Kyle Lowry Discussion

[hrdboild]

Daryl Morey is downplaying the situation, but Kyle Lowry's comments about not getting along with McHale and a possibly expensive contract for Dragic on the way could mean that perhaps Kyle Lowry will be available this off-season.

Here's the link:
Kyle Lowry takes issue with McHale

He's got two more years at 5.75 and 6.2 million left. We've been able to deal with Houston a lot in the past so it seems like Petrie could get something done if he offers the right players. We can offer them Cisco's expiring contract, and throw in Thomas or Jimmer. Or maybe they'd be interested in getting Chuck Hayes back? Thornton is another possibility, and before people jump on me for bringing it up, we're going to have to shave salary somehow if we want to retain JT and/or fill whichever forward position we don't address in the draft. Lowry for Thornton is probably a pretty even trade talent-wise. Less scoring from Lowry, but he contributes in a lot of other areas as well with defense, rebounding, and three-point shooting.

Personally, I'd be thrilled to have Lowry. I've liked Lowry since I saw him in college. He's improved on his three point shooting since then and he's still a tough defender and an underrated playmaker. He was off to an impressive start this season before he got injured. I think a case could have been made for him as an All-Star this year if he stayed healthy. Borderline anyway. I didn't even bring him up before as a possible trade target because I thought Houston would be dumb to trade him, but the news today makes it worth discussing at least. I'd wait and see what happens with the draft first, but if we can get Davis, Robinson, or Drummond with our pick, I'd strongly consider making that Thornton for Lowry trade to even out our starting lineup and clear a little more cap space to steal Batum from Portland. A little bit wishful thinking there with the draft pick, but if it does work out this looks like a pretty solid lineup to me:

PG: Kyle Lowry
SG: Tyreke Evans
SF: Nicolas Batum
PF: Davis/Robinson/Drummond
C: Demarcus Cousins

EDIT: Actually, now that I think about it you could swap in Kidd-Gilchrist, Barnes, or Perry Jones for Batum and look fro a free agent PF or C and I still like that lineup. The benefit of bringing a veteran PG like Lowry in is that he let's Tyreke slide over to the SG position, but he can shoot the ball well enough that he's still got a role out there when Tyreke is handling the ball. I've been pushing for moving Tyreke back to PG as there's only a few PGs in the league who would make sense to me as a back-court partner for Tyreke, and Kyle Lowry is one of them. I don't know who I would target as the other big man in that scenario (I'm not crazy about bringing Thompson back as the starter) but with any of those three rookie SFs along with Lowry and Evans we could have a pretty formidable perimeter defense. Barnes should be able to hold his own, Perry Jones has the size and athleticism to have an impact there, and of course MKG is a stud. Just thinking about Lowry/Evans/Batum or Lowry/Evans/MKG in our starting lineup warms my cold defense-obsessed little heart.

 

[rainmaker]

Just about to post this. I agree, he'd be a very good fit next to Reke. I doubt Hou will keep both he and Dragic, and these latest statements just add fuel to the fire.

Not sure many here would want Lowry though, as I've brought it up before and the responses weren't all that positive. I'd trade MT for him tomorrow. Not a knock on MT, but Lowry starting for us next to Reke would do more for us than a pissed off MT coming off the bench, because he doesn't want to come off the bench.

Lowry/Reke, and all the sudden our backcourt defense is 5 times better than the IT/MT pairing.

 

[Bricklayer]

I have and continue to love Lowry...well, maybe not so much this little snitfit, but everything else, including the fact he can hit the three now and so works better next to Rkee or Cousisn than he once did. BUT there's a huge problem with adding basically ANY big minute small PG to this team. First you have the ball control issue -- where IT and Reke were fighting over it before, now you add a third guy for a big scrum of guys who are all better with the ball in their hands. Secondly, Lowry is 6'0" tall. If you bring him in, retain, it is very hard to put those guys out ther together -- you end up with a 6'0"/5'9" backcourt that's not even big by high school standards. So then you are talking about a pure platoon? Making IT into a 16 minute a night player behind Lowry? You almost have to play them together just to get your best players time.

 

[Big Cuz 15]

i'd give up MT without even blinking. his toughness in our backcourt would be welcomed. i just don't see why houston would want another guard.. they have a bunch of em.

maybe we can trade MT + hayes for lowry + dalembert.

cousins, JT, draft pick, reke, lowry and we have a balanced team. MT

 

[OptimusRhyme]

I'd absolutely love Lowry as the starting PG. I'd give up MT or IT as the main trade piece, and add a future pick or possibly Jimmer if needed. We need some Defense,Playmaking,3Pt shooting in the back court. And Kyle is good at all those things. Plus hes got playoff experience, and thats always a big plus for your floor general.

