Kyle Lowry Discussion

[Bricklayer]

Having two good PGs is not a bad thing.

No, but having 2 1/2 could be a problem. Especially with this:

Lowry as starter last year: 32.1min
Thomas as starter last year: 31.6min

Throw in Lowry being 6'0" and Isaiah being 5'9" and the numbers don't work. Somebody is going to be awfully disappointed, or undersized, or both. Let's say you trade Thornton for Lowry. Then your tiny guard rotation is 6'5" PG/SG Reke, 6'0" PG Lowry, and 5'9" PG/SG? Thomas. Let's say you play Reke 34 min, Lowry 32...that leaves 30 for IT. That's enough. Unfortunately it also means that for those 14 minutes a night Reke is not on the floor You are playing 6'0" Lowry and 5'9" Thomas together out there. Alternately you get a real SG to backup Reke, and then run Lowry and IT either as 32 Lowry/16 IT (IT pissed) or 24 Lowry/24 IT (Lowry and likely IT both unhappy). And of course all of this is wasting Reke's own ability to handle and create, which is one of the traits that sets him above other SGs if that's what you call him.

 

[ESP47]

You just listed all 5 (!) of our small forwards. And by the end of the year none of them were in the regular rotation. Whether it's the draft, free agency, or a trade we need this gallery of misfit forwards to stop now.

Haha yeah I just listed the 5 worst players I could think of right off the bat. Although Salmons was ok when he came off the bench. Throw Fredette and Hayes in the scrap pile as well. Whiteside is too young and not doing any harm in the 12th roster spot. Terrence Williams has some upside, so I'd like to see what he could do.

Brick is right about how it'll never work to have two midget PG's. You'd have to trade IT in a package for Lowry. I love what IT brings to the table but I just don't see him leading a playoff team. He brings points and excitement but we also have about the worst defense in the league when he starts. I'm not writing him off or anything, especially after his rookie season, but I just can't envision him being the PG of the future.

 

[beb0p]

No, but having 2 1/2 could be a problem. Especially with this:

Lowry as starter last year: 32.1min
Thomas as starter last year: 31.6min

Throw in Lowry being 6'0" and Isaiah being 5'9" and the numbers don't work. Somebody is going to be awfully disappointed, or undersized, or both. Let's say you trade Thornton for Lowry. Then your tiny guard rotation is 6'5" PG/SG Reke, 6'0" PG Lowry, and 5'9" PG/SG? Thomas. Let's say you play Reke 34 min, Lowry 32...that leaves 30 for IT. That's enough. Unfortunately it also means that for those 14 minutes a night Reke is not on the floor You are playing 6'0" Lowry and 5'9" Thomas together out there. Alternately you get a real SG to backup Reke, and then run Lowry and IT either as 32 Lowry/16 IT (IT pissed) or 24 Lowry/24 IT (Lowry and likely IT both unhappy). And of course all of this is wasting Reke's own ability to handle and create, which is one of the traits that sets him above other SGs if that's what you call him.

You're too infatuated with a 5'-9" guard whose career projects to be a backup at best. If IT is pissed with playing 16 mins a game, that's his problem. I like IT but I, like many here, is under no illusion that he is the long term solution.

A combo of Lowry and Evans, I don't know how well it works in real life, but on paper sure beat anything we threw out there last season.

With that said, in no way am I implying that the Kings has a snowballl chance of landing Lowry. The point is that if a very good PG is available, the Kings will be dumb not to go after him because it might hurt IT's feelings.
.

 

[Kingster]

I like Lowry, but if you're going to use your trade capital, then use it for a position of need. The three and the four are more positions of need than the 1.

 

[ESP47]

I like Lowry, but if you're going to use your trade capital, then use it for a position of need. The three and the four are more positions of need than the 1.

This is true but who could we realistically get at the 3?

I guess it depends on the draft and whether we draft a 1, 3 or 4. I'm guessing the front office is as infatuated with IT as some fans are and won't go there. It's a shame because as nice a player as he is, he's just not a long term answer.

 

[The_Jamal]

No, but having 2 1/2 could be a problem. Especially with this:

Lowry as starter last year: 32.1min
Thomas as starter last year: 31.6min

Throw in Lowry being 6'0" and Isaiah being 5'9" and the numbers don't work. Somebody is going to be awfully disappointed, or undersized, or both. Let's say you trade Thornton for Lowry. Then your tiny guard rotation is 6'5" PG/SG Reke, 6'0" PG Lowry, and 5'9" PG/SG? Thomas. Let's say you play Reke 34 min, Lowry 32...that leaves 30 for IT. That's enough. Unfortunately it also means that for those 14 minutes a night Reke is not on the floor You are playing 6'0" Lowry and 5'9" Thomas together out there. Alternately you get a real SG to backup Reke, and then run Lowry and IT either as 32 Lowry/16 IT (IT pissed) or 24 Lowry/24 IT (Lowry and likely IT both unhappy). And of course all of this is wasting Reke's own ability to handle and create, which is one of the traits that sets him above other SGs if that's what you call him.

