Acie
Quote:

But looking specifically at next season, Lowry will still be on the books at about $33.3 million. And, as JD Bunkis put forward in the latest episode of Free Association, given the emergence of what appears to be the Raptors’ future, would it not make sense to at least explore moving Lowry now?

“Is there a growing case for Masai Ujiri and the Toronto Raptors to consider moving Kyle Lowry or be willing to move Kyle Lowry to take more of a look at what you have in [Siakam, VanVleet and Anunoby] and your bench for the evaluation of where this future is going?” Bunkis asked.



Quote:

“I think the Raptors are better with Kyle Lowry,” he said. “If Kyle Lowry’s on this team, especially with no point guards, and with an offence that sometimes sticks and doesn’t have creators, it’s no doubt in my mind he makes this team better. He elevates the ceiling of the team.”

In fact, given how good the club’s looked thus far, the impending addition of a five-time NBA all-star in Lowry has swayed Bunkis from feeling the Raptors have no shot at returning to the NBA Finals to feeling they have around a 12-per cent chance of getting back. Something that then begs another question regarding this team and the possibility of moving Lowry.

“Is that 12 per cent that I mentioned so compelling that you need to keep Kyle at all costs and ensure that you have as best a chance as possible to make it to an NBA Finals this year?”

Coming into the season there was talk over whether the Raptors would be looking to move Lowry because the team might not be good enough. Now, it seems, that conversation’s shifted because the team might have proven to be nearly as good without him.

 


https://www.sportsnet.ca/basketball/nba/raptors-move-kyle-lowry-given-teams-success-without/
Quote 0 0
'trane
Hell no
Quote 1 0
JeffB
7 games after he went down and this is the narrative? What is with this city's urgency to get Lowry out of town?
Quote 1 0
DocHolliday
JeffB wrote:
7 games after he went down and this is the narrative? What is with this city's urgency to get Lowry out of town?


It has nothing to do with trying to get Lowry out of town but being opportunistic.  Moving Lowry makes a lot of sense - and I love Klow.
Quote 0 0
DanH
The premise of the argument is flawed. Keep Kyle at all costs? There is one cost and one cost only to keeping him. Whatever he would fetch in a trade. And unless that's a significant haul (say a 1st round pick and a quality prospect), does that really change much for the future of the team? And if they were going to receive a quality offer like that, they always should have been open to it. But if teams are willing to offer deals like that, you don't have to explore moving the guy, the offers will come in on their own.

The logic flowing from the idea that the team might be nearly as good without him is nonsense. Not necessarily because that's not true (they have a lot of talent so any one piece won't completely kill them), although it is indeed probably not true (making calls like that on a 6 game sample is silly), but because even if they are only a little better with Lowry, and the baseline is borderline contender, then every little bit better they can be is extremely valuable. If they were mediocre or bad and Lowry would make them slightly better than mediocre or slightly better than bad, then the logic makes sense. But they have a chance to make some noise in the playoffs again, so why sell talent?  Especially such impactful talent.

Now, if someone wants to write about how Serge is excess to requirements at this point I'm all ears (especially with the difference in contract status). But Kyle Lowry is not Serge Ibaka.
Quote 5 0
elT
I refuse to even read such crap. No.
Quote 0 0
Carlito
We certainly shouldn't be shopping Lowry ... if great offers come in, then Masai should consider any deals that could make the team better ...
Love Lowry and would love to see him lead us to another chance for a ring ...
Quote 0 0
elT
DanH wrote:
The premise of the argument is flawed. Keep Kyle at all costs? There is one cost and one cost only to keeping him. Whatever he would fetch in a trade. And unless that's a significant haul (say a 1st round pick and a quality prospect), does that really change much for the future of the team? And if they were going to receive a quality offer like that, they always should have been open to it. But if teams are willing to offer deals like that, you don't have to explore moving the guy, the offers will come in on their own.

The logic flowing from the idea that the team might be nearly as good without him is nonsense. Not necessarily because that's not true (they have a lot of talent so any one piece won't completely kill them), although it is indeed probably not true (making calls like that on a 6 game sample is silly), but because even if they are only a little better with Lowry, and the baseline is borderline contender, then every little bit better they can be is extremely valuable. If they were mediocre or bad and Lowry would make them slightly better than mediocre or slightly better than bad, then the logic makes sense. But they have a chance to make some noise in the playoffs again, so why sell talent?  Especially such impactful talent.

Now, if someone wants to write about how Serge is excess to requirements at this point I'm all ears (especially with the difference in contract status). But Kyle Lowry is not Serge Ibaka.


Well put. I applaud your preseverence to put together a gentleman's response. However, I'm just a Balkan fat ass brute and all I can really say to idea of trading Lowry is - fuck off with that stupid ass arrogant spineless shit.

As always, diversity is great.

Of course, anyone can be traded for right offer. But unless we are getting back Donovan Mitchell type prospect to be our top guard - fuck off. And we are not getting that kind of offer because other people know how to say fuck off, not just us fat ass Balkan brutes. So, the universe is balanced with equal amount of fuckoffery on all sides of reason. Beauty is, fuckoffery balances out the stupidity as found quoted in first post.
Quote 1 0
Wu
Juxtaposed against the recent lists of "Top 25 Raptors of All Time", I find an article like this hard to process.

Given how smart a player he is, and how impactful he is and how much he has matured over his tenure with the Raps, we should be envisioning how to keep him here long term and how we can transition him into a meaningful role with the team once he is done playing.
Quote 2 0
moremilk
I'm really hoping that they have a wink wink deal with Kyle to keep him beyond 2021. At 35, he will not have a huge market anyway, and a series of one year deals designed to optimize our cap space for 2021 may enable us to keep him and have him retire hear ( and maybe become a coach for us after that).
Quote 1 0
Pzabby_2nd
Would love to sign kyle to a 3 or 4 year deal worth around 5-10 mil a year (front loaded) and have him retire here. 
Quote 0 0
LX
why does someone with a name like JD Bunkis go so far to always make such a stupid sounding moniker seem perfectly fitting?

Dan nailed it. And i’d just add that Masai has very much worked within such a framework of staying with what works patiently while remaining open to any possibilities. The worst part of the dumb thinking behind the article, is that it is an extension of the proposed “rightness” of tanking. Look for every opportunity to mess up what you’re building and what you’ve built, so that you can build from a position of weakness like that is somehow too desirable to pass up. Just keep working from a position of strength, starting with creating valuable assets with great scouting and player development, right through to great scouting that helps make deals that increase the overall abilities of the team.

Are we going to get shit about how the team is better without Kyle next? Probably not, but this feels like it’s trying to go there without going there. I like the idea of Kyle as a lifer. He’s going to need to like that idea to make it workable, but i can see that being the case.
Quote 4 0