Let's stop wasting space and spend some time discussing our new pal Kyle Lowry
Is it possible for me to jump on the Kyle Lowry fan-wagon too early? Yes; this post should serve as a decent indicator that I'm going to be blowing sunshine up the guy's ass for many games to come. And you can't disagree with me - that's against the rules. Granted, you do have one excuse not to be sweating enthusiasm whenever Lowry's in the court, that being that you somehow missed last night's game. If that was the case, take a look at Bulldog's play-by-play to end the third quarter. I nearly fist-pumped myself in the face watching this unfold:
1:47 - Kyle Korver shooting foul (Kyle Lowry draws the foul)
1:47 - Kyle Lowry misses free throw 1 of 2
1:47 - Kyle Lowry makes free throw 2 of 2
1:39 - Paul Millsap bad pass (Carl Landry steals)
1:16 - Von Wafer misses 24-foot three point jumper
1:15 - Ron Artest offensive rebound
1:15 - Ron Artest makes layup
0:55 - Mehmet Okur misses 23-foot jumper (!!!!)
0:54 - Kyle Lowry defensive rebound
0:51 - Mehmet Okur shooting foul (Kyle Lowry draws the foul)
0:51 - Kyle Lowry makes free throw 1 of 2
0:51 - Kyle Lowry makes free throw 2 of 2
0:43 - Paul Millsap offensive foul (Kyle Lowry draws the foul)
0:39 - Andrei Kirilenko shooting foul (Kyle Lowry draws the foul)
0:39 - Kyle Lowry makes free throw 1 of 2
0:39 - Kyle Lowry makes free throw 2 of 2
The score went from a 71-59 Jazz lead to 71-66 lead in less than two minutes. During this interval, it's safe to say that our boy Kyle Lowry was "Greatness."
Now, I realize that Lowry isn't the most graceful of players, like CP3 or that Canadian fellow. Bulldogs aren't graceful by nature. Bulldogs are, on the contrary, short, stocky, and the premier rough-and-tough badasses of all canine species. Like Uga in the video below. We like it when Lowry does this to the opponent:
Kyle went Bulldog on the Jazz last night. He jumped off his leash and had a field day in the lane, drawing fouls at will (as difficult as it is, right?) and, unlike the rest of our bunch'a bums, he made his free throws. Of all the players Utah fans thought would hurt them, they never expected Lowry. For those two minutes of the game, fans were stunned. Thoughts like "damn; nobody told me to make a 'Lowry Sucks' sign!" floated throughout the crowed as Kyle put on a show. It was an ugly, unwatchable show, but the results were glorious. Gold stars and onions galore for Kyle. And maybe a few drinks I suppose.
But, for a second, let's hold the champagne and do what we bloggers do best: scenarios. Perhaps a scenario involving a Bulldog vs. Midget battle for the starting point guard position? I'm game. Maybe not to the degree of my last point guard battle post, because that wasn't a fair assessment with Rafer Alston in the discussion. Luckily, the post wasn't a complete disaster as I came out victorious the minute Brooks assumed SPG duties after Alston skipped all the way to Disney World. I'll keep this much more brief.
Forget style points and ESPN The Mag cover gigs for a second. Does it really matter if you start or not when your backup is just as good as you are? No, and especially not in this case. What does matter is who is in for the majority of the game. In some cases, who plays more may simply depend on who is hot that night. For a quick comparison, Brooks and Lowry are two much different players that, when mentioned in the same conversation, are said to be of the same overall caliber. I agree with that statement for the most part. They're about the same defensively, with Lowry getting a slight edge because of his Bulldogginess. What Brooks lacks in the ability to finish at the basket, he makes up for in outside shooting ability. Lowry is the exact opposite; he's a monster around the rim and a sixth grader behind the arc. Not to insult aspiring sixth grade shooters everywhere (and especially our loyal sixth-grade readers), but Lowry's shot looks like it was fine-tuned by a part-time P.E. teacher. However, it will go in at times, and he does have an effective jumper inside the three-point line.