So now IT is a selfish player who demands starter minutes? What?

If we got Lowry, IT would become a bench player who will get bench player minutes. I've been one of the biggest advocates of IT on this board, but there's no justification for him to have equal time with a top 7 PG like Lowry.

It's amusing how you try and tear down IT any chance you get. You constantly bring up his height as a means to diminish his talent level and now he's all of a sudden a selfish player who fully expects and demands to be a starter.

 

[Kingster]

This is true but who could we realistically get at the 3?

I guess it depends on the draft and whether we draft a 1, 3 or 4. I'm guessing the front office is as infatuated with IT as some fans are and won't go there. It's a shame because as nice a player as he is, he's just not a long term answer.

It's too early to know the ceiling of IT. For a rookie, he did exceedingly well, so he might be the answer As for who you could get at the 3, I have no idea. But I'd rather have some dry powder for when the 3 becomes available than spend it on a position that is not of great need.

 

[Bricklayer]

You're too infatuated with a 5'-9" guard whose career projects to be a backup at best. If IT is pissed with playing 16 mins a game, that's his problem. I like IT but I, like many here, is under no illusion that he is the long term solution.

A combo of Lowry and Evans, I don't know how well it works in real life, but on paper sure beat anything we threw out there last season.

With that said, in no way am I implying that the Kings has a snowballl chance of landing Lowry. The point is that if a very good PG is available, the Kings will be dumb not to go after him because it might hurt IT's feelings.
.

So now IT is a selfish player who demands starter minutes? What?

If we got Lowry, IT would become a bench player who will get bench player minutes. I've been one of the biggest advocates of IT on this board, but there's no justification for him to have equal time with a top 7 PG like Lowry.

It's amusing how you try and tear down IT any chance you get. You constantly bring up his height as a means to diminish his talent level and now he's all of a sudden a selfish player who fully expects and demands to be a starter.

Amusing how the same post can lead to calls that I am simultaneously both infatuated with IT and trying to tear him down any chance I get.

And if a problem has been created or might be created by IT it is a problem created by our front office and coaching staff. After incessant "you gotta love him!" "you go ROY" "you're my general on the floor" etc. etc. etc. sucking up for the entire second half of the year, even a level headed kid's head is going to be turned a bit, and his expectations for the future will be changed. This of course only even becoming an issue if a front office/coach that embarrassed itself with gushing hype would even have the guts to reverse course and disappoint a whole group of fans who bought into it. I have larger doubts there than I do about IT. But in any case the point stands -- there is no way to have two small PGs on a team who both think they should start without creating a problem somewhere. If one guy is the size of Beno or somesuch maybe you can buy yourselves some defensively shaky minutes playing them together. With two 6' and under guys something has to give.

Oh and P.S.: Assuming the front office went for it (doubtful) and the coach went for it (doubtful) and the players went for it (doubtful) I would be down with a Lowry 32 IT 16-20min PG rotation. Be feisty. Works for me. Unlike most posters though I don't make posts based on what works for me. I try to predict what will work period. And the above combination, which I think could be dynamic, is just entirely too smart for a place as full of agendas and silliness as Kingsland.

 

[Big Cuz 15]

i am here

 

[Glenn]

Amusing how the same post can lead to calls that I am simultaneously both infatuated with IT and trying to tear him down any chance I get.

And if a problem has been created or might be created by IT it is a problem created by our front office and coaching staff. After incessant "you gotta love him!" "you go ROY" "you're my general on the floor" etc. etc. etc. sucking up for the entire second half of the year, even a level headed kid's head is going to be turned a bit, and his expectations for the future will be changed. This of course only even becoming an issue if a front office/coach that embarrassed itself with gushing hype would even have the guts to reverse course and disappoint a whole group of fans who bought into it. I have larger doubts there than I do about IT. But in any case the point stands -- there is no way to have two small PGs on a team who both think they should start without creating a problem somewhere. If one guy is the size of Beno or somesuch maybe you can buy yourselves some defensively shaky minutes playing them together. With two 6' and under guys something has to give.

Oh and P.S.: Assuming the front office went for it (doubtful) and the coach went for it (doubtful) and the players went for it (doubtful) I would be down with a Lowry 32 IT 16-20min PG rotation. Be feisty. Works for me. Unlike most posters though I don't make posts based on what works for me. I try to predict what will work period. And the above combination, which I think could be dynamic, is just entirely too smart for a place as full of agendas and silliness as Kingsland.

It's tough being the alpha dog, isn't it? Sob!

Anyway, I doubt if IT's head has become too swollen and I feel prety sure he knows he is lucky to be on a small ball team. Now let's change this small ball thing.