I say get this done, hes on the block, DO IT! If somehow we ended up with Lowry,Batum and a solid draft pick this offseason, Some of my faith would be restored in this franchise.

Lowry,Evans,Batum,Thompson,Cousins is a nice nucleus.

EDIT. Houston seems to be needing a PF/Center pretty bad. I MIGHT be willing to resign Thompson and trade him for Lowry. Then we could draft a big to replace JT. Or the opposite, Draft a big and trade him for Lowry and resign Thompson.

 

[hrdboild]

I have and continue to love Lowry...well, maybe not so much this little snitfit, but everything else, including the fact he can hit the three now and so works better next to Rkee or Cousisn than he once did. BUT there's a huge problem with adding basically ANY big minute small PG to this team. First you have the ball control issue -- where IT and Reke were fighting over it before, now you add a third guy for a big scrum of guys who are all better with the ball in their hands. Secondly, Lowry is 6'0" tall. If you bring him in, retain, it is very hard to put those guys out ther together -- you end up with a 6'0"/5'9" backcourt that's not even big by high school standards. So then you are talking about a pure platoon? Making IT into a 16 minute a night player behind Lowry? You almost have to play them together just to get your best players time.

My thinking on this was that Lowry would either push Thomas back to the bench, or you give backup PG minutes to Jimmer, trade Thomas, and let Tyreke and maybe T. Will play some de facto point from the SG position. A number of people here have already made the observation that Thomas' game is better suited for the second unit anyway since he's more of a scorer than a facilitator. He's more likely to accept a bench role than Thornton would be, and you won't have a huge dropoff in productivity if Lowry gets injured or gets himself in foul trouble occasionally. On the other hand, he could help sweeten a sign and trade deal for help at another position. In any case, hopefully we've seen the last of either coach Smart or his fascination with midget-ball.

 

[hrdboild]

i'd give up MT without even blinking. his toughness in our backcourt would be welcomed. i just don't see why houston would want another guard.. they have a bunch of em.

maybe we can trade MT + hayes for lowry + dalembert.

cousins, JT, draft pick, reke, lowry and we have a balanced team. MT

That would be pretty funny if we managed to swap Hayes for Dalembert now. Both guys had down years so maybe a do-over would be in everyone's best interest. Back to your first point though, I'm not really sure what Houston is looking to do this off-season. They've been stockpiling expiring deals with only Scola and Lowry signed beyond next season. Even so, they just missed out on the playoffs with Goran Dragic and Courtney Lee as their starting backcourt down the stretch. Kevin Martin is in the last year of his deal now and he seemed to lose favor with McHale as the season went on. I think they'll make re-signing Dragic a priority and it wouldn't surprise me if Morey, being the proactive GM type, trades Martin at some point this season rather than lose him for nothing in a year. Heck, he already traded him last off-season, it just got vetoed by the league. That's why I can maybe see them going for Thornton as a cost-controlled scorer to replace Martin. They need frontcourt help badly though, and we don't have much to offer there.

 

[The_Jamal]

Just about to post this. I agree, he'd be a very good fit next to Reke. I doubt Hou will keep both he and Dragic, and these latest statements just add fuel to the fire.

Not sure many here would want Lowry though, as I've brought it up before and the responses weren't all that positive. I'd trade MT for him tomorrow. Not a knock on MT, but Lowry starting for us next to Reke would do more for us than a pissed off MT coming off the bench, because he doesn't want to come off the bench.

Lowry/Reke, and all the sudden our backcourt defense is 5 times better than the IT/MT pairing.

Lowry would certainly be an ideal fit here. He's the best defensive PG in the NBA, he's an outstanding rebounder, he can easily be a #2 option on a championship team, and he spreads the floor for Reke and Cousins. Best of all, he can actually run an offense and would be the best PG the Kings have had probably since Archibald.

My guess is some combo of MT+JT or IT or perhaps our pick+IT/JT would intrigue the Rockets

 

[The_Jamal]

I have and continue to love Lowry...well, maybe not so much this little snitfit, but everything else, including the fact he can hit the three now and so works better next to Rkee or Cousisn than he once did. BUT there's a huge problem with adding basically ANY big minute small PG to this team. First you have the ball control issue -- where IT and Reke were fighting over it before, now you add a third guy for a big scrum of guys who are all better with the ball in their hands. Secondly, Lowry is 6'0" tall. If you bring him in, retain, it is very hard to put those guys out ther together -- you end up with a 6'0"/5'9" backcourt that's not even big by high school standards. So then you are talking about a pure platoon? Making IT into a 16 minute a night player behind Lowry? You almost have to play them together just to get your best players time.

