His defense? Are you kidding me? Did you get this quote from 8 years ago? Fisher gets burned on a nightly basis by other point guards, starting or bench. His understanding of the triangle gives him an edge over any incoming player but this is the Lakers' fault for not bringing in or drafting point guards to learn the system. 1. The Lakers game has changed from perimeter oriented (due to the fact that Kobe and Vujacic loved to jack up 3s years ago) to an inside offense the past two years. This is because of what assets they have now (Gasol and Bynum) and because of what has happened with Kobe (he stopped jacking up 3s and worked more on the post). 2. Fisher is old. I don't know how long his contract is but there's no way the Lakers are thinking "Okay, once Fisher retires, we can let Farmar take over". Farmar is more of a satellite player than a point guard in that he just camps at the three and can't handle the ball. Thinking that Fisher is a better fit simply because he's been their incumbent point guard is pretty blinded. If they were so satisfied with Fisher, why were the Lakers entertaining the idea of bringing in Jason Kidd a few years back? 3. It's funny that you bring up the fact that the Lakers are one of the worst 3pt shooting teams in the NBA and, yet, you champion Fisher and his 1-3pt-make-per-game as something that makes or breaks the Lakers' offensive game. You also assume that, since Lowry is a poor 3 point shooter, that he'll be jacking up more threes simply because he would (in this scenario) take over Fisher's starting job. Why can't Lowry stay the same player? Why can't he get the ball, penetrate, set up open shots for Kobe or Artest or set up easy dunks for Bynum and Gasol? Again, you bring up one facet of Lowry's game and leave another one out. You bring up that the Lakers don't need a passing point guard but you fail to acknowledge the fact that Fisher and Farmer are both defensive sieves. Lowry isn't an all-world beater on the defensive end but he's strong enough and quick enough to keep the opposing point guards from going NOVA every night. When you have Skip 2 My Lou going bananas against your starting point guard, you know there might be a chance that the defense your point guards are giving you is kinda lacking. Just because they have Bynum and Gasol manning and defending the paint doesn't mean it's ok to have the opposing point guard blow by you, which could either put your bigs into foul trouble or cause them unneeded injuries.
phil jackson said it, not me. 1. gasol and bynum are their inside threats. why would they bring in lowry who gets most of his buckets at the rim when they already have a solid inside scoring threat? 2. guess who else they tried to get? luke ridnour and kirt heinrich. wtf? but they dont get a lot of assist and get to the free throw line? why does phil want them? because they are outstanding 3 point shooters that play defense. lowry is only 1/2 of that. 3. "Why can't Lowry stay the same player? Why can't he get the ball, penetrate, set up open shots for Kobe or Artest or set up easy dunks for Bynum and Gasol?" because phil's offense doesnt need point guard to distribute the ball because of the way the ball moves due to the triangle offense. why is it hard to understand that the point guard does not become the main play maker in that offense. phil won 10 nba championships without a point guard that setup for teammates due to the way his system is designed. 4. hasnt hurt them yet.
this thread is hysterical. don't use TS% as an argument if you don't know what is designed to do. despite its misleading name, true shooting percentage has little insight to offer when trying to figure out what player is a better shooter. TS% instead is a formula that integrates the difficulty of a 3 point shot, a 2 point sot and a free throw into one percentage. it combines 3 shooting percentages into one, hence the name true shooting percentage. Essentially it aims to account for shot selection and volume. If you have one player that significantly excels at shooting threes, and shoots them at a high volume that is taken into account. same thing with someone that shoots and make a lot of free throws. EVERYONE NEEDS TO STOP USING THIS STAT AND THEN ARGUING THAT IT BENEFITS PLAYERS THAT GET TO THE FOUL LINE. does anyone realize it does that because getting to the free throw line is the easiest, and most efficient way to score and to ignore that when evaluating a player is probably the most idiotic things anyone could do? its as stupid as calling the cops on yourself and as ignorant as writing a book review after reading the first chapter.... kyle lowry and aaron brooks have equal TS% because lowry is a more efficient scorer. he averages 1.34 points per FGA despite only averaging 9.1 PPG. Brooks is a volume scorer scoring 19.6 PPG despite averaging only 1.2 points per FGA. offensively they are exact opposites but people value brooks' contributions moreso then lowrys' because brooks excels at the glamorous stats - scoring lots of points and hitting lots of threes. That is why TS% is such a great stat because it takes into account the things that most people fail to take into account or account for incorrectly when stating their opinions.
thats why I'm glad Adelman doesn't listen to him... my point was that I don't think the TS% is a good measure... and even using that statistic Brooks is better... I will admit Brooks is a problem on defense, however we can mask that problem with Ariza, Battier and Yao... however no one can mask Lowry's problem of shooting poorly... With that said I am happy with Lowry being our backup, however if someone is willing to overpay him we can replace him... On the other hand how many point guards who can score the way Brooks does are available to us??
1.) People value Brooks contriutions more because it doesnt rely on a gimmick like Lowry. IE running straight into your opponent and getting a foul. 2.) People value Brooks contriutions more because they know it will have better synergy with Yao at spacing the floor. 3.) People value Brooks contriutions more because it doesnt become unrelaible in the playoffs when the pace drastically slows. 4.) People value Brooks contriutions more because it doesnt rely on a ref blowing a whistle, which is something outside thier control. 5.) People value Brooks contriutions more because he is a better player than Lowry. 6.) People value Brooks contriutions more because he isnt easily scouted and locked down by packing the paint.
Lowry isn't likely to leave - he has a good situation here. What he is saying is a very calculated move - basically throwing himself out there to see if any team will make an offer and therefore he can get more money with the Rockets (when they match). Nothing more than being smart. Give the man credit for trying to maximize his money.
I don't think anyone here doubts that Brooks is a better player than Lowry. The point of contention is whether or not Lowry handles the offense better than AB. AB is by far a better player than Lowry, he is finishing a lot better, he can shoot from anywhere, quick as lightning, and has been much more confident come clutch time. With Yao on the floor, I would put AB in as PG simply because it creates spacing for Yao and keeps the paint unclogged. However, who knows when we will see Yao play and who knows when his season will end. Without Yao in the paint and in RA's system, I would prefer Lowry starting over AB and AB coming in as an instant spark for offense.
On another site i saw a rummor that the 76ers are offering him a starting spot and the MLE. I think he is from Philly to.
If they do, he should take it.......and it would be interesting to see if Morey is true to his word and matches, that is a lot of $$$$...and another reason that signing Ariza when we already had Battier was not all that good. DD
Hope Morey won't match it. MLE is overpaying too much considering how many successful PGs in this league.
