Well to be fair, certain known advocates of Brooks have been using the "if you disagree with me you don't know basketball" for a long long time. Some of which have completely gone hiatus.
Fair enough, at least you have the balls to man up and stick around after the trade. Some others however
I just enjoy the fact that the team has started playing with a toughness once again. The personalities of Lowry, Hayes, Scola have taken over the team. The Clipper game was a bummer but "the edge" is back. Lowry gets everyone involved and it's exciting to watch. And Goran is hard nose, plays all out like Lowry.
LM MFing AO. No. No, no, no. You stopped, Mr. Larsv8, because you have been proven utterly, completely, shamefully wrong. Your boy toy who was so full of youthful potential has been traded for a BACKUP PG because no team in their right minds would touch him or take him for anything more than the BACKUP PG that he is. It turns out other teams were a lot smarter than I gave them credit for and AB had a lot less value than I thought. At least we are not the ones tied up with him now. You stopped the "don't know basketball" schtick because if you dared say that now after all that, everyone here would laugh their ass off at you. Not unlike what is happening anyways. What ever happened to "admitting wrong"? Instead you spew this BS about Lowry every chance you get because it just hurts sooo bad, poor baby.
Agreed And Dragic I think has the potential to play up tempo and get everyone involved a lot like Lowry coming off the bench the past 2 seasons.
Not sure why people engage in name-calling so much on this website, but one can characterize your comparison of Lowry to Rondo as ridiculous and borderline delusional. I think you need to calm down a bit. Your posts seem very emotional and unnecessarily aggressive. Also, I would question how much basketball you watch if you don't think Sessions is just as good if not better than Lowry. Wow, this is absolutely hilarious coming for you of all people.
Holy crap, CXbby, it’s just basketball. Shouldn’t the topic go on the Kyle Lowry fan club board if opposing viewpoints are unwelcome? I mean, acting like comparing Lowry to Sessions is a disgrace is going a little overboard, in my opinion. Their numbers are similar, but Kyle has more experience and the clearly superior supporting cast. If you brought up a Lowry vs. Sessions comparison on a general NBA board, people would see it as a debatable comparison and discuss. But apparently all those people would be idiots too? Come on, there’s a way to communicate your views without calling everyone idiots who know nothing about basketball. As the poster above said, DD does it too and it’s likewise very annoying.
This. Can we enjoy this new team, albeit incomplete, without going at each other's throats? Look, anytime you have 40% or less on making the playoffs, you will likely not make the playoffs, so we are playing in essence to get better for next year and see who should stick around. It appears Lars has come around to accepting Lowry as the starting pg. Good for him. Let bygones be bygones.
Some of us liked both Brooks and Lowry and simply believed, after watching innumerable games, that Kyle was the better fit as the starter and Aaron a better fit as instant offense with the Bench Brigade. Brooks would have been good at the role, in my opinion, had he not proved to be emotionally incapable of accepting it. Of course, he might have been traded regardless, because he's been expecting (justifiably) a big raise, but maybe, just maybe, had he returned from his long absence and put up the numbers we all know he's capable of, Morey would have wanted to take a chance and keep him. We'll never know.
People have misunderstood my stance on this issue the whole time. It had nothing to do with who I thought was better or who deserved anything. I just felt Lowry was a better fit with the bench crew, and I felt Brooks was a better fit with the starting group. It wasnt that I didnt accept it, I just had a different opinion. I like Lowry, he just is being massively overated by some people, which is fine. The problem is, for whatever reason, Lowry has attracted a cult like group of fanatics. Having an opinion contrary to the fanatics seems to send them into some sort of rage fest (see other posts on this page) It appears he had a breakout year this season because of usage, but his per 36 is practically identical. Brooks was struggling in his bench role, whereas he was playing well as a starter. I thought the best choice was Brooks starting and Lowry off the bench and whoever was most effective that night played out the stretch. In other words, I was a fan of both. But enough of that, Lowry is clearly the best option for starting PG on the team right now for sure. I wanted him alongside Budinger, which at the time, had him on the bench. Things have changed though with Battier moving on and Budinger in the starting lineup, so it makes sense. And on a side note to CX: I clearly must of really gotten under your skin in previous threads for you to post like this. If thats the case then I apologize.
It's tough to say. I would've been in favor of keeping him if it came at a low cost. IF Morey ever thought about keeping him, how things played out, with the injury and struggles, would have been perfect for a lowball ala Landry. If he had put up good numbers after coming back I would think that it would've been even less likely that we kept him. Since the main reason Morey cited for trading him was we were not willing to pay him the money he was looking for given we had already chosen our PG of the future. To me it looks like he was out either way, mainly because he could not accept the new role and salary that would've matched it. The only difference is if he had played a little better we could've gotten a little more than a backup PG and low pick in return. Too bad that his ego was such, especially only one year removed from when WE were the ones who showed him enough faith to let him start in the first place.
