I never actually said those things weren't important. 1. He's not in that upper echlon of point guard talent (top 7 players). Moreover, he's not all that much better than next 7-8 top point guards, such as Irving, Dragic, Wall, Curry, Lin, Rubio, Lawson, and Conley. Some people think he's the best of this group, while others think he could be towards the end of the line. You cannot compare the Rockets to the Nets, this season or the Hornets with Chris Paul. Most of the top half of point guards (top 15 or so) could equate what Lowry has done for the Rockets or better him. The Rockets had an ok enough team to make the playoffs with him or without him. Both of those situations were also chaotic and Williams/Paul did deal with some injuries. On the same token, look at Nash did for the Suns in 04-06, what Kidd did for Nets from 01-03, what Rose does for the Bulls, or Parker with the Spurs, right now. Even this season, I was way more impress with what Dragic and Lin, and how much better they made their teams' offenses. Lowry cannot run an offense to that capacity. 2. He could be a foundation guy or higher level role player, because he has very few holes in his game. I disagree with not having no holes in his game, because he's not a very good mid-range shooter though he's good three point shooter. He's not an outstanding or even one of the better play-makers at the point guard position. Lowry also does not play as well off the ball, or when it's not in he's hands (as an initiator). Since, he's not a consistent spot up shooter and seems uncomfortable playing without the ball in his hands. On a really good team, he cannot be your 2nd or maybe 3rd option, unless the other players are superstars. Moreover, I could say that about a number of other point guards who could be equally as good foundation pieces or better. 2B. When it comes to scoring ability for higher level point guards, he's not up to snuff to anyone within the top 8-11, except Nash and Rondo. Yet, both are outstanding play-makers, especially with Nash's uncanny shooting ability or Rondo's creativity with the ball or his ability to get to the basket. I never said rebounding or hittting 3s were not important. More importantly, he's not necessarily great or one particular thing at one particular thing, except rebounding. There are alot of players who are good at things across the board (even a good amount of point guards), but they still are complimentary pieces at best. As a utility player of sorts, he still is not going to effect the overall game plan of other teams, like say Nash or Westbrook would. Again, like I said earlier, he's not going immensely improve a team. He's not going to put a lottery team in the playoffs, while he's not going to push 7th or 8th place team into the top 3-5. His defense is good, not great (emphasize that), while rebounding is important he's still only a point guard and it is not an outstanding requirement of the positon. Lowry fits more into the complimentary player role than he does a bonafide play maker/gamebreaker. He's not the type of player you would trade a top 5 pick. He's on a good contract for most teams and very cap-friendly, but it only last for two more seasons. You could say he's getting underpaid at this point, but he's going to want some money coming next summer or in 2014. Like Dragic, he wants to be on a team where he doesn't have to compete for a starting job. Which ever prospective team picks him up, realistically speaking how much more money do you give him or will he ask for? I hate saying this about him, but he's in no position to talk or demand anything. He's been a good, above average point guard, this season and decent year last season, but he doesn't have the pull to make any sorts of demands. Because, you can replace a player, like him much more easily than you could Dwight Howard or even the top 7 or so point guards. Most of all, he's not in any position to be demanding a starting spot or expecting from any team, even the Rockets. Realistically speak, he's had two above average seasons, but nothing spectacular. I've seen better point guards come off the bench than Lowry. Does he really believe that his good enough to start on a really good team, because most good teams are set at point guard. 3. He's a good tough player, but he will not be a perennial all-star. Maybe one or two appearances in an off year. Though, I have to say it's hard to say how much more his game can improve. Posters seems like I am trying to devalue Lowry, but you have to keep within perspective and not overrate him. Right now, the Rockets see him as expendable, even with his small contract, because they feel that Dragic will become a higher level player. He's been disgruntled with his playing time and how the team (esp. the coach) have sort of put him on the shelf (rightfully so, after the injury). Honestly, I do not disagree with that course of action. What hurts him even more, he's not really at the top of anyone's list, especially if the Rockets ask for something ridiculous. There's the possibility he could stay put, if Dragic bolts. Even then, you have to wonder how volatile the relationship with McHale would be during the season.
I understand why Lowry is pissed at McHale because he had to do things his way and ruin a good offense that worked. I have always been a fan of Lowrys even giving him the benefit from last summers ball throwing incident. I think a healthy Lowry may be a top 5 pony in the league. BUT, that being said I'm no longer a fan of Lowrys, ***k him. The Houston fans stood behind him an wished him the best and now he turns around and screws us over. Now we have to pay more for Dragic and get less for him Kyle, that's a great way to show your appreciation to a loyal fan base.. That was a punk *ss move, complaining like that and I hope I never see him in a Rocket uniform again.
with that much money on the line you would play hard ball too... fans don't matter as much as getting gold and glory.
You should have realized all that when he was making the veiled complaints about backing up Brooks. He's an alpha dog. He believed he had the skills from day one and disliked anyone in his way. He said he needed his shot, and when he got it he achieved. Most believe their own hype (i.e. T-Will, Gerald Green, James White, on and on), Lowry proved his. Can't spite him for the same spirit that drives all great people to achieve great things. There's an edge to it.