I'd trust Lowry on 90% of all SG's in the NBA. He's a brilliant defender and I have no doubt he could last 8-10 minutes playing with IT. In fact, it would probably work quite well for that amount of time

 

[mac]

I have and continue to love Lowry...well, maybe not so much this little snitfit, but everything else, including the fact he can hit the three now and so works better next to Rkee or Cousisn than he once did. BUT there's a huge problem with adding basically ANY big minute small PG to this team. First you have the ball control issue -- where IT and Reke were fighting over it before, now you add a third guy for a big scrum of guys who are all better with the ball in their hands. Secondly, Lowry is 6'0" tall. If you bring him in, retain, it is very hard to put those guys out ther together -- you end up with a 6'0"/5'9" backcourt that's not even big by high school standards. So then you are talking about a pure platoon? Making IT into a 16 minute a night player behind Lowry? You almost have to play them together just to get your best players time.

I have a feeling that is likely to happen anyway. The only way Smart managed to get good minute distribution was by putting Evans at the 3. IT/Thornton/Tyreke is going to take up just as many minutes as IT/Lowry/Tyreke would.

 

[beb0p]

Getting Lowry is a no brainer but I think it's a pipe dream. The Lakers will gladly take Lowry off the Rockets' hands and they can offer back an overrated, over-the-hill, and overpaid Spainard that the Rockets have been having wet dreams about.

I can only hope that the Rockets' own title ambition will prevent them from making the inevitable mistake. At the same time, I can't believe the Lakers' luck. What is the odd that a player they've coveted is suddenly available and the player they want to trade away happens to be the a guy that the other team wants?

 

[Sac.1989]

very true. If the lakers could get dally and lowry they'd be back to contending.

We need to get this done. GP has a recent history with HOU which may help

 

[Mass]

I'd love to get Lowry, it's a no brainer in my opinion. I'm not sure we can make this happening with MT anyways. The Rockets already have Martin, so I don't think they want MT. Probably we could get this done by adding a 3rd team on this trade, but I don't know which one right now.

Lowry - Evans on the backcourt, with IT and T-Will form the bench would be a great rotation. I still think IT can be a productive 16/20 mins guy from the bench, and that this should be his role.

 

[pshn80]

Give up Thornton for someone taller than Lowry. A really, really bad route for the reasons Brick describes, is getting Lowry and keeping Thornton. Don't do it.

 

[VF21]

Once again, people need to think of both sides of a potential acquisition. I can't think of any real reason why/how we could get Lowry for Thornton. And, as Brickie has pointed out, I'm not sure it would work out that well with the rest of our existing personnel.

 

[bajaden]

Give up Thornton for someone taller than Lowry. A really, really bad route for the reasons Brick describes, is getting Lowry and keeping Thornton. Don't do it.

If you can get a top PG, especially one of the best defensive PG's in the league, I don't think you worry about how he fits with IT. Yeah, IT had a great year last season, but one season does not a career make. You don't have to put them on the floor together. You could trade IT. I mean if you can do it, and not do serious damage to the existing core, then you do it and figure the rest out later. I mean come on folks! You can find negatives in any deal. Were starting to get into Paralysis by analysis.

 

[swisshh]

I think Houston would want a big in exchange and not another shooting guard. Remember that they have Kevin Martin still and two decent SFs. One possibility would involve the Kings ending up with a draft pick thats too low for anyone they truly want. There might be a semi-decent big at that point. Then it becomes a question of taking a young rookie big and waiting on them to be viable as a NBA starter or trading that pick for Lowry and getting your PG tandem set.

I would offer that right now the PG spot is very important in the NBA and Lowry is better with the ball than either IT or Reke. The Kings are desperate for defense, but they also need interior defense as well.

 

[rainmaker]

If you can get a top PG, especially one of the best defensive PG's in the league, I don't think you worry about how he fits with IT. Yeah, IT had a great year last season, but one season does not a career make. You don't have to put them on the floor together. You could trade IT. I mean if you can do it, and not do serious damage to the existing core, then you do it and figure the rest out later. I mean come on folks! You can find negatives in any deal. Were starting to get into Paralysis by analysis.

Yeah, I don't get it. Don't trade for a 6' proven NBA starting pg, who's a great defender at his position, because we're concerned about playing a 5'9" IT who's a lesser player on both ends?

