Deron Williams vs. Kyle Lowry: Which Guard Is a Better Fit for the L.A. Lakers?
My question to that is, what games was team president Jim Buss watching?
I give the younger Buss the benefit of the doubt because he must have ultimately had something to do with the failed attempt to acquire point guard Chris Paul, but his stated intention to pursue Sessions may prove that the Paul deal was almost exclusively something of Mitch Kupchak's making.
The shine from Sessions' quick start after the Lakers acquired him quickly wore off in the postseason, and if Buss was watching Sessions get abused by Russell Westbrook like I was, his immediate response to Sessions' decision to refuse his player option should have been a wave and good luck.
Did Sessions prove he was worth the $4.5 million his player option guaranteed?
In my opinion, the Lakers should look elsewhere for their next lead guard, and the two names I have heard mentioned most besides Sessions' are Brooklyn Nets point guard Deron Williams and Houston Rockets lead guard Kyle Lowry.
Both Williams and Lowry have Lakers fans lining up ready to extol their virtues, and there are merits to be found in the case of chasing each player.
Lowry is an above-average defender who averaged an impressive 14.3 points and 6.6 assists per game last season—when he wasn't injured.
Lowry only started 38 games last season while competing in 47. Durability may not be an issue with Lowry, but how can you judge him as a player when the best season of his career only spanned 47 games?
For the sake of comparison, Lowry's best professional season would rate as one of Williams' worst, and let's not forget that the 6'3" point guard has been consistently putting up strong numbers pretty much since he entered the league.
Williams may not be as astute on the defensive end as Lowry, but he's bigger, stronger, sees the court better and Williams is much better offensively.
In fact, the only reason that Lowry would even exist in the same conversation as Williams is because there is a perception that Lowry would be much easier and cheaper to acquire.
Lowry may be cheaper than Williams, but the Lakers could possibly acquire Williams just as easily as Lowry if they were willing to make center Andrew Bynum available.
Gasol is due nearly $40 million over the next two years, and the dollar amount combined with Gasol's age makes him an unlikely piece in a trade-and-sign deal. Can you say the same for Bynum?
Bynum is younger than Williams, a New Jersey native and likely the best player Brooklyn could get talent-wise in exchange for Williams.
And make no mistake, if the Lakers do plan on breaking up their seven-foot interior duo for a guard, Williams wins the debate in every category that matters.
I have a feeling there are some significant changes on the horizon for the Lakers, and one of them might involve the uncertainty surrounding the point guard position.
However, how much sense does it make for the Lakers to trade a top-five player at his position for a point guard whose best season is barely equal to half of a regular NBA season?
The Lakers are probably silly to think they can receive equal value for Gasol when you consider his age, but is the same true when the player being dealt is Bynum?
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?