The context of you saying LeBron is Kyrie's first 20+ ppg scorer like DeRozan was to Lowry is still wrong.
You address this to
@Jscc but, you don't seem to back it up with anything.
Why is "the context" of what
@Jscc is saying, "wrong? "
Fwiw, I think Lowry would have played a great finals if he played beside Lebron.
Why?
You keep talking about what Kyrie did in the finals like he would even have had the chance to play in the finals if he did not have Lebron as a teammate.
Did Lowry have a legit shot at the Finals? No.
At several points last season, Lowry was making darkhorse appearances on the MVP ladder.
Stop it...
He got his team to the playoffs as the best player on his team.
Kyrie Irving would be the best player on the Raptors today, with Lowry on the same team. That's even according to you.
So, saying this isn't saying much.
The parallel would be if Kyrie would have gotten the Raptors that far were he and Lowry to switch places.
Well, you are assuming universality of role and need across rosters; but, I'd argue the Raptors would likely have been better with Irving,
in the playoffs. They still don't beat the Cavs, but, it'd have been a more interesting series.
Kyrie gets the go-ahead IMO because he DID light it up in the finals whereas with Lowry, there's no actual way of proving he could have done anything remotely close
Then, given these statements aren't provable or demonstrable, why are you basing an entire argument on them?
BUT what we do know is that he also did things last season that Kyrie has never done, like leading his team to 56 games and at certain points in the season, have his name mentioned in MVP race discussions.
Kyrie Irving won an NBA championship. You are discounting his performance because LeBron James was on the floor? That's
irrational, at best.
Lastly, Kyle Lowry was never a serious contender for last year's MVP, yet this is the second time you've said this.
Allow me to preempt your counter-argument "kyrie never had a team as talented as the raptors, so how do you know he couldnt have?" which I acknowledge to be true.
He has had a team as talented as the Raptors, they're called the Cavs.
Those Cavs went to the Finals twice, and in 2014-15, Irving was healthy and undoubtedly better than Kyle Lowry in both the regular season and the playoffs.
Irving won a championship, alongside LeBron; with his performance being Finals MVP worthy had it not been for LeBron James'
unparalleled and unprecedented Finals performance.
You're comparing Kyle Lowry to what we've observed to be a Hall of Fame / MVP caliber player. It's absurd.
But then that means you also have to acknowledge my point that says Lowry never played beside a teammate as talented as Lebron.
Sure. So what?
We get that the Raptors would be title contenders with LeBron, that doesn't mean Lowry would perform like Irving has; these two players are not interchangeable.
Both players are in entirely different situations that makes side by side comparisons incomplete.
This is false.
It could be said for ANY comparison of ANY player at ANY time.
Both players have shined in their different individual roles.
Sigh.. no they haven't, at least, not equivalently.
Lowry was an
embarrassment in last years playoffs when his team needed him to lead. You discounted that in your analysis above. If you're being objective, why have you carefully sidestepped his abysmal playoff appearances?
This isnt the landslide people are making it out to be.
Actually, I'd argue it is.
You're making this debate unnecessary difficult because you seem to be TL,DR'ing.
Yeah, I was; and still am.
I'm doing so because we've litigated this argument for 2 years. Last year is was almost a joke. This year during the regular season, Irving was injured, and in the playoffs we thought the matter was closed.
I'm sorry, but, I'd advise you to go back and re-read our arguments from the previous Kyrie Thread rather than bring them back up here. The admins closed that thread
because of these arguments.
That's why my posts are tl;dr, because, again, we've gone in-depth on this
ad infinitum.
Every potent one-two punch benefits both parties in some way to make both players better. Kyrie benefits Lebron and vice-versa. That is in no way the question.
Which is
@Jscc 's point.
The question is does Derozan benefit Lowry the same way Lebron benefits Kyrie? No. So it's wrong to draw definite conclusions as if every one two punch is the same just because Derozan is a 20ppg scorer. This was made in response to JSCC's post.
That's not
@Jscc 's point; I mean, you could ask him, and I'd argue he'd say the same thing.
