RealGM

Rocket fan here just wanted to get Griz fan take on Lowery? We are being told he is better than Rafer, but I am not sure. Is he (lowery) a player that could become a starter or is he best suited as a back up. Thanks

He's a different type of player from Rafer. He's a bulldog. He'll get more rebounds than the typical point guard, isn't afraid to mix it up in the trees and is an adequate distributor and an okay defender. What he definitely isn't is a shooter. He's an above average back up/below average starter.

Really his jumper has been the only thing holding him back from becoming a complete player. If he could ever extend his range and knock his shot down consistently, he would be such a steal.

He plays much better coming off the bench as a fierce change of pace guy.

Imagine a thin Derek Fisher without the jump shot.

A tenacious defender, like someone said "a bulldog".
Will take it to the basket and draw contact whenever possible.
His jumpshot is more than a little suspect.
Limited range and is of average heighth, so he may struggle more with oversized point guards.
If forced to switch off his primary defensive assignment, the other team has a defensive mismatch (kinda like with most switches).
His effort always seems to be there every time he steps on the floor.
People would hate playing against him and love playing with him.
All in all, you'll love him.

He's a pitbull. He's not afraid to go up against the big guys. He gives 150% every game.

memgrizzlies wrote:He's a pitbull. He's not afraid to go up against the big guys. He gives 150% every game.

But his attitude begins to suck when he thinks he should be starting.

wadero wrote:Rocket fan here just wanted to get Griz fan take on Lowery? We are being told he is better than Rafer, but I am not sure. Is he (lowery) a player that could become a starter or is he best suited as a back up. Thanks

I think you'll like him alot. To really sell this to a Rockets fan from a Grizz fan, I'll say he's the Shane Battier of point guards - except he does have one glaring weakness in his game - outside shooting.

grizzleGM wrote:

memgrizzlies wrote:He's a pitbull. He's not afraid to go up against the big guys. He gives 150% every game.

But his attitude begins to suck when he thinks he should be starting.

Can you blame him? When you outperform your teammate and are still relegated to the bench, I can see reason for you to be upset. The truth is that the organization wants Conley Jr to be successful simply because he was one of the top picks.

jman3134 wrote:

grizzleGM wrote:

memgrizzlies wrote:He's a pitbull. He's not afraid to go up against the big guys. He gives 150% every game.

But his attitude begins to suck when he thinks he should be starting.

Can you blame him? When you outperform your teammate and are still relegated to the bench, I can see reason for you to be upset. The truth is that the organization wants Conley Jr to be successful simply because he was one of the top picks.

+1

jman3134 wrote:

grizzleGM wrote:

memgrizzlies wrote:He's a pitbull. He's not afraid to go up against the big guys. He gives 150% every game.

But his attitude begins to suck when he thinks he should be starting.

Can you blame him? When you outperform your teammate and are still relegated to the bench, I can see reason for you to be upset. The truth is that the organization wants Conley Jr to be successful simply because he was one of the top picks.

They had to do something to make Conley look like a good pick. If they didn't, the fans will appear to be right about Conley being a potential bust all along. The change simply happen due to Iavaroni's firing from the team. Under Iavaroni, Conley was submitted to the micro managing nearly every possession. Under Hollins, Conley was giving the freedom to either sink or swim. So far, he's swimming.

You see, I am not under that impression. The Grizz organization has nothing to prove to the fans other than the fact that they are committed to winning. And whatever it takes to win, that's what I feel the team should go for. Looking bad with your selection is completely irrelevant imo. I understand that we were losing and it was time to try something new, but I don't feel that this was the change that needed to be made. No doubt Conley is playing well, but I still feel that Lowry may have been the better fit.

It's due to Lowry's aggressive side he displays on the floor. Something that Conley lacks in some instances.

The difference between Conley and Lowry under Iavaroni was that Conley followed Iavaroni's instruction while Lowry regularly disregarded his instructions on the court. I'm not sold yet that Conley is a starting quality PG in the NBA, but IMO Lowry is not a starter in this league, but is a great backup.

^I think Conley certainly has the talent to be a very good starter. I think he is starting to show it, but the Grizz are a bad fit for him. He is not a good shooter and he is someone who needs the ball in his hands to be effective. On a team with Mayo and Gay he was kind of relegated to the 3rd option on the perimeter which took away his strengths. I think in a system like Jerry Sloan's that allowed him to run the pick and roll, he would be a very good PG. His quickness and ability to split the defenders and drop it down low if the D steps up make him very hard to stop in that situation.

Sorry to get off of the OP's topic, but since the last few posts were regarding Conley, I couldn't help but to join in.

grizzleGM wrote:The difference between Conley and Lowry under Iavaroni was that Conley followed Iavaroni's instruction while Lowry regularly disregarded his instructions on the court. I'm not sold yet that Conley is a starting quality PG in the NBA, but IMO Lowry is not a starter in this league, but is a great backup.

Conley has a while to prove to the NBA world that he's quality starting PG material. We're on the same page about Lowry being a great backup PG. That kind of energy and hustle is what a team needs from off the bench.

What if he developed a consistent outside shot? Then would he be starter material? I don't see how that is outside the realm of possibility.

jman3134 wrote:What if he developed a consistent outside shot? Then would he be starter material? I don't see how that is outside the realm of possibility.

Yeah but you could say that about any player that has a deficiency in their game. What if Derrick Rose developed a consistent jump shot? Would he be the most unguardable player in the league? What if Rajon Rondo developed a consistent jump shot? Then would he be a superstar? What if O.J. Mayo had LeBron-like athleticism? Would he be the best player in the world? What if Dwight Howard developed point guard skills? Would there even be a reason to have an NBA season?

If Lowry hasn't developed a consistent jump shot after three years in the NBA, then he probably won't develop one any time in his career. He could slightly improve it, but he will most likely never be a consistent 3-point shooter.

What about Tony Parker? Sure, this can be applied to any of those guys that you mentioned. I don't feel that it is unrealistic to predict a learning curve there. Lowry is still extremely young because he was an early entry candidate. He has not hit his stride yet, so I don't see why it is so far out of the realm of possibility. (for any of those guys that you mentioned)