Who is more serviceable for next year Lopez or Vasquez?

We all seem to agree, that both Lopez and Vasquez in their respective positions showed good progress, but also limitations. Although not ideal in most people minds, it is certainly a possibility that either one of them or both would be our starting players next season (note I am not saying that is ideal or very likely but certainly one of the possibilities). We also agree that it is possible to have a decent season with either of them being starters, as long as the other additions to the team really make a difference in comparison to this year. Now my question is which of this two players is more serviceable for next season.
Lopez:
Pros:

• Very reliable (played every game last season as starter).
• Good physical presence under the basket.
• Relatively consistent with his short/ medium range shots.
• Relatively cheap for what he offers

Cons:

• Very slow for his position (which is more consequential if he plays together with Vasquez, as both are very slow).
• Not very aggressive offensively.
• Can’t really jump, for his size,
• He is weak as a rebounder.

Vasquez:
Pros:

• Probably his biggest plus is how cheap he is for what he offers (2.3 mills for next year).
• Very passionate, hardworking attitude (he gives 110% night in and night out).
• High advantage over other PG (he can post up and get points that way).
• Relatively good court vision.

Cons:

• Clearly his biggest negative is his defense. He is too slow, and has not being able to learn how to at least be less of a liability.
• Tends to keep the ball too long.
• Slows down the offense when it needs speed.
• Tries way too many hero shots.

I think this is a close one in terms of serviceability for next season what do you think?

With our current roster makeup, Vasquez is the most serviceable to our team. I don't expect that to be the case once the offseason comes to an end.

If Gordon was consistently healthy, I'd lean Lopez. But we all know that's never the case.

Both are solid trading chips.

i would honestly trade whichever one gets us better value, i dont think either is huge in our long term plans.

Firstly, I would say this is very dependent on the draft. But that aside, I would rather have Lopez starting than Vasquez

I would like to replace both. But it's harder to replace Lopez at the moment. If we pass on Len in the draft I hope we can at least find a way to upgrade GV.

keep Vazquez and draft Alex Len and next season get a pg in the draft

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rebelman

keep Vazquez and draft Alex Len and next season get a pg in the draft

---

Or give Austin a real shot at it.

Easily Lopez.

I like taking a big this draft (if Burke isn't there) and then drafting a pg next.

If people weren't impressed with GV this past season, Rivers has no hope next, so we will need a real threat that can't be found on this team.

I say keep both though. Great contracts, great bench/ serviceable starters. I would upgrade at sg and sf before I worried about pg and center.

If one is starting next season, I hope its Lopez.

i think your assessment of both players is spot on...i see their acquisitions as a smart trade bait move from demps. get 2 young players who don't get lots of minutes, inflate their stats in a throwaway year, trade for someone you really want. picture trading vasquez lopez and gordon in one trade...sky is the limit

Lopez. But I'd get rid of both. I'd rather have Aminu starting next year than either if I had to pick one of the 3 to start.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BeeBall Reasons

Lopez. But I'd get rid of both. I'd rather have Aminu starting next year than either if I had to pick one of the 3 to start.

---

Agreed

Here is the question, when you say equal value, what kind of equal value are you expecting in return for a $2.4 mil contract? I don't know how many good players are out there playing at contracts less than $5 mil, so you are looking at tying up a good chunk of change on a bench player who may/ may not be a better fit for your system than GV.

As for Aminu, dude couldn't have a good year til his contract year, and it wasnt even good enough to get him ranked among the 28 best sf's in the game. At least Looez and GV showed that when given minuets they are up to the challenge.

Easily Lopez.

The knee jerk answer for me would be Lopez, but it is really impossible to say without knowing who would replace each one.

First, the price is right on both of them. We have a horrible contract (Gordon) on the books, plus Anderson's deal is not the greatest in the world, so if you can get cheap starters, you keep them.

In the long run, I think Lopez is the more valuable. First, there are more point guards out there to be had than big men. Second, the things that Lopez does poorly, Davis does well, so as AD gets older and takes more control that will help Lopez. There is nothing you can do to help Vasquez' defensive shortcomings. The PG has to defend on an island. That is just the way of things.

We can have a successful year with Lopez starting at the 5 if we fill other needs, I can't see us ever being a good team defensively with GV at the point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GESWhoseBack

Or give Austin a real shot at it.

---

Even if they keep Vasquez on for his final year (or until he gets traded), if they don't draft a PG Rivers will get his shot. Monty wants him to be the starter over Vasquez as it is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cki3915

First, the price is right on both of them. We have a horrible contract (Gordon) on the books, plus Anderson's deal is not the greatest in the world, so if you can get cheap starters, you keep them.

---

After this upcoming year, Vasquez is not gonna be cheap anymore.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UNO Gracias

Here is the question, when you say equal value, what kind of equal value are you expecting in return for a $2.4 mil contract? I don't know how many good players are out there playing at contracts less than $5 mil, so you are looking at tying up a good chunk of change on a bench player who may/ may not be a better fit for your system than GV.

