"Significant" is an over statement. Kyle Lowry is averaging 4 less assists than Raja Rondo, but he is scoring more, shooting at a better percentage (especially from 3) and his supporting cast does not consists of 3 other all-stars on his team.
I think for the point guard, it is really about how they impact the game, rather than just stats. I mean what do you have a problem with stat-wise for Lowry? Shooting the same FG% as MVP candidate Rose. What about averaging the same assists as Rose per 36. Are you worried about points? Like Rondo getting 9 points per 36 minutes vs. Lowry's 14? Rebounds? Like averaging more than Williams or Paul? What about his TS%? Like his 54% vs. Williams 49%. Lowry just impacts the game. And his impact is arguably the equivalent of many "star" point guards.
too bad lowry won't continue his superb playing, simply not that talented, brooks has a higher ceiling than lowry still
Rondo is not performing like a star-level point guard this season either, however the media might hype him. But his overall track record the last three seasons is a lot stronger than Lowry's anyway.
I don't care about the stats or how you play in the regular season. It's when you do it in the playoffs and carry your team when I throw the word "Superstar" around. If Lowry drags us into the playoffs and we somehow beat the Spurs or Lakers then yes, he'd be a Superstar.
That's now what I remembered. But anyway, AB doesn't have all star ceiling even without mental issue. He simply has too many holes in his game, many of those holes are hard to impossible to fix. For example, his frame and strength on defensive end, his court vision, his overall PG IQ etc. Those are the items much harder to improve compare with shooting. And AB isn't a high energy guy who can play both ends like Lowry. I've noticed when AB played hard on defensive end, his shooting suffered.
The AB of last season demonstrated elite speed, elite shooting ability, and an elite ability to create separation from his defender. Those three together are big markers of having a star-level ceiling in my opinion. But this thread isn't about AB who is no longer a Rocket.
You can't have your own criteria for an argument concerning all-stars. That is called subjectivity. Rondo was voted by coaches to be an all-star, thus he is an all-star. Kyle Lowry is not far from Rondo, and he has a lesser supporting cast. Their past don't matter, since none of them have earned Tim Duncan honor for a free trip to all-star team
He is becoming the Rondo of the Rockets, only Lowry can shoot better. He can run the offense, get everyone involved, score, get you that steal or rebound in a crucial situation and kick everyone's arse in Black ops. He also has a tweeter account, which is essenstial for every "superstar." Just need some youtube clip of him hanging out at the arcades laughing and saying thabeet sucks.
I don't, I pretty much use Hollinger's PER which is calculated using a combination of the stats listed above plus a few others. Rondo's PER is 17.1 this season. Lowry's is 16.6. Chris Paul? 24.5. Derrick Rose? 22.9. Deron Williams? 21.2. Steve Nash? 21.7. That's a pretty significant difference between true star-level point guards and between Lowry/Rondo.
That's why AB was so overrated. His "elite shooting ability" only resulted in above average TS% and other part of his games were below average to terrible. No, star is not made by shooting only.
Kyle Lowry compared to the Joneses I don't have time right now to put together a fact-driven post with stats but this is intended for Clutchfans to chew on this bit: With the sustained stellar play of Kyle Lowry since the All-star break, I feel that he has broken out into a Top PG around the league. Given CP3's uncertain future (injuries?) and DWill going to the Nets, my question is how do the rest of you feel he compares with the rest of the elite (joneses) point guards around the league? Do you feel that we already have a star PG in the making and that ANY upgrade (whether it be Rose, Westbrook, CP3, DWILL, etc) is not entirely necessary? Not trying to be a homer here, but I feel that Lowry (as an overall player) fills the bill nicely for the future as is. Your thoughts?
He's playing great and has taken over the offense very well, but I would still take any of those 4 over Lowry. Rose is on another level. We're talking MVP candidate.
Lowry is beasting no doubt. But if you were to add dunking ability like Rose then we'd be able to compare him to some of the elites. Just imagine if Lowry could throw it down like Rose or Westbrook
Hoping this was intended to be a joke. I fail to see how dunking would be what pushes Lowry into elite status...
Nash is great but he's getting old and wouldn't be suitable for our future right? And I personally feel Lowry is just as good if not better than Parker moving forward as the PG for the Rockets.
