If we'd kept Landry we'd be in the same position, they both are good low post scorers with no interior defense.
If this team is serious about winning a championship within this window of opportunity, Luis Scola will be on this team. He's won medals/championships/MVPs at other levels. He is a winner and IMHO letting him go, even if Chris Bosh walks through that door (FAT chance), would be championship contention suicide. There are so many up and coming teams in the west (Thunder, Blazers, Grizzlies) that we can't afford to break the team up for experimentation. I think the chemistry and talent is already here. We need a legit back-up center to keep Yao's minutes in low 30s and lessen the chance of another long-term injury. The less minutes he plays, the less chance for injury, obviously. I'm hoping for Marcus Camby, or if he wants to stay a Blazer, I hate to say it, but my second choice is Pryzbilla. But anyway, Scola is a 100% keeper.
I still think that Landry is going to be a near all-star level talent for the next 5 to 8 years. Solid Solid player, whom championship teams take for granted, but desperately need. Very efficient player. But, I think that Scola is more suited for this Rockets team, for he he can contribute as the focus or a role player. He's crafty enough to still get his 15 points a game without being the focus of the offense. Smart player. Landry on the other hand can still become a legit #2 option for a team. I think he needs the ball a lot more to be sucessful. Both guys are good, but right now I think that Martin, Brooks, and Yao are going to be your top 3 scorers next season. Scola is very well suited for team ball, be it as a 1st option or a 4th option. Because with Ariza and Battier, there is no way Scola is the 5th option, ha ha... Yao Scola Ariza Martin Brooks Hill Battier Lowry :grin: I like that line up....
This. Scola is a seriously intelligent all around player, very consistent and very experienced. Landry MIGHT get to his level in 2 or 3 years.
Landry might be a better scorer (very disputable) but Scola is way more experienced and excels in rebounding and making good decisions on the court.
If we traded Scola, we'd have to start Hill to have even a remote shot of winning any of our opening jump balls. Basically, either Landry would still be screwed to the bench or Hayes would.
Sac didn't want Scola. They wanted an athletic YOUNG PF to come in to play with Tyreke Evans and also provide an example to Donte Greene, Jason Thompson etc. Sounds like they wanted Joey Dorsey pretty bad as part of that trade as well. The knock on the Kings was they didn't play hardnosed or smart. They wanted some frontcourt guys who would bring that to the team Nah Morey has been saying **** about resigning Scola since before the trade, I think landry was always the piece, maybe he shopped brooks and bud... This trade is one of the rare trades that made sense for everyone. We traded Landry but he was likely gone anyways since we were going to keep Scola. And Morey believed in Scola's immediate upside Trade was good for Sac, they really wanted Landry, wanted Dorsey Good for NY, for whatever the **** they wanted. Good for Scola, got more touches. Good for Landry gets to start. Good for Martin he was dying in Sac. Good for Dorsey got some PT. Good for Tmac, he got NY. No sense rehashing it. This is one of the those rare rare situations in business where everyone involved got what they wanted.
it seems like we wouldve ended up about the same. scola and landry produced about the same. and given a larger role either of them wouldve gone off. in the long run tho, landry prolly would be better. he is more injury prone than scola tho.