Also, I don't think anyone really read him as equating DeRozan with LeBron; he's simply arguing that there is another scorer on the team.
There is also the potential for these two players to cap each others production by limiting the number of possessions they can initiate. This has been mentioned by the players themselves as a problem; particularly in Kevin Love's case.
We saw Lowry in the playoffs with defenses focused on stopping him as the best player on his team.
Wait..
what?
Are you arguing that Lowry got more coverage than Kyrie Irving? Or that LeBron and/or Lowry were somehow double-triple teamed or covered more frequently or more often than Kyre Irving?
I think you need to go back and re-watch those games.
Just on the Cavs, Kyrie draws more double-teams and tighter coverage than LeBron James; many coaches choose to put smaller guards on James on order to simply stay in front of him and force the jumper. We saw this in the very firsrt series against the Pistons. Irving essentially
requires a double-team out on the perimeter.
But your point is with respect to Kyle Lowry; so let's just take a look at that for a second.
Looking at 2-pt attempt coverage (since they dynamics of shooting a contested 3 are quite different, let alone doubling someone outside the arc); here's what the coverage looks like for the 1-2 options on both the Raptors and Cavs during the ECF:
Code:
2PT (Inside Perimeter) Coverage:
0-2FT V. TIGHT
------------------
1. Kyrie : 14.2%
2. LeBron : 13.3%
3. Lowry : 11.6%
4. DeRozan : 9.3%
2-4FT TIGHT
------------------
1. DeRozan 60.2%
2. Kyrie 50%
3. LeBron 35.7%
4. Lowry 25.3%
4-6FT OPEN
------------------
1. DeRozan 25%
2. James 20.4%
3. Lowry 12.6%
4. Irving 9.2%
6+ FT WIDE OPEN
------------------
1. James 9.2%
2. Irving 4.2%
3. Lowry 2.1%
4. DeRozan 1.9%
Guarded
-----------
1. DeRozan 69.5%
2. Kyrie 64.2%
3. LeBron 49%
4. Lowry 36.9%
Open
-----------
1. LeBron 29.6%
2. DeRozan 26.9%
3. Lowry 14.7%
4. Irving 13.4%
So.. from empirical data, it's fairly obvious that Irving and DeRozan attracted more coverage than LeBron and Lowry. Comparing Irving and Lowry alone, there's no sort of equivalence here.
Kyrie was guarded on his two-point possessions 73% more often than Lowry, and opponents did not sag off Irving anywhere near as often as they did Kyle Lowry.
So, I can't accept this line of reasoning; it is most certainly counterfactual, especially given what we observed of Kyle Lowry's sub-par performance during the playoffs.
I'm not sure why you think Lowry attracted more coverage than Kyrie Irving; but that's simply not true. I think this might speak to why we disagree.
He got far enough to be commended. I also think you're being a bit ridiculous by dismissing Lowry's achievements so casually with statements like "two meaningless games".
You talk of Cavs fans not being offended; I'm not sure but it seems like you're the one taking offense?
I'm not sure why?
But honestly, that's how you come off if you think I'm being "ridiculous" by discounting Lowry's "achievement?"
So I have to say that I'm sorry, and
I don't mean to offend you ...
but ... I'm not as thrilled about Lowry as you are; and I don't think he should be commended for his performance. I thought he was abysmal in the playoffs - I take it you disagree.
If we're trying to make educated guesses, A fairer question would be asking,
Wait, simply evaluating their performance is unfair?
How many games do you think any Kyrie led team could take off of any Lebron led team.
So to evaluate how good Lowry is,
we need to compare Irving to LeBron???
Would Kyrie even get to the playoffs without Lebron?
Yes; I mean,
how many teams go to the playoffs every year without LeBron?
Think about how asinine a question this really is....
Would Kyrie get to the ECF like Lowry playing on his own team.
..sigh..
You're going to say yes to all of these aren't you?
Yeah...
Well maybe we can agree to disagree. I know when a debate isn't going anywhere quick.
This is a debate about what?
You acknowledge Irving is better than Lowry.
