RealGM

So I need help with something. I’m having a debate about Kyle Vs DeMar and who is better (during their time with the raptors) and he’s an American from Houston who believes that since he watches basketball, the eye test is enough to tell me I’m crazy for saying Kyle was better. Where’s the stats we used to talk about that show Kyle’s impact on winning basketball?

Thanks in advance

LOWRY easy

Sticks wrote:LOWRY easy

Not even a debate. He will need stats to be enlightened

And before people say "but Lowry was a playoff choker too!!"

Last 45 Playoff games as a Raptor

16.4 ppg
5 reb
7 ast
1.5 stl
45.4 fg%
37.4 3pt fg%

Biz's contract with Orlando is proof in my books.

Because DeRozan cannot play off the ball.
Lowry can play both as on ball and off the ball.
Defense may even have an edge on Lowry.

Which one would you prefer, a slightly better star player who cannot play with another star vs a lightly worse star player who can play as good with another star.

Potential wrote:

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

And before people say "but Lowry was a playoff choker too!!"

Last 45 Playoff games as a Raptor

16.4 ppg
5 reb
7 ast
1.5 stl
45.4 fg%
37.4 3pt fg%

This is perfect thank you. I realize i'm just debating your average american who doesn't watch the Raptors but has a loud opinion on them, but numbers are what will sway his opinion. I've already talked to him about how basketball includes both sides of the court, and spacing, etc. He needs numbers to be convinced.

I'm actually really interested to hear what other players pass his eye test.

Lowry:

• Got the whole team involved and made everyone better. His play-making was crucial for the Raptors.
• Took more efficient shots (i.e. 3 pointers and lay ups instead of midrange)
• Played better defense
• Less reliant on getting favourable whistles from the refs compared to Derozan, who relied on going to the line for free throws to make his offense efficient.

These all show up in advanced stats to show how much more impactful Lowry was. I find it's hard to see all the ways that Lowry is better though because Derozan's strength is so obvious in terms of what appeals to viewers in terms of aesthetics. His midrange game with all the counters he has just looks so appealing and just has the look of an old school super star but it just isn't that impactful in today's nba if that's all you can do.

Winterfrost wrote:Lowry:

• Got the whole team involved and made everyone better. His play-making was crucial for the Raptors.
• Took more efficient shots (i.e. 3 pointers and lay ups instead of midrange)
• Played better defense
• Less reliant on getting favourable whistles from the refs compared to Derozan, who relied on going to the line for free throws to make his offense efficient.

These all show up in advanced stats to show how much more impactful Lowry was. I find it's hard to see all the ways that Lowry is better though because Derozan's strength is so obvious in terms of what appeals to viewers in terms of aesthetics. His midrange game with all the counters he has just looks so appealing and just has the look of an old school super star but it just isn't that impactful in today's nba if that's all you can do.

Couldn't agree more. The casual basketball fan from a random city in the US would think we're crazy for saying Lowry>DeMar, but to anyone who watched all their games, we know this is not even a debate.

It's hard to argue against Demar, he put up great numbers. Just not in crunch time. Neither of them really did that.

People forget we were chanting MVP for Lowry first before Demar. Lowry was always the leader and engine, and still proven after both Kawhi and Demar left.