUOTE]Sometimes, though, he seems content to stay in the five to seven foot range, where his success drops considerably. Lopez is very formulaic in this range when he has his back to the basket, never trying to further back his man down once he has the ball, never putting the ball on the floor for more than one dribble, and almost always going right up into a right-handed hook shot or a turnaround jumper, often rushing his shot. Watching him in this area of the court, you get the idea that he knows exactly what he

Chris Mihm was actually really good before the injuries.

10 and 6 with a block and an assist and average defense is not "really good". It's average.

It will be funny if Brook Lopez works his ass off to gain post moves like Olaujowan and we are all proven wrong, but sadly I don't think he will. To me, Brook Lopez's biggest problem is his lack of competitive fire.

I would have been mad if he dropped to 16 and the sixers took him, so I know how you feel VC. I was sweatin bullets while phx was on the clock hoping they would take Robin so the sixers didn't consider him.

Can you relax and atleast wait till he plays a hand full of games in the nba before saying he isn't a good pick. Every scout saw him as the best Center in the draft. imo the Nets got a good player plus someone to fill the hole they desperately needed to fill.

[QUOTE=Make It Rain]Chris Mihm was actually really good before the injuries.[/QUOTE]
umm chris was solid and showed flashes of potential at times before his injury.

[QUOTE=VCMVP1551]10 and 6 with a block and an assist and average defense is not "really good". It's average.[/QUOTE]
He's been injured since his 1st year. You had to have watched him play. I'm positive you just looked at his career stats and made that assumption. But he was pretty damn good. He looked like he was gonna be something. But injuries have prevented him from maximizing his potential.

[QUOTE=rknine15]Can you relax and atleast wait till he plays a hand full of games in the nba before saying he isn't a good pick. Every scout saw him as the best Center in the draft. imo the Nets got a good player plus someone to fill the hole they desperately needed to fill.[/QUOTE]
Those scouts can't be trusted. They're the same scouts that scouted every bust to come through the league. And how the HELL does one twin average 19/8, the other averages 10/5.5...and the distance between their talent is only 5 draft picks?

[QUOTE=Make It Rain]He's been injured since his 1st year. You had to have watched him play. I'm positive you just looked at his career stats and made that assumption. But he was pretty damn good. He looked like he was gonna be something. But injuries have prevented him from maximizing his potential.[/QUOTE]

I saw him play. I didn't see him that much until he got to Los Angeles because he spent most of his career in Cleveland who didn't have pretty much any games shown on national TV prior to Lebron being drafted.

He sure as hell wasn't "really good" at any point though. He was a role player.

[QUOTE=Posterize246]Those scouts can't be trusted. They're the same scouts that scouted every bust to come through the league. And how the HELL does one twin average 19/8, the other averages 10/5.5...and the distance between their talent is only 5 draft picks?[/QUOTE]
Scouts are aware that the players could be a bust(every player could be a bust). Its a high risk high reward thing. Plus there are a lot more scouts now.

To be honest I only watched Brook play one game so I really dont know how things work in stanford. Maybe it had something to do with the minutes, maybe they were just complementing each other (one would work on scoring and the other in defense) or maybe Brook is just the better one(the one that develop quicker).

Who should they have drafted instead of Brook Lopez?

i watched these guys play high school ball. these guys are the next O'Banan brothers.

[QUOTE=GOBB]Who should they have drafted instead of Brook Lopez?[/QUOTE]
Jerryd Bayless, Anthony Randolph, Brandon Rush were all better. Even if they don't fit a need of your team, you can always trade them for something that does. Hibbert and Speights were also better big men. I don't like Koufos that much, but I have him higher than Lopez. No way I respect a 7 footer who shot under 47% in college.

[QUOTE=GOBB]Who should they have drafted instead of Brook Lopez?[/QUOTE]
Exactly, Bayless was there but we have Marcus and Devin.
[QUOTE=Posterize246]Those scouts can't be trusted. They're the same scouts that scouted every bust to come through the league. And how the HELL does one twin average 19/8, the other averages 10/5.5...and the distance between their talent is only 5 draft picks?[/QUOTE]Because the Suns are stupid lol