Indeed. The way he judged "average" with 15 as the cutoff point(starting PGs) while using 44 qualified players automatically makes the whole thing BS. I'd say Lowry is the very definition of an "average starting PG". Disregarding his stats for a second, which can always look good or bad due to playing time, usage, etc. Just look at the way he plays. He's not bad at anything, he's not great anything. He's just an all-around role player. To put it another way, he's never the guy you point to as the reason for being a winner. Nor is he a scapegoat for your team losing. Put him with Hakeem or Kobe and he can start for a contender. But put him with scrubs and he's not going to elevate the team to anything.
Point Guards that are better than Lowry: Rose Paul DWill Nash Westbrook Rondo Curry (I'll give him the nod but hesitantly because of his poor D) Billups Kidd (again hesitantly because he is in decline) Parker (hesitantly, he's a better scorer right now than Lowry) Point Guards that Lowry is at least as good as if not better: Andre Miller Darren Collison Felton Conley Calderon Ty Lawson Jameer Nelson Ramon Sessions ......all the rest Now, honestly look at the list. On the list of guys that would be definitively better than Kyle, I listed a player that cannot play D (Curry), I gave him the benefit of the doubt because of his shooting and offensive skillset, a hall of fame player who is at the end of his career (Kidd), another guy that shoots a lot (Parker) but doesn't give his team much else and is playing in a system that covers his defensive weakness. On the list of guys that Lowry is at least as good as....I would not trade Kyle straight up for any of them. Yeah, I like Sessions a lot. I may consider trading Lowry for Sessions if there was something else in the package. But the rest of those guys.....no way. Not to mention, on the list of guys that are better than Kyle, there's three or 4 on there that I would not trade Kyle for unless there was something else in the package because his career arc is still pointed up and theirs is pointed down. By the way, those numbers that you are looking at with Kyle are mostly accumulated during a season when he was deferring to another point guard (Brooks). Lowry's scoring and assist numbers are both going to go up post trade because: 1. He's going to get a few more shots that Brooks and Battier aren't taking; and 2. He's going to be passing to players that are hitting a higher percentage of their shots than Brooks and Battier were. You don't realize how statistics translate. Brooks took the third most shots on our team when he was here behind only Martin and Scola. He was our third option, and he was shooting abysmally. Lowry's scoring and assist numbers are taking a leap right now because Brooks is no longer here. Lowry is easily a top 15 point guard in the NBA.....right now.
Lowry is a very good PG that is underrated and flying beneath the radar. There is one thing that Lowry has an advantage over other PGs in the league. That one thing is his tenacity. He is like a bulldog of all PGs. His will power and his determination. On top of that, he is a very smart player. He is not afraid to take it to the rim and never gives up on defense. Lowry will most likely not be a HOF at the end of his career. But he still have lots of potential to grow. Many don't see his potential because of his style of play. He isn't the flashy PG nor is he a great shooter. But you can count on him to play his heart out night in and night out. Brooks was last year's starting PG and reigning MIP and Lowry was his back up. Over the offseason, you can tell Lowry put a lot more work into his game and improve from last season while Brooks was a standstill. Even after Brooks injury, mid way through the season, Brooks just couldn't work his way back into the starting lineup because his level of play doesn't match Lowry's. Between Brooks and Kyle, Lowry has a higher potential than Brooks because of his size and his good all around game. Brooks relies on one thing and that is his quickness. We all know that if that is taken away from him, his effectiveness will drop. Overall, Kyle will never be a top tier PG in this league. But he has the potential to be a very special player. Very few PGs in this league has the same amount of will power Kyle possesses. He is still young and has plenty of room to grow. Right now after the Battier's trade, he is taking the leadership role under his belt. On top to his good all around game, his never give up mentality and relentless plays, he will grow into a very special player in this league someday and hopefully he'll still be wearing Rockets red.
This is what I don't agree with. Again I really enjoy watching Kyle play and think he's a great fit for the team but....I want Martin, Bud, or Scola taking those "extra" shots instead of Kyle.
I see Kyles potential as being the next Chauncey Billups. Both have the same body type, can put up big numbers any given night and seem to have a strength advantage at their position. Kyle's shooting in the last minute from deep this year has been amazing.
Kyle Lowry is only effective...when he uses his brain. Love the guy, plays harder than anyone, but sometimes tries too hard to be "Mr. Big Shot." His three point shooting has definitely improved, but he doesn't need to be rushing those end of the game threes. Run a play, get K-Mart the ball, even get a quick two. Lowry has hit a ton of 3s in the closing minutes of games, but more often than not they come after a rushed/failed attempt when we really needed it. It's not always Kyle's fault, but it seems like most of his late-game 3's come out of desperation when we are down around 6-7 points rather than when we really need them
I don't think I've said anywhere that Zach Randolph was a "bad" player. The point is that Zach Randolf's 20-10 is very different from Tim Duncan's 20-10(in the past). That you cannot compare players purely based on their raw boxscore stats. That it is a joke to say Sessions is comparable to Lowry just because they put up similar points and assists. Even if it was true, the logic behind it is flawed.
Sessions is a very nice player, every bit as good as Lowry at half the price tag. You're right that it's not fair to compare the two players based on team record. Sessions' fellow starters are Anthony Parker, Alonzo Gee, Samardo Samuels, and J.J. Hickson...A little different than what Kyle has to work with.
