Our bench guys - Lowry, Wafer and Landry - have a lot of energy themselves. Because of their size and Oden, I'd give Portland an advantage, but not by much. As for the starters, I know this belongs in some other thread, but how we deal with LeMarcus Aldridge at the 4 will be interesting. Will Hayes get the minutes or will Adelman go for more offense with Scolandry? And will Hayes remain effective against LA for the duration of the series? I think this will be a key matchup. Sorry for the derail.
Lowry is a stud, no doubt. He is by far our best PG, arguably our only PG. Having said that, not even he could help us in a game like last night. We need a stud perimeter scorer to replace what McGrady was supposed to give us. Artest is a nice two-way player but he should not be our main perimeter scoring option. Wafer is awesome but he's still a bench-caliber player at this point until he gets more experience and proves he can consistenly play both ends of the court. Barry isn't much more than a spot minute outside shooter that can't play defense at this stage of his career. Lowry >>>>> Alston and Brooks. Our biggest need going into this offseason is now SG, despite some people still pointing at the PG spot. As far as this postseason, Adelman knows Lowry is the man and he won't let Brooks cost us a series even if he continues to start him. We have bigger issues than PG at this point.
we won't see a change man... do u really think a coach should change his starters on the first game of playoffs, to a starting lineup that had NEVER even been tried?? Be smart man...
Brooks fit better coming off the bench to and score. But stubborn old RA won't make any change right now. Too late. We'll prob. see Lowry playing more minutes though.
AB has more upside than lowry. AB is still raw, comparisson of two pgs: Aaron Brooks: Good shooter, solid driver, very quick, fast, good ball handler. Decent passer, bad defender. Size issue (needs to bulk a little bit). Kyle Lowry: Decent shooter, solid driver, quick, good ball handler, great at getting to the line, pretty good passer, decent defender. If we had mcgrady, i would say kyle lowry would be better suited, because our pg would need a more limited scoring role. However we don't, so i feel like AB is the best choice. (our scoring out of yao is swing to the open guy, and ab is a much better open shooter than lowry). If AB can bulk and work on his defense over the off season, he could be a top 10 pg next season in the nba. Kyle lowry doesn't have much upside, but he is still a solid player.
+1. we can probably talk about our candidates all day, but what's more relevant at this point is what do we do against portland. thoughts?
You know that Lowry is younger than Brooks by over a year, right? The only weakness I've seen at all in Lowry's game is his outside shot. Not just how often he makes them but his low release point given his height may be an issue in the long run. Other than that, I haven't seen a single weakness. He isn't just a pretty good passer. He's a great passer with great court vision. And he isn't a decent defender. He has the potential to be one of the best, if not the best, defensive PG in the entire league. His ability to finish through contact around the basket and get to the line is world class. At this point, I see Lowry with far more upside. That said, Brooks has some nice tools and can improve to where he becomes a very good change-of-pace, scoring PG off the bench for us or another team.
everything is fine for now... Let me remind you that Cassell didn't start. It is all about managing the 240 (5x48) minutes on the court. AB spaces the floor for a post-up-centric offense, so I can see the logic in starting him. Lowry has that "poise" that Cassell had, so if the initial plan doesn't go right, the coach has the option to bring in a stabilizing force.
They are both young pgs, and when it comes to first few years in the league, age isn't much of a matter in my opinion. I knew they were about a year or two apart. When I said AB had more upside this is what i meant: to me a player has more upside if they contain something special, something raw that can't be taught or developed. For example, Yao had a lot of upside entering the league because of his size, lebron did because his raw talent and athleticism along with his size. Those are two guys with upside that panned out, now here are some failures of some guys with a lot of upside: Kwame Brown was athletic and great size coming into the league, Shawn Bradley had a lot of size, JJ reddick was a great shooter with a lot of upside. All those players mentioned had something that couldn't really be taught or developed, and the question to them was whether they could mature their game and develop in other areas, then they would truely be above everyone else. AB posses great shooting ability and quickness that no one else in the league can match. I am saying he has a lot of upside because if he was able to develop defensively and as a passer, he would be a top pg in the league. Kyle Lowry posses a lot of qualities you look for in a point guard, but he doesn't really have something that is special or there isnt much room for improvement. And that is the reasoning I used when I said AB had more upside then kyle lowry.
Since Brooks is getting it pretty hard these days (rightfully so to a certain extent), I just wanted to point out a few of his strengths. The weaknesses are now glaringly obvious. The quickness/athleticism is obvious. He just needs to learn to use it to his advantage better. He can handle the ball, pass and finish very well with both hands. Very few players can do that. His turnovers are typically the result of bad decision-making, not poor ballhandling. His struggles to finish around the basket are not from the lack of good touch. He uses the glass extremely well. The problem is he doesn't know how to find space a la a player like Parker and he isn't yet able to use his body to create space a la a Lowry or Chris Paul. As a result, he throws up a lot of difficult shots in the paint or gets rejected. But we have seen a number of spectacular finishes around the basket using both hands. He just needs to get better at finding space by better using change of speed and bulking up. I don't know how much he'll improve but I do think he will eventually. My current best-case projection for Brooks is an excellent backup PG if he improves enough in certain areas. His court vision, his ability to run a team and his defense will likely always be subpar preventing him from being a starter for a contending team.
lowry's jumper is decent at mid range. his 3's have been falling lately too. i think his 3 can easily improve since he has good shooting form. i can live with lowry as our starting pg going forward, hoping he'd grow and get better. in other words, i can see our team's future with lowry being a good enough starting pg. ab? not so much. now how many of you still say ab should start over lowry? i'm just curious.
No reason to be sad about it. We have upgraded at the PG spot with Lowry. Brooks still has the potential to fill a role in this league, even if it's not with the Rockets in the long-term. When I saw Brooks play in his 1st Summer League, I was just hyped that we may have found a replacement for Alston. I had also seen a little bit of him in the Final Four the previous year. Because of those things, I started following him a little more closely. He hasn't lived up to what I hoped but now we got Lowry, who is better than both of them. This team now needs a proven, starting-caliber SG to replace McGrady. Brooks, Wafer and Landry may end up being a pretty potent bench unit if they all continue to develop well.
I think AB's inconsistency will bring him to the bench sooner than later. He is a good scorer but not a passer. He is also a defensive liability because of his size. I think Lowry is a better fit to start. IMO