Getting Lowry makes our starting lineup better, on both ends of the court. If we traded MT for Lowry, it helps clear up room in the backcourt. If we don't trade MT, we have a better bench and possibly a 6th man of the year candidate.

If MT and IT were still here with Lowry, then yes they'd suffer defensively when paired together when coming off the bench, but we were starting them together and playing them together 30+ mins a night. How is pairing them together off the bench, for less mins, so we don't struggle as much defensively as when they're starting together, a large enough worry not to do this if possible?

I don't get it. Don't improve our starting lineup while making our bench more potent, because we're afraid how two guys off the bench might pair together?

Possible pairing would be:
Lowry/Reke=very good defensively
IT/Reke=good defensively,improvement over what we had
Lowry/MT=strong at one spot defensively, better than what we had
IT/Lowry=still better defensively than what we had as Lowry from what I've seen even at 6' is better at guarding sg's than MT
IT/MT=what we had, worst possible pairing defensively, but instead of sharing huge starters mins together, it'd get cut down to spot mins off the bench

So.....people don't want to do this, not make our starting lineup better all around and improve most combinations defensively, in order to play a worse combination, arguably, on both ends? No combination featuring Lowry would be worse than what we had starting in our backcourt last season, and now we don't make our team better and deeper because of the spot mins IT/Lowry might get, or Lowry MT, which would still be better defensively that IT/MT?

 

[bajaden]

I've been reading the Houston newspapers to get, you know, their opinion on the Lowery situation, and what Morleys thoughts are. First of all, no mention of Gasol at all. Bynum or Howard have been mentioned as well as Deron Williams. But here's the deal. Lowery isn't going anywhere until Houston has another legit PG signed sealed and delivered. He is, at the moment, their only legit PG thats under contract. Dragic is an unrestricted freeagent, so there are no guarantee's they'll get him back. The odd's of landing Williams are about as good as ours. Point being, until their PG situation is resolved, Lowery isn't going to be traded.

Add in, McHale has stated that if they can resign Dragic, he wants to play Dragic and Lowery together. So resigning Dragic still doesn't mean Lowery will be traded. Lowery has little leverage, and if Houston doesn't want to trade him, he's going nowhere. Houston really wants Williams, but I don't think they have enough talent to attract Williams, and some of their talent, Camby, Dragic, are unresticted freeagents.

Dalembert has one year left, but its non-guaranteed, so it will be interesting to see if they guarantee it or not. He hasn't been mentioned much in the papers, but I get the impression their not all that thrilled with him. However, without Camby or Dalembert, they're in a world of hurt at the center position. So they almost have to guarantee Dalembert. Otherwise Scola would be their starting center.

This tells me that would interested in Hayes. So even if Lowery is off the table, we might be able to work out some sort of deal with them. Maybe pick up Chandler Parsons, who proved he can defend at the SF postion. Just a suggestion. They also have two first round picks and want to move up in the draft. Lots of options!

 

[baller13]

Lowry next to Tyreke would be awesome. I would give them MT in a heartbeat but i agree they would probably want a Pg back in the deal as well. If we had to throw in IT as well that would be fine with me.
Lowry Lowry
Evans Evans
Twill/Batum/ Twill/harrison barnes/ MKG/ perry jones
cousins JT/ ryan anderson
drummond cousins

I really like both these lineups

 

[Amory]

i'd give up MT without even blinking. his toughness in our backcourt would be welcomed. i just don't see why houston would want another guard.. they have a bunch of em.

maybe we can trade MT + hayes for lowry + dalembert.

cousins, JT, draft pick, reke, lowry and we have a balanced team. MT

As people have said, it would be funny but I would do it!

 

[Bricklayer]

If you can get a top PG, especially one of the best defensive PG's in the league, I don't think you worry about how he fits with IT. Yeah, IT had a great year last season, but one season does not a career make. You don't have to put them on the floor together. You could trade IT. I mean if you can do it, and not do serious damage to the existing core, then you do it and figure the rest out later. I mean come on folks! You can find negatives in any deal. Were starting to get into Paralysis by analysis.

The key difficulty here is that assuming same coach and front office you have to assume we WILL play IT a lot of minutes next year. We all know that after all the minutes and hype invested in him. So once you have that as your backdrop, as your constant, you have to take that into account and try to figure how to work around it. Would love to have Lowry. But no matter how you come down on trade Reke (foolish) trade Thornton whatever, just the mere pairing of Lowry and IT creates some real issues. Neither guy is going to get 16min a night from this franchise. So...you either have to create a messy platoon with neither guy happy, or you have to not put them together in the first place, or you have to actually play them together as quite possibly the smallest major minute backcourt pairing in modern NBA history. That's not hyperbole.

