please you are comparing a 2 time mvp, a finals mvp and a multiple time all-star to a guy who just became a full-time starter this year what sort of silly argument is that? no i dont think so, we can agree brooks is the superior offensive player but in terms of a complete basketball player in all facets I would say Lowry's ability to do a bit of everything is more valuable to the average NBA team than Brooks ability to score ...Brooks is very valuable to teams like Phoenix, new york, golden state with the "mini-suns" offense I think brooks benefited the most by having the ball in his hands and needing to take on the scoring load..with yao out there is no way one can reasonably argue that Brooks is not more valuable to this team than Lowry is. You need to replace those points somehow Brooks is the best way. when yao is there the points do not need to be there necessary since Yao will be the primary option on offense exactly why i feel lowry may be better suited for the starting lineup he pushes the ball more than anyone on this team and outside of Yao all the other projected starters (scola, ariza, martin) all like to run up the court which can lead to easy buckets if they have to hold up and set up with Yao in that case lowry, though he isnt the sharpshooter that Brooks is, can set up his team better it doesnt matter who is starting, lowry or brooks, scola martin and yao are all more efficient scorers and they should get looks first based on matchups. bring brooks off the bench you got instant offense and another guy to just run with chase and taylor in a weird way i think the roles should be reversed since i think (and once again my opinion) that Lowry is more valuable to the starting unit when Yao is playing. I dont think Morey and his staff would match an offer a little over 5 million for a backup PG when other suitable backups were getting around 4 million this year. of course what we both can (or at least should) agree on is that not many teams can argue about this problem of what point guard should start and make great cases for both guards and we should be grateful for that it was only 4 years ago (05-06 season) where we had a choice of Rafer Alston starting and having Rick Brunson come off the bench in relief
He did that all last summer, at some point it has to pay off, right? Glad they matched it, if only to give them more assets moving forward. And the team is better with both Brooks and Lowry. DD
Ray Allen career 3pt% - 39.6% When a player shoots OVERALL 37.5% & from the field, they're a bricklayer Trevor Ariza. When he shoots 42.5%, its a respectful Andre Iguodala. Its the same difference in shooting %.
I bit steeper than I was hoping for, but most definitely a great move. Now I gotta wonder why AB's value is. 4 years $36million?
uh, 40% 3 pointers is extremely high...few players in the league can hit at that rate, especially not volume shooters. i'll take brooks' 3pt shooting any day.
I just don't think we'll see eye-to-eye on this if we disagree on who the better player is, Brooks or Lowry. I'd go through your points, but Rockets2K is right -- no sense in arguing the two here, I'm just glad to have them both and happy that we matched the offer sheet.
Dude STFU would ya! We dont give a damn if you are not impressed are not! Lowry is a damn Rocket for Life and I'm glad you are not the GM for the Rockets.
Exactly. Anyway, Skip's problems weren't with his 3 point shot. He was OK shooting the 3s, it was a good percentage shot (but Brooks is better). Skip's ineffeciency was his 2s, especially those tear-drop runners that almost never seemed to find the bucket. He's a 40% shooter from 2s for his career. Lowry's the opposite, by the way. He's a fairly high percentage 2 point shooter but can't hit 3s reliably.
I just want to point out to everyone that your sig is 100% wrong, I did not chat with John Hollinger. That is all. DD
Never said it was special. It was just about average. Which was much better than his 2 point shooting, which was terrible. People say Rafer was a terrible shooter, which is true overall, but the 3s weren't especially bad (or especially good).
Why don't you say something funnier so that I can change it? Kidding... I've had the sig up for a year and just haven't found something better in that time. I'll go sig-less until I find another, since it bothers you.
I say lots of funny stuff.....just not on ESPN chat. Try this one....isn't it funny that a good number of the Lowry lovers were the ones complaining the most about Vspan when their games are nearly identical.....how ironic..eh? Now cue the folks saying that is not remotely true, look at the stats...yadda yadda yadda, when the truth is they have similar styles, and if VSpan continued to develop as all players do, we are probably looking at a taller version of Kyle Lowry. Neat, huh? DD
DD - I hope you never get sent to prison, I have a feeling your compulsive need to call attention to yourself by acting ridiculous wouldn't go over so well there as here: http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/tiny.cgi?id=dTPZJ
Can't see Sam's post, but probably says something about career stats. When all we have are VSpan's rookie stats.... VSpan's type of game is nearly identical to Lowry's. If you can't see it, you are blind. VSpan = Kyle Lowry. DD