Actually, hold up. Let me re-think the possibility of stating that Lowry could/should start over Brooks. What I don't want to do here is turn Lowry into Von Wafer. To explain: about a month or two ago, we all got on Wafer's train and practically, as Dennis Green would elegantally say, "crowned his ass." Then he became human and, thankfully, is no longer placed in the same category as our other young guns, such as Lowry, Brooks, Landry, and Scola. He's still a lethal shooter, but he's never going to take over games like he was earlier in the year. Now back to Lowry: while he hasn't been spectacular to any degree, he has played very efficiently and hasn't anything too detrimental to our offense or defense. In eight games with the Rockets, Lowry has yet to give us, the jury, a good reason to convict him of anything. That's not going to last very long based off basketball's Laws of Nature.
In fact, I'm going to make a complete 180 here and put any notion of Lowry starting to bed. Forget the idea for now. We need to see a few bad games out of him first, see how he responds, and then re-evaluate. The only reason we are even having this discussion, and the only reason we ever had the Alston/Brooks discussion was because we had seen the then-starter screw up more than the young padewan. Brooks has been off-target while on the court of late, but he can also get on-target, and he has more experience with this team than Lowry does. While I absolutely love Kyle's game, we need to wait a while longer before even thinking of the notion that he should start for us. There; my 180 is complete.
Kyle Lowry is a boss. That's really all you need to know. Wasn't this supposed to be about not wasting space...?
32 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Well...
I definitely understand your argument, and it makes a lot of sense.
That being said, it’s easy to see what the Rockets are doing here.
First off, AB knows this offense a lot better than Lowry (obviously not Lowry’s fault, he got here 2 weeks ago). and can impact the game right now a little more with his passing than Lowry can (again, emphasis on right now). I know Aaron loves to shoot, but he knows where to find guys, and although Lowry was a beast for that spurt, none of it was accomplished through his passing.
That being said, this is Lowry’s job to lose in the future, as of right now. The Rockets want to give both players a real shot at this, and picking someone this early in the competition would only serve to alienate the other PG. However, if Adelman can figure out how to use both of them effectively, that changes everything. But then, how long until one of them gets fed up and wants out. I don’t know too many point guards that entered the NBA to play second string to a player of comparable talent (just ask poor AB, sitting behind He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named).
Finally, the real victim here could be AB. The Rockets showed faith in him by trading Alston, or so it appeared. Though I think they did intend for Aaron to be the main guy, they couldn’t have known that Lowry would make this kind of noise this early. They though Aaron would be the guy for the rest of the season, and that Lowry could supplant him next season.
What would that say for the Rockets to just give the spot to Lowry now? Sorry, it was awesome being together for two years and then getting engaged, but I found someone who is a little hotter than you. I don’t know if there’s any love there, but I want to test the waters. By the way, can I have to ring back?
You’re right, though. All the Rockets can do is give it time.
There, I’m not wasting space with you.
Can't they just get along?
Do this comparison test (not that you won’t know, but just consider it without names)
PG1 – small, blindingly fast, more polished offensive game, gets to the rack quickly and easily, nice shooting touch and range but very streaky, good defensive effort, can be abused by the likes of D Williams (and who else? Rose maybe), not many PG he can’t take off the dribble, good handle but often at a loss as to where to go with the ball
PG2 – small, very quick but not as quick as PG1, generates steals and confusion on D, better finisher at the rim, better passer on breaks, better passer in half court offense, weak shooting from 3pt range, amazing ability to draw fouls on much bigger players, surprisingly good rebounder, decisive
All things being equal (and assuming you agree with my assessment), who is your starting PG?
I honestly think it’s “horses for courses” – that you pick the best matchup, or the hot hand, unless it turns out that either one pines when they’re not officially the “starter”
hey now
Do not diss Von Wafer.
dude can ball if he’s given time/opportunities.
When he was starting he was the Man.
Now he’s trying to squeeze the same production into 10 minutes a night. Not easy.
Von
I’m not dissing Von – he’s still a good player. But he’s a mere role player who can come in and play well. He’s not someone we can build around or put a steep price on.
"I think girls are probably just better shooters." - Steve Novak
about a month or two ago, we all got on Wafer’s train and practically, as Dennis Green would elegantally say, “crowned his ass.” Then he became human and, thankfully, is no longer placed in the same category as our other young guns, such as Lowry, Brooks, Landry, and Scola.
I would like to say that I did not jump on the Von Train, and I believed that his performance in January was (while certainly no fluke) not indicative of his skill level. And I had stats to back it, so there.