As for Aminu, dude couldn't have a good year til his contract year, and it wasnt even good enough to get him ranked among the 28 best sf's in the game. At least Looez and GV showed that when given minuets they are up to the challenge.

---

Equal value could just be them being the difference in a deal to get a better player, Gustavo Ayon made the Ryan Anderson deal go through.

Say we want to offer Tyreke Evans a deal, Vasquez could satisfy the Kings need for something in return and give them a reason to not match a deal that management my not want to match in the first place, but would feel pressured to match because of the fan base. And the same thing goes for Lopez.

On Aminu, Lopez and Vasquez, are both older than Aminu, both left college as seniors. Vasquez and Lopez both got to see the floor during real game time.

Aminu got drafted by the Clippers then they realized they didn't know what to do with him, is he a PF or SF, bad team with a coach on the hot seat, no time to teach and develop Aminu, getting drafted by the Clippers put him 2 years behind.

Aminu still has untapped potential. Perfect example of a guy that could come back with a jump shot and more confidence and become most improved player award winner, because the talent is there.

Aminu is still learning to be a perimeter player, playing for the olympics set him back.

Vasquez and Lopez were handed the starting positions in a way guys at their level never are, there are guys all over the league rotting on benches of teams, good and bad teams, guys we could get from the d-leauge who could come in and do what they did or surpass that if giving the minutes and freedom that were given to those two.

Its time to cash in those chips and find guys that will help us win games and give a couple more guys a chance to become assets for us.

While I think Vasquez is the better player. Ball handlers are more important commodities. I think if we replaced Vasquez with Burke it's a much bigger positive than replacing Lopez with Pekovic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UNO Gracias

I like taking a big this draft (if Burke isn't there) and then drafting a pg next.

If people weren't impressed with GV this past season, Rivers has no hope next, so we will need a real threat that can't be found on this team.

I say keep both though. Great contracts, great bench/ serviceable starters. I would upgrade at sg and sf before I worried about pg and center.

---

I really think you miss why we weren't ok with gv last year. Rivers is an upgrade in that sense. DEFENSE.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by da ThRONe

While I think Vasquez is the better player. Ball handlers are more important commodities. I think if we replaced Vasquez with Burke it's a much bigger positive than replacing Lopez with Pekovic.

---

this. i also think rivers needs a bigger role, he will be much improved, also we should trade GV now while he is an asset because he is only cheap for 1 more year then will be an UFA, lope however can be kept cheap for 3 more years or traded as a valuable cheap 7 footer who can score and defend.

I say trade GV now and possibly trade lopez in the future. just my opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cki3915

First, the price is right on both of them. We have a horrible contract (Gordon) on the books, plus Anderson's deal is not the greatest in the world, so if you can get cheap starters, you keep them.

In the long run, I think Lopez is the more valuable. First, there are more point guards out there to be had than big men. Second, the things that Lopez does poorly, Davis does well, so as AD gets older and takes more control that will help Lopez. There is nothing you can do to help Vasquez' defensive shortcomings. The PG has to defend on an island. That is just the way of things.

---

Sorry but I totally disagree with you that rynos contract isn't a good one. I think it's an excellent one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kclaboy504

I really think you miss why we weren't ok with gv last year. Rivers is an upgrade in that sense. DEFENSE.

---

exactly, i'd rather rivers' defense and giving him more minutes will also help him improve than GV who wont get any better

and ryno's contract is a great 1, 8 million for a 24 year old stretch forword who can knock down the 3 any time, is clutch, is a great offensive rebounder and not in his prime yet. He's is also extremely effcient and has one of the best win shares per 48 than any player in the league.

If I am Dell, my thought process is as so:

Both players provided adequate stop gaps for this last year. Both players can be considered good trade chips with the luxury tax penalties coming into effect due to decent production/salary. Regardless of who will make my team better for the immediate next year, what sequence do I need to trade these guys in order to maximize value in return - since neither are really long term answers.

I would begin looking to ship GV immediately. For now GV gives you more than what you are paying. When his new contract comes around his production per cost will be a lot lower and less of a value to rival gms. Also he will not be a cap relief any longer. I would look for teams who are desperate for a pg or excellent backup pg around the luxury line or above. In return I want other young players or draft pick(s).

I think Lopez will be of even more value the following year. 5 million expiring contract for a starting caliber center is gold. This will also be when other teams absolutely will start conforming to the luxury line. I can see a few teams above the penalty trying to keep players together if they make a run next year but after that I predict salary dumps. I also think Davis will make Lopez look real good next year which may trick a team or two.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Purple Haze

Even if they keep Vasquez on for his final year (or until he gets traded), if they don't draft a PG Rivers will get his shot. Monty wants him to be the starter over Vasquez as it is.

---

Where do you get this from? Everything I have heard form Monty in two interviews is that he likes the versatility he gets with Rivers, so he can spend some time in different positions, but when asked if he wanted Rivers to become starting PG he did not seem very exited about the idea?