Can Lowry log some minutes and try to do the Bobby Jackson at SG? Maybe. He's a strong tough dude. But its a lot like moving Reke to SF. You are taking him from his strength, where he's proven he's hihgly effective defensively, and you are setting him up to fail.

I could make all this work if I were like a computer game GM/coach/god emperor. There is a way through here. But the reality is you are have to rely on severely flawed decisionmakers and various interfereing agendas.

 

[bluntsnbball]

i'd LOVE lowry, but lets be honest, we're gonna need to give up Reke or something along those lines to get him. I know he's disgruntled but there are plenty of other teams willing to offer much more than Thornton, most likely

 

[Gary]

I can't see Evans and Lowry working on the floor at the same time. So if we were that interested in Lowry then it would probably be at the cost of Evans.

 

[pshn80]

I'm still a "don't do it" but we'd solve a lot of problems spelled out above if we traded Thornton and Thomas for Lowry. That's what you would call real commitment to the Lowry-Evans cncept.

 

[mac]

I can't see Evans and Lowry working on the floor at the same time. So if we were that interested in Lowry then it would probably be at the cost of Evans.

Interesting, because every else seems to think the two would be great together. What's the reasoning behind your view?

 

[Big Cuz 15]

you would need to balance out the roster with good shooter at 3 if reke/lowry are the backcourt.

 

[Bricklayer]

i'd LOVE lowry, but lets be honest, we're gonna need to give up Reke or something along those lines to get him. I know he's disgruntled but there are plenty of other teams willing to offer much more than Thornton, most likely

I think people underestimate Thornton rather routinely around here. There just aren't many SGs able to score like he can anymore. And much as I like Lowry, its nto as if we are talking about a multiple time All Star or some such.

The bigger probelm with Thornton for Lowry is our old friend Kevin Martin. Unless Martin and Scola are packaged to bring back Gasol...which makes no sense for the Lakers because they have Kobe and generally like defensive players, but...guess you never know. They could trade those two for Gasol, trade Lowry for Thornton, resign Dragic...and end up with a Dragic, Thornton, Parsons, Gasol, Camby/Dalembert team that would probably be no better than the one they just had.

 

[Gary]

Interesting, because every else seems to think the two would be great together. What's the reasoning behind your view?

Don't get me wrong, I think it would work better than IT with Evans at SG. I just have reservations to making a big change until we can see if Evans can indeed play the SG position.

Lowry would do well enough off the ball and defensively he's pretty dang good. What I worry about with a guy like Lowry (which might seem pretty petty) is that He's not a real ball dominant PG. Almost too passive form what I have seen, and being that Martin was my favorite King for a while I still watch him in Houston. If Evans was at SG and Lowry were to bring a passive approach to SG then what would be the difference than Lowry basically being "Beno" to Evans PG? When they played Dragic and Lowry together it kind of looked like Dragic was controlling things. I don't want another 6'0 SG.

I would rather see if things can work with Evans at SG with a semi ball dominant PG in IT first before we make any big moves. It could end up like a MT/Evans back court with the team shooting less than 40%.

I am probably being too fickle but that's jut the way I am.

 

[MassachusettsKingsFan]

I think people underestimate Thornton rather routinely around here. There just aren't many SGs able to score like he can anymore. And much as I like Lowry, its nto as if we are talking about a multiple time All Star or some such.

The bigger probelm with Thornton for Lowry is our old friend Kevin Martin. Unless Martin and Scola are packaged to bring back Gasol...which makes no sense for the Lakers because they have Kobe and generally like defensive players, but...guess you never know. They could trade those two for Gasol, trade Lowry for Thornton, resign Dragic...and end up with a Dragic, Thornton, Parsons, Gasol, Camby/Dalembert team that would probably be no better than the one they just had.

I agree 100%. Thornton is very underrated around here in my opinion. The general solution to our roster issues seems to be 'trade Thornton' or 'move Thornton to the bench' ... neither options I love.

Thornton for Lowry? I don't think I make that deal...but I suppose it largely depends on what else we do. I'm not sure Houston would either, because Dragic is a FA and they have Kevin .. but we have players who can do some of the things Lowry can do. We have guys that need the ball already. Evans/Thomas/Lowry would be a bigger mess than the one we have right now.

And I like Lowry, I just think this league is pretty stacked with good point guards. Almost every team has one, or one they think can become a good one. Thornton is just a rarer player... with the unique ability to shoot and attack the basket. He and DeMarcus are the biggest 'winners' on the roster right now, or at least they are the most expressive about it. I know he wants to win. You can see it.