Morey
Put Von Wafer in the same category as Lowry Brooks Landry and Scola on 610 yesterday.
It takes a big man to walk away, but a bigger man to break his freaking jaw!
he's a decent role player
but people (not here, though, because Dave and Co. are too smart for that) were talking him up to be McGrady’s replacement. Even while injured, McGrady outplayed Von (though he didn’t play within the system and largely made the team much more inefficient; but that’s not the point).
Von’s good for some bench points, but that’s it. It’s a highly valuable contribution, though, so I’m not knocking him.
he's only twenty-three
and his improvement during the year has been really remarkable (his PER jumped 13 pts. from last season; TS% improved by 36%). He’s athletic enough that he qualifies for that all-encompassing label of “project.”
He’s (probably) never going to be a star, but he can become a good player. There’s always a place on a team for a guy who can 41% from behind the arc and can get into the lane, too.
Exactly.
He’ll be an excellent outside shot off the bench, and can get in the lane and provide a spark on most nights. Nothing more.
"I think girls are probably just better shooters." - Steve Novak
Baron Von Wafer
I think Wafer is a project, but one that ends with him being a starting SG for an OK team, or a heavy rotation player with a good one.
Half-Full: Wafer is a 20-30 minute SG, maybe a starter if you have a defense minded or distributing PG.
Half-Empty: Energy, quick scoring guy off the bench who creates horrible match up problems for opposing second units.
Not bad for a (virtually) free pick up.
Kyle Lowry played great against Utah.
Unfortunately for AB, his basketball IQ appears to be very low. Starting position should remain with AB, but with only weak point guards.
Fortunately the Rockets are not losing because of the point guard position, they are getting out-rebounded.
yeah
that’s been a disturbing trend over the past few games. Typically, the Rockets are among the league’s best in rebounding, so I’m not sure if it’s just the quality of opponents (the Jazz are really good at it, too, as are the T-Wolves) or if it’s something else.
yeah,
but it seemed to me that they weren’t rebounding well at the start of the game, either. And it’s been something I’ve noticed for the past few weeks, so it extends beyond just the Jazz.
The Rockets don’t generate a lot of turnovers; their strategy on defense is to make you take a bad shot and to limit you opportunities for offensive rebounds. It’s imperative that they rebound well, which is why this trend (if it really is a trend and not something my mind just decided upon) is troubling.
We rebounded well in the second half
I just tihnk it was a matter of us facing two of the league’s top 2 rebounding teams.
"I think girls are probably just better shooters." - Steve Novak
Lowry should definitely start
too bad we had to trade Rafer to get him instead of Brooks.
Rafer + Lowry > Rafer + Brooks > Brooks + Lowry
by goingforthecorner on Mar 6, 2009 9:14 AM CST reply actions
dude, this isn't beerfest
That equation only works if you are talking about something other than basketball.
Simplifying your inequalities...
what you want to say is that Rafer > Lowry > Brooks, right?
I just
Threw up in my mouth.
It takes a big man to walk away, but a bigger man to break his freaking jaw!
Rafer's last 3
5-11 5A – 2TO,
4-12 6A-4TO
4-10 6A-0TO
Though they were all wins
www.TheDreamShake.com Co-Founder and Writer
Bulldog
I got a Bulldog because they are awesome and the Marine Corps Mascot, and she is scared of anything on 4 legs. Cats, yappy ankle bitting dogs, toddlers, ect. She freaking hides in the bushes like a little bitch (which she technically is). I am thinking about sending her to boot camp!
It takes a big man to walk away, but a bigger man to break his freaking jaw!
My B****
My female border collie was a stone killer. Really. Dogs, like people, have individual personalities, that’s all.
Kids
I have babies at the house, so when i picked her out i went for a less dominant pup. I rolled her on her back and she didn’t fight back. I love my little weak b**** because she is great with my kids. Just kidding about bootcamp. Not saying I wouldn’t want her to bite a burglur in the a** or maybe a jazz fan. Just sayin
It takes a big man to walk away, but a bigger man to break his freaking jaw!
That's the exact right dog for your kids.
Let the puppy play with the kids and the marine guard the house. You’re a better shot than your dog anyway.

by 






