I wish both could be kept as backups, but if not have a great bench.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HornetGuru

exactly, i'd rather rivers' defense and giving him more minutes will also help him improve than GV who wont get any better

---

Are you kidding me? Vasquez has gotten better every year he has been in the league. His is doing better than Nash at the same point in their careers. Vasquez will continue to get better, but you have to make Rivers beat him out. You don't just give River the starting job, you make him beat GV out and prove that he can bring something to the starting lineup. With luck he does, but you view GV the way I view Rivers...bench guy and nothing more.

It depends on what you mean by servicable.

In my view, Vasquez is more versitile. He gives you more points, he can give you the rebounds and the assists.

Lopez is more consistent and isn't going to kill you defensively as Vasquez will. Plus he's more efficient offensively. Better overall player.

I disagree with the notion that Rivers would be an upgrade over Vasquez next season after having a horrible season. Rivers also has holes defensively that need to be improved upon.

Oh yeah, Vasquez isn't better than Nash at this stage. That's a bogus argument.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicans78

Oh yeah, Vasquez isn't better than Nash at this stage. That's a bogus argument.

---

Nash: http://www.basketball-reference.com/...l?mobile=false
GV: http://www.basketball-reference.com/...l?mobile=false

This is why I don't understand why people think GV can't get better than he already is. Every year he has improved, and he has brought something new to his game. It should be fun to see what the future holds for him here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UNO Gracias

Are you kidding me? Vasquez has gotten better every year he has been in the league. His is doing better than Nash at the same point in their careers. Vasquez will continue to get better, but you have to make Rivers beat him out. You don't just give River the starting job, you make him beat GV out and prove that he can bring something to the starting lineup. With luck he does, but you view GV the way I view Rivers...bench guy and nothing more.

---

define better

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jgman

define better

---

Better bet·ter 1 (btr)
adj. Comparative of good.
1. Greater in excellence or higher in quality.
2. More useful, suitable, or desirable: found a better way to go; a suit with a better fit than that one.
3. More highly skilled or adept: I am better at math than English.
4. Greater or larger: argued for the better part of an hour.
5. More advantageous or favorable; improved: a better chance of success.
6. Healthier or more fit than before: The patient is better today.
adv. Comparative of well2.
1. In a more excellent way.
2.
a. To a greater extent or degree: better suited to the job; likes it better without sauce.
b. To greater advantage; preferably: a deed better left undone. See Usage Notes at best, have, rather.
3. More: It took me better than a year to recover.
n.
1. One that is greater in excellence or higher in quality.
2. A superior, as in standing, competence, or intelligence. Usually used in the plural: to learn from one's betters.
v. bet·tered, bet·ter·ing, bet·ters
v.tr.
1. To make better; improve: trying to better conditions in the prison; bettered myself by changing jobs. See Synonyms at improve.
2. To surpass or exceed.
v.intr.
To become better.
Idioms:
better off
In a better or more prosperous condition: would be better off taking the train instead of driving; felt better off after the rise in stock prices.
for the better
Resulting in or aiming at an improvement: Her condition took a turn for the better.
get/have the better of
To outdo or outwit; defeat.
think better of
To change one's mind about (a course of action) after reconsideration: I almost bought an expensive watch, but then I thought better of it.
[Middle English, from Old English betera; see bhad- in Indo-European roots.]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UNO Gracias

Nash: http://www.basketball-reference.com/...l?mobile=false
GV: http://www.basketball-reference.com/...l?mobile=false

This is why I don't understand why people think GV can't get better than he already is. Every year he has improved, and he has brought something new to his game. It should be fun to see what the future holds for him here.

---

I could be wrong here, but I think when most people on here say that GV "can't get better" or has little upside, they're referring to his athletic shortcomings, which affect his ability to play defense and blow by his man on offense. Not so much improving his skill/game/intangibles...he can definitely improve that IMO. Other than his occasional hero-ball play, I love GV's game. Since his first year in NOLA, I likened his game (*not talent*) to a poor man's CP3 or Nash in that he can both play within the PG flow of the offense in terms of distributing the ball while still being able to score and get his. Kinda the opposite of how I feel about Russ West...I recognize and love his talent and athletic gifts, but absolutely hate his game as a PG.

I feel that because of his athletic shortcomings, GV will always be a limited player because he will be a liability in many matchups as a starting PG, which is why I wouldn't mind him being sent elsewhere.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UNO Gracias

Nash: http://www.basketball-reference.com/...l?mobile=false
GV: http://www.basketball-reference.com/...l?mobile=false

This is why I don't understand why people think GV can't get better than he already is. Every year he has improved, and he has brought something new to his game. It should be fun to see what the future holds for him here.

---

Compare the ages and then get back to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicans78

Compare the ages and then get back to me.

---

I find it hard to believe you even clicked the links before making this argument since both links go to Nash.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicans78

Compare the ages and then get back to me.

---

They were the same age when they came in (22).

But click the links again.

GV:http://www.basketball-reference.com/...l?mobile=false
Nash: http://www.basketball-reference.com/...l?mobile=false

Vasquez > lopez

That question needs to be answered depending on how the offseason goes. I think Vasquez is the better player, however he's the easiest to replace this offseason. Vasquez is the better player, but I think Lopez will have the bigger role for this team in 2013-14.