 

[Big Cuz 15]

Now let's change this small ball thing.

yes

 

[beb0p]

Amusing how the same post can lead to calls that I am simultaneously both infatuated with IT and trying to tear him down any chance I get.

That's more of a reflection of the points you were making. It's possible to think that IT should start and think that he is selfish, demands starting minutes, and can't defend? They're not exactly mutually exclusive, right?

But in any case the point stands -- there is no way to have two small PGs on a team who both think they should start without creating a problem somewhere.

Lowdry demanding starter minutes? Sure. IT demanding starter minutes? I don't know how you'd know that.
.

 

[Bricklayer]

That's more of a reflection of the points you were making. It's possible to think that IT should start and think that he is selfish, demands starting minutes, and can't defend? They're not exactly mutually exclusive, right?




Lowdry demanding starter minutes? Sure. IT demanding starter minutes? I don't know how you'd know that.
.

This is where the size becomes an issue. Because with two small PGS you don't go from "oh, you get starting minutes" to "oh. you come off the bench but can still get just 5 minutes less". You kind of go from "oh you get starters mintes" to "sorry, your minutes just got slashed in half. Unless, again, you want to actually throw out an all 6' and under backcourt onto an NBA court for long stretches.

If Rekee starts at PG for instance there is not that gap/problem there with IT, because IT can play next to either Reke or Thornton. Its only there when both guys are small.

 

[Spike]

This is where the size becomes an issue. Because with two small PGS you don't go from "oh, you get starting minutes" to "oh. you come off the bench but can still get just 5 minutes less". You kind of go from "oh you get starters mintes" to "sorry, your minutes just got slashed in half. Unless, again, you want to actually throw out an all 6' and under backcourt onto an NBA court for long stretches.

If Rekee starts at PG for instance there is not that gap/problem there with IT, because IT can play next to either Reke or Thornton. Its only there when both guys are small.

We know Smart wouldn't go THAT small...

 

[beb0p]

This is where the size becomes an issue. Because with two small PGS you don't go from "oh, you get starting minutes" to "oh. you come off the bench but can still get just 5 minutes less". You kind of go from "oh you get starters mintes" to "sorry, your minutes just got slashed in half. Unless, again, you want to actually throw out an all 6' and under backcourt onto an NBA court for long stretches.

If Rekee starts at PG for instance there is not that gap/problem there with IT, because IT can play next to either Reke or Thornton. Its only there when both guys are small.

Give IT 0 mins, get an affordable true PG (a veteran leader) to backup Lowdry. Hope that Jimmer's light comes on finally.

Problem solved.
.

 

[Bricklayer]

Give IT 0 mins, get an affordable true PG (a veteran leader) to backup Lowdry. Hope that Jimmer's light comes on finally.

Problem solved.
.

And that's just getting even more unrealistic. Kid had a good rookie year. Not the rookie year of the hype. But a good one. He has every right and I am sure does expect to be a a significant piece wherever he ends up. But his size has and always will create enormous issues.

 

[hrdboild]

Post draft-lottery we can obviously eliminate the Anthony Davis scenario. Most likely we'll be getting Drummond or Barnes in the draft I'm guessing. Adding Drummond/Batum/Lowry would make us a very solid defensive team with two 3pt shooters in the starting lineup as well. Lowry and Drummond aren't going to be scorers but they'd be the defensive anchors of the team. Alternatively, adding Barnes/Lowry would improve our offense significantly right away but we'd still need to find our defensive anchor in the post. Roy Hibbert is the only FA I like there. Emeka Okafor should be available via trade as a short-term solution if our owners can stomach the price tag. There aren't a lot of good options out there at PF. Probably we'd end up going with JT again.

 

[beb0p]

And that's just getting even more unrealistic. Kid had a good rookie year. Not the rookie year of the hype. But a good one. He has every right and I am sure does expect to be a a significant piece wherever he ends up. But his size has and always will create enormous issues.

Can't let emotions get in the way, Brick. In the end, it's all about winning. You're never going to win with IT as your starting PG (unless the other fours are all stellar which they're not). IT may excel as a backup but he is also very much replaceable. I'm sure he expects to play some minutes but I'm also sure he understands that nothing is guaranteed in this league, especially when he's 5'-9 and the last pick of the draft. If IT doesn't get it I'm sure someone will kindly educated him about the career path of Von Wafer and Terrence Kinsey, among others.
.

 

[Glenn]

IT brings leadership and a great smile to the team. He is a good guy to have on the bench. Can anyone really argue that? Lowry sounds fine but there is that uncomfortable combo of two tiny PGs and the "what if" the opposition has a Tyreke and a TWill as their starting guards? No matter how aggressive Lowry and IT are on defense, and they are aggressive, a guy 6'6" can just pop a jump shot over his head and there is no defense against that.