Not a chance. Carl can't create his own shot, and LaMarcus can't be easily stopped one on one. They are at two different levels.
I believe that is somehow wrong as he is clearly a couple inches shorter than Scola. And he is a little shorter than Battier, only a little taller than Hayes. He was listed 6'7 in college too.
He is the exact same height as McGrady and Battier and slightly taller than Artest. I have seen this up close several times with him standing side by side with all three of those players.
Yes. 19.1 this year for Aldridge, 17.6 for Landry. But as you can read from the 4 pages of posts before this one, it's not always about PER. Landry is very efficient as a role player. He's a high percentage player and is aggressive without being turnover prone or shooting bad shots. But the ability to hit open shots doesn't translate into the ability to deliver on highly contested ones. Landry doesn't have the talent to do what Aldridge does now, much less be the player Aldridge is going to grow into in 2 - 3 years.
You can compare Aldridge and Landry to Nowitzki and Scola. Aldridge and Dirk both have consistent mid-range jumpers. But Landry and Scola are the "Go and get it guys," those hustle and energy players that every team needs. While Landry might not be as good as Aldridge ever, he's a pretty darn good player in his own right.
IMO Aldridge and Landry, eventhough both play Power Forward, can't be compared in terms of skillsets. But they can be compared head-to-head in terms of playing against each other. LaMarcus Aldridge is mostly an all-finesse, shoot-first player with a still-evolving skillset. He also showed his weakside shotblocking as evidenced in the first round, but other than that, he's been only doing jumper after jumper. He's a weak rebounder (7.5 RPG for a PF). I can compare him to a poor man's Kevin Garnett or Dirk Nowitzki with a great potential but still one-dimensional. But because the Blazers are a developing team, Aldridge rightfully owns his starting spot with the way he plays. Carl Landry is a scrappy, hustle-first player. True, he has a decent jumper, but he won't be making it on a consistent basis as Aldridge does (albeit a hand in his face), unless he can evolve into a Carlos Boozer or Elton Brand. On the other hand, he makes it up for energy, explosiveness, offensive rebounds, and he is more aggressive attacking to and around the basket, and his high FG% is due to his easy putback layups and dunks. The way he's playing, I can compare him better with Jason Maxiell, undersized but very explosive. But as for now, he'll still have that "role player" tag under the shadows of a perennial All-Star in Yao and a gritty veteran of international basketball in Scola. A difference that played a big role in the Rockets-Blazers series: Height. LaMarcus Aldridge stands around 6'11" while Carl Landry is mere 6'8" (barely 6'9" at most). Result: Aldridge owned Landry on offense and defense for most of the series. Landry can't defend Aldridge, Aldridge kept on denying Landry. And for a 6'8" (who's not 100% after getting shot in the leg) against a 6'11" guy like Aldridge who has developed a good skillset, and add those long arms of his, it's a tough job. If it is who's playing better at the PF position in terms of comparison across all PFs in the league, Aldridge > Landry.
Unless Landry develops a sick jumper from any where on the court and grows a couple of inches. It ain't likely.
I wish Carl Landry was as good ad Aldridge. IF that was the case we would win the Nba Championship for the next decade.
carl is alot of hustle, not a beautiful post player, just a high energy guy who can hit the outside shot now, but aldridge is a center in a lean mans body, beautiful moves and a sick stroke
Can't teach size, once both players lose some athleticism only one of them will be done and that is the guy who isn't 7 foot.