The joke is u dont watch Sessions. There isnt anything lowry does better than session except maybe shoot the 3 ball. Thats not to say sessions is a giant leap better than lowry, but he's a better player. It has nothing to do numbers,watch the tape. Better yet, go watch the game vs the Cavs and how sessions got by at will and controlled the game. Top that off, he makes 4m and wouldve been availible to be traded to any team if needed. Meh summed it up perfect, lowry will never be the reason or the scapegoat. He's a solid player and will be a solid player for years. He'll probably play 10-15 yrs and be traded a few times,but thats not a bad thing. Kidd and shaq have been traded multiple teams.
We're not talking about last second shots of the game. We're talking "extra" shots since AB was traded.
I present to you, exhibits A through Z: Anyway, it's pretty sad that people still act like we live in the 80s when people still thought that PPG, RPG, APG meant something. Kyle's TS% and rebound rate are on par with Rose and he gets many more steals than Rose. He also has a turnover rate right up there with the likes of Paul, although i think he still needs to improve since he makes a good amount of stupid TOs. He needs to improve FT% but that will come.
They're certainly comparable just ilke Ishmael Smith is comparable to Lowry once he gets familiar with the NBA. In this league a player can fall from greatness in a very short time. Brooks was once seen as a fringe all-star and now look at him. The only players who are safe in their status' are superstars like D-will, Rose, and CP3 because these guys have skills and knowledge that make them consistent. Lowry looks good now, but in a year he could certainly be playing bad and we have a new PG.
Oh, now it has nothing to do with numbers. Okay, because this was what I thought I was responding to: So if you weren't talking about the "monster numbers" he puts up when comparing him to Lowry wtf were you talking about. That was my whole point, that you can't compare their numbers. Now if you want to start watching the games then fine. In Sessions I see a player who is a little bit worse than Lowry in everything he does. A worse shooter overall, a worse rebounder, a worse defender, and a worse passer. Now if it was simply just that, it would only make him a little worse of a player than Lowry. Problem is it isn't quite that simple. Sessions is a completely different kind of player than Lowry. He is in the Steve Nash/Chris Paul mold, where he is only effective with the ball in his hands, ending a possession with a pass or shot. Now you might think that is a compliment, but it isn't, because he is no where near as good as Nash or CP3. Yet for him to be at all effective, you have to center your entire offense around the guy. This is why you might have been surprised when I say he is a worse passer than Lowry, even though he can rack up the assists at times. It's because not all assists are created equal, where Lowry gets his while actually having to run a offense. The fifth most efficient offense in the league as a matter of fact. That is how Sessions broke the assist record as a rookie, his team already gave up on the season and just gave him the ball and said "what the hell it's yours". So in essence, for him to play at all, you have to throw away what ever offensive sets you run, and literally hand over the keys of your team to a below average player. No good team or team striving to become good would do that, which is why he has been passed around like a cheap slut his 4 years in the league by the bottom dwellers. Incidentally, the same bottom dwellers who overvalue the "monster numbers" that you do, which makes them the crappy ran organizations to begin with. Once they figure out what I just said after a year, they pawn him off to the next team foolish enough to take him. Compare all that to Lowry, who runs an offense not conducive to assists from it's PG which limits his raw numbers. Yet he actually affects the game greatly without the ball, and without numbers. With his hustle, defense, offensive rebounding, controlling the pace, leadership, toughness, poise, winning etc etc. So yes, you are right once again. It isn't about the numbers, because looking at the numbers would make Sessions look a whole lot better than he actually is. Watching the game, we see the true difference between the two. Now I am not sure why I just wasted all this breath because I know you won't agree. You never saw value in Battier and it was the same intangibles that made him effective as well. Lowry has all the intangibles, with the difference being his tangibles are a lot louder and easier to see. But hey, don't sweat it. You were wrong when you said he was only effective against backups. You were wrong when you said he was only effective in limited minutes. You were wrong when you said his shooting was on a hot streak. You were wrong when you said he was only good against bad defenses. You were dead wrong when you said the team is worse this year with him starting compared to last year with Brooks starting. Because this year, we are about to have a better record, all while Brooks, the Rocket's "best player", has either been out, or playing like a cancer on the court. You are already wrong about everything you've ever said about the guy. Why stop now? It is hilarious that you of all people still have the nerve to come in this thread with more gibberish. A thread with an OP meant to laugh specifically at all the BS YOU'VE said. To think, when have you been right, about anything??? Does it make you feel like a big man that you were "right" about Deandre Jordan that you mention him every opportunity you get? You know, the guy who averages 6 points and 7 rebounds anchoring one of the worse teams and worse defenses in the league? LOL. Okay, I'm getting off topic now and having too much fun. I would hate to be you to be a fan of a team who you think will have "placeholders" and "backseat players" as building blocks going forward. Please go root for the Cavs or Clippers who have much brighter futures and less placeholders and backseat players.
The only people who thought Brooks was a fringe all-star were the idiots with no basketball knowledge that I have been calling out since last year and in this thread. Same idiots that have now come up with this idiot comparison.
Interesting tidbit that might help the argument: Lowry is running the best offense in Rockets history as a first year starter. Oh wait, that's not exactly a "tidbit", lolz.