So what are we debating? The size and scope of the gulf between them? That's not an interesting debate, friend.
You're praising Kyrie's achievements, dismissing Lowry's achievements
What achievement of Lowry's am I discounting? He was nationally shunned for his performance in those playoffs.
Lowry posted a statline of:
38.3 MPG
19.1 PPG
.397 FG%
.304 3P%
.750 FT%
4.7 TRB
6.0 APG
1.6 SPG
0.2 BPG
3.2 TOV
3.7 PF
He had an ORtg of 103 and a DRtg of 108.
He had a PER of 16.6, a TS% of .508, used 27% of his teams possessions, and carried a .077 Win Share p/48..
The Raptors backcourt, particularly led by Kyle Lowry, were laughed at nationally for how abysmal they performed. You seem to want that to go down the memory hole to suit your argument...
I'm looking at this and wondering, what achievement am I dismissing?
and not even trying to account for the difference in their situations. We'll just leave it at I rate Lowry higher than most.
Since you call this a debate (I've actually debated college, quite frequently, and this doesn't feel like much of a debate), perhaps you'd be wise not to infer my thought process? I'll do the same for you, okay?
Maybe let's just "debate" this argument on the merits, rather than assume everyone else around you is somehow incapable of processing the same information?
So with that said, I've watched the games, and I can see the stats, and Lowry was abysmal throughout the playoffs.
That's not a small sample size, that's his last 20 games. Kyrie Irving was
excellent. Lowry wins the regular season of 2015-16; great, yay!
Kyrie Irving wins
everything else in every other year including these last playoffs, and a ring.
Kyrie just outperformed Steph Curry, the league MVP, and every single guard in the NBA during these 21 games....
Sorry, but I don't see these two as near equal.
Because this has been litigated for 2 years... Please see previous posts in previous thread.
The very nature of present day comparisons does require us to look at their more recent level of play in a vacuum while also trying to account for differences in either player's situation.
Why???
Please demonstrate the validity of your methodology that requires us to look at these players performances in a vacuum?
Why is it that we only should look at 2015-16 regular season while discounting the playoffs? Who says 2014-15 does not count?
You say these things and state them as truths and axioms without demonstrating
why I should accept your framing of this argument? I think it's absurd, so, please explain to me why your framing is the correct one?
We arent asking who has had the better overall career or who has the better upside.
Aren't we?
The question was, at least as I've read it, is: who is the better player, Kyrie Irving or Kyle Lowry, and specifically how large is the gap between the two?
How do you evaluate these two players without looking at their past, present and also project their futures?
It's an absurd proposition.
You'd have us look at two blips in a vacuum of your choosing; rather than actually looking at where those points are along the curve of a player's entire history.
Irving has had a more distinguished career, and a better overall career, than Lowry, in half as many years. That speaks to Irving's argument, yet you want us to dismiss it.
Irving is an NBA Champion; you want us to dismiss it.
I ask you why?
Irving is finals MVP caliber player. Agreed.
This should end the conversation.
What Lowry has done with his level of play certainly does not warrant such an easy dismissal that he would not be productive in a finals with Lebron on his team.
This statement is not in anyway equivalent to the previous one.
Your own admissions end this argument.
Problem is you keep trying to make comparisons as if both players are in the same situation.
No, I'm not. You are assuming they must be to make rational comparisons; that's
your problem.
This approach massively exaggerates the gulf in class between both players and it's all you're willing to consider.
Friend, I do business analytics, statistical analysis, logic & programming, etc for a living. I'm not sure why you think what you do, and I'm willing to entertain your argument, but, no one is exaggerating anything. I'd appreciate it if you explained,
objectively, what your methodology is and why I should use it.
Let me reiterate my point before everyone begins sharpening their pitchforks. Kyrie is better but not several tiers better. It's a perfectly valid and reasonable position all things considered
You're entitled to your opinion; and I'm not really inclined to try and change your mind.
All I ask is not to be so dismissive of the rest of us as being homers because we argue that Irving is a tier above Kyle Lowry.
I don't think anyone argues that he's "several" tiers above Lowry... at least, that's not my position.
