I think I would trade Lowry for a dominant big man..sadly, non are available. Lakers wouldn't deal Bynum for Paul, certainly won't for Lowry. I wouldn't deal him for Gasol, who does that leave? At this point, he is your "star" player...add to him.
Nash wasn't an all star til his fifth season at age 27, and didn't earn his MVP til age 29. He averaged 17.7 ppg and 7.3 assists the first year he was an all star in 02-03. Deron Williams is 27 and Chris Paul is 26 with a history of knee problems to put it in perspective in comparison to Lowry at 25. Lowry's numbers the past year and a half match up very closely to what his projected per 48 minute stats were prior to being a starter. He just never was given a starter job until now, so there is no track record to compare his recent performance to. I doubt he will ever be a super star, and certainly there is a chance that he is never an all star. I wouldn't be looking to dump him unless it meant getting a clear superstar player in return though. Especially considering the Rockets would probably have to give up both Lowry and additional assets to make a trade for a player that is clearly better than he is. So if it gets you Dwight Howard or some super star player then certainly Lowry isn't untouchable, but I wouldn't agree with the idea that we need to be rushing to trade him because his value can't possibly go up. If Lowry does sustain the level of play he has had since the all star break last year then there are only a small handful of point guards who are more productive.
Lowry's contract is awesome. His breakout came shortly after we signed him to a bargain contract, we would be foolish to trade him. He's only 25, we have his prime years locked down in the contract we gave him.
Funny how it has flipped many of the people saying sell high on Brooks are now on the keeper side of Lowry...lol....so bizzare. I think Lowry has peaked, and will not get much better, he is a very good starting PG, you try to keep him if you can, but if something comes along in the Superstar or star category and you have to flip Kyle to get them, you do it without thinking twice. No one on this team is untouchable, you don't have untouchables on a team of role players. DD
They are very different players. Maybe those people just think Lowry is more valuable to the team and Brooks was, well ... "fool's gold".
It's too early to determine if he's peaked or not. What we do know is he's gotten way better since his new contract.
I think this is 100% correct. Brooks was never going to be the point guard that Lowry already is. Basically, Lowry is a point guard that you could win championships with and Brooks never was. That said, I think OKC is going to be hard pressed to resign both Harden and Westbrook. I fully believe that Harden will be the one they keep and they will be listening to offers for Westbrook. I don't know if Westbrook would be the answer but he is certainly interesting to say the least.
And they would be wrong. They are different players no doubt, and played different roles. That being said though, they are not that far away in production when healthy. I would definitly give the edge to Kyle at this point, but not by as much as some of his supporters say. AB during his MIP year was pretty much a very productive player. Most would have traded him for a superstar, and would do the same for Kyle. While both can be effective, neither are of an elite level. Heck Kyle has been great at assists this year but is exerting so much energy his D has seriously regressed.....which is oddly familiar, amazing what carrying an offense does isn't it. DD
I don't think it makes sense to move him for an established guy right now, like say P. Gasol. I do think it makes sense to move him, Scola and Martin to the Atlantic division for draft picks. This accomplishes a couple things: 1.) To make the Knicks pick even better for us 2.) To get back other picks 3.) To tank our pick This has a better chance of getting us a true franchise player, quicker, imo.
Would it be fair for me to say you've also "flipped" on this issue? http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?p=5259194&highlight=peaked#post5259194
I guess it would be fair to say sort of flipped, but if you notice I said if you trade Brooks you need to get a very good player in return. Same for Lowry...... I do think Brooks will return to his pre injury form, and the circumstances of losing his job, in a contract year overwhelmed him, but I also don't think Lowry is as good as some people here think he is. I think Lowry is a top 10 PG now, and his grit and determination make him good, and I feel the same about him as I did about Brooks when he was playing well, trade him if you get a GREAT player back, otherwise build around him or with him. DD
Lowry is really the only effective playmaker on this team, and moreover he's a plus defender, makes the tough gritty plays that can inspire teammates, and he may be the best bargain in the league. If we're getting a superstar in return, then I'm open to trading him. But I'm more inclined to retain him as one of our building block pieces. Maybe its because I'm not ready to say he's peaked. I do think we should be looking to move Martin and Scola.
I asked you this before, I will ask again. How do you envision us retaining Lowry and being a contender in the next 3-4 years?
Lowry is a keeper. He's a great two way player who is locked in at a great price. He's not a franchise cornerstone in the sense that he will be the best player on a championship team, but you keep him because you can easily afford him and two other players who are considered franchise players. The Rockets should keep Lowry, and look for other bargains and superstars. Boring strategy I know but as long as we don't get another trade vetoed it can work.