Couldn't agree any more with this statement, especially once Martin was brought in to do the scoring in the starting unit. Pre Martin deal brooks had to be out there to score, even then it was evident that Lowry ran the offense better and more effectively, but brooks was vastly superior at scoring and we needed it badly. This year lowry shortened that gap in offensive efficieny between the two, while still bringing the pg skills that brooks just simply lacks at the moment. Not saying he won't ever get there, but this year whether it can all be blamed on injury or not, he just wasn't getting it done. The numbers just don't lie people. Comparing last season to this season. We have jumped from 18th to tied for 6th in offensive efficiency. We have jumped from 17th to 6th in turnovers per game. We have jumped from 14th to 1st in turnover percentage. We have jumped from 11th to 3rd in assists per game. We have jumped from 14th to 6th in assist percentage. We have jumped from 15th to 1st in Team AST/TO To completely attribute all of this to Lowry starting over Brooks would be r****ded, but it has a good amount to do with it. The point is our offense is top notch this year. The one thing brooks is really good at, we as a team are already great at without him. Moving him was the right move, I liked the guy, but he wasn't/didnt want to fit in as our 6th man. In his first year to really be the starter Lowry is doing pretty well, he is only 24 years old and is playing on a team down 17.7 million worth of player. To say that this is all he will ever be would be a premature assumption in my opinion. He made a lot of improvements this past offseason and I think as the season closes out he will only continue to get better. Add another offseason and we will see where he is next year. Before then how can anyone know how good he can be?
Cx- I would keep this going, but its kinda of pointless. As i said before, when sessions has played big minutes, he's done well,very well. When the rockets matched the cavs offer, the cavs got sessions and hollins which is what i thought the rockets shouldve done. A move like that wouldve kept them under the lt and they couldve gotten a guy like gerald wallace. Since the rocket chose to match 5.75m and sign miller for 4.4m, it put over the ability to take on salary. My argument this summer was session is equal to if not a better player and talent than lowry. Cx, you were the one bringing win totals into this and as usual,miss the entire point.Talent is talent no matter who you play for. Jamison is the same productive player he was in gsw,dallas,washington, or any other team he's played for.Thats the point. People on this have tunnel vision when it comes to rocket players. Most only see other players when they play the rockets. Some like myself watch the entire league and alot of other players. So it doesnt surprise me when these great assets dont yield the players via trade most think they would bring. Cx, you made the comment about brooks going from a fringe all star to traded for a backup. Well, most consider martin 3rd best sg in the west and he was traded for a backup. Does that have anything to do with how good he is? Gasol was traded for his brother,kwame, and crttendon who is out the league now. Does that mean he wasnt all star caliber or now all of sudden he's better because he's on a winning team? Pau is the same player he was when he couldnt win a playoff game 3 straight years. Memphis traded him because he was sulking and appeared to have quit. Guess who else sulked and was traded? Yep, lowry in memphis. That didnt mean he couldnt play,but similar to brooks, he felt he lost his starting job unwarranted. He sulked and the rockets had the good fortune of getting him. As far as the comments about being a backseat type of player or placeholder, whars wrong with that? I think thats part of the reason brooks was traded. They didnt want to tie up that kind of money since the plan has changed. I truly think williams and howard are the targets in 2012. So yes, lowry will hold it down till we get williams next summer. Then he will be traded and dragic will be the cheap backup.
First you said he put up "monster numbers" and now you are saying "he's done well". That is not semantics and those are two very different things especially since I know what "monster numbers" mean to you. He is a below average player when you look beyond the boxscore and just focus on his impact. Now you may not agree with that, and think he is better than Lowry. But the Cavs obviously do not agree with you since Sessions was plan B. Daryl obviously does not agree with you since we've handed the team to Lowry. And Jerry West doesn't agree with you since he drafted him as their "PG of the future". The only person that seems to agree with you that he is a backup PG is Chris Wallace and he is one of the worst GMs in the league who only traded Lowry to cover his ass for drafting Conley who was being out played by his backup. Obviously you see I am in a tough spot here as I seem to hold the same opinion as one of the best GMs ever, as well as another one of the best GMs today, while Leebigez and his rigs disagree. You are the one missing the point. I 100% agree that those are the same players whether on good or bad teams. But that has absolutely nothing to do with whether Sessions is a good player or bad. Especially based on his "monster numbers". I'm not sure what you are getting at here. Those are some examples of some of the worst rip offs in league history. The Gasol trade and getting Martin for Landry were huge steals. Yes they do happen, but that doesn't mean every trade is going to be one. For instance, I highly HIGHLY doubt that trading Aaron Brooks will be coming back to haunt us. We traded a backup PG for a backup PG, plus a pick. In reality it was an OK deal. Problem is I was hoping some dumb GM would pony up a lot more while overvaluing AB. I was wrong. What's wrong with that? Patterson will never be a superstar, so if that makes him a back seat player then fine, there are a lot of back seat players in the league then. Saying he doesn't want to be in the game in the 4th quarter because he is a backseat player is just ignorant. If "placeholder" means holding it down until we get a superstar like Dwill then fine, that's great I'm down. I guess every player who isn't a superstar is a placeholder then. Although I'm curious why you never called Brooks that. Actually I'm not.