I'd put Kyrie even with him for now. Yes he's better than Lawson and Dragic. That could change in the next year or so, but from what I have seen so far that would be my order. The only one that I think is sure to pass up Lowry is Kyrie. Dragic needs to do it for more than 2 months and Lawson is just another Aaron Brooks.
None of those teams resulted in a ring except for Parker, and he's not a max guy. Look, PGs are both the most important yet least important position in the NBA. If your pg is trash you're not going anywhere, but at the same time you don't need a CP3 or a Deron, in fact those guys turn out to be liabilities because while you're paying CP3/Deron/DRose 20M a year, the other team is paying Kobe/LBJ/KD 20M a year. You don't need a great pg, just a good pg, and this has been proven again and again by the Lakers and MJ Bulls. Lowry's that kind of guy, which is why if you want to win rings he's much better as option than dudes who cost 2-4x more. Rondo is better than Lowry are you kidding me? Rondo's had the luxury of playing with 3 top offensive options for much of his career, his scoring liability was minimized. Now that Allen is injured and PP/KG are old, he's proving he can't carry the team, as shown by how he can't even outplay chalmers. All that passing ability can't help you when the other team can double another dude and leave you alone at the 3 pt line.
Got to agree with DaDakota. Dude showed his true colors, last thing we need is overconfident average talent. Dragic works just as hard and fought his way into the rotation on a team with 3 or 4 PG's. Even when Aaron Brooks was a Rocket, I remember Lowry sulking when Brooks came back from injury and got his starting spot back. He shoots poorly when he doesn't get his way, that's unprofessional. You're not worth the pricetag Kyle. The guy worked hard to get there, but doesn't want to be subject to competition - which is how he became the starter to begin with. Good riddance. I'm sure McHale issometimes rude, narrow-minded and dictatorial, but for me he struck out when 1) Sold out his coach. 2) Sold out his teammates, particularly Dragic who has a genuine claim to start. 3) Went to the media instead of keeping it with his agent and team. Reduced his own trade value by virtue of being a whiner. You can seek a trade to all NBA teams in private. Publicity does not increase your chances, it only reduces your value. I hope we deal him for a good draft pick.
That's kind irrelevant and out of context, because those teams like the Bulls or Lakers were loaded at other positions, while they had playmakers and ball-handlers at other positions. Not at that point, you do not need point guard. They've already got players running the offense. Though, I like how you did not mention that Lowry is not quite as effective when the ball is not in his hands. Playing off the ball and spot up shooting is not one his strengths. You are right, you don't need a high-level point guard to win a championship. Though, you totally dismissed my points on the Nash, Kidd, and Paul reference. My biggest point with those references were to show how much they improved a team from the previous seasons. With Nash and Kidd, it was exponential. Lowry cannot improve teams, like that at any level. Moreover, Lowry has nothing on Chris Paul and younger Jason Kidd. He has fewer advantages on Nash and Williams. For most teams, the higher caliber point guard is the better option, when I say most teams, I mean like 25-27+ teams. Of the other top 10-17 point guards in regards to their team, I doubt most of them would give up their starting point guard for Kyle Lowry. I cannot say that about Deron Williams or Russell Westbrook. It totally depends on how good the point guards. I'm sorry, pretty much anything Lowry can do, Paul can do it about 5x -10x better. Lowry is again a good point guard, but on any team I question whether his value would be greater than that of a top 7 point guard. Like with Nash whose limited defensively, but he can hit open shots all day. Plays extremely well of the ball, probably can create a shot little bit better than Lowry. Lowry brings a little more on defensive end, while he's a better rebounder. I doubt a team like the Lakers, really need their point guards to rebound, considering you already have good rebounders on the front line. He could never replace a player, like Derrick Rose, Russell Westbrook, or Tony Parker. He does not have that kind ability. Moreover as you say, a team does not need a great point guard to win. I agree with that. But do you pass one up, if you have the opportunity to get one or in need of one. The Lakers are a great example, Kobe is in his 16th season and probably going retire within the next 5-8 years. Woudn't it make sense to bring another high quality player, if he's on his way out the door. If he goes down with an injury, which duo do you think would be better Andrew Bynum/Kyle Lowry or Andrew Bynum/Deron Williams. Some things in there are somewhat untrue and misleading. Rondo is a better and more effective players than Lowry. He's a better defender, playmaker, accumulates more total points (pts/ast), better court vision, and surprisingly a better mid-range shooter. Moreover, he's gotten much better, while the big 3 are steadily declining. He's the one that makes things go oftentimes. He could get 11 assists, anywhere in the league. You'd be foolish, if you thought Lowry could average 11 assists on the Celtics. He doesn't have that type court vision or play-making ability. It's one game where Rondo got outplayed by Chalmers, it doesn't mean anything, especially when Rondo put on clinic against the Heat through out the regular season. Based on your premise, I could easily go find several games were Kyle Lowry got outplayed and beaten down by lesser point guards. That's one fatal flaw to Rondo's game, yet you seem dismiss or not acknowledge that Lowry has none. Which is completely untrue? Again, Lowry is a good 3 point shooter, but he's not a good mid-range player.
