Landry may be the most over-hyped Rockets ever. I'm not saying he's not a valuable piece to our potential championship team but he's not a player the opposing teams are game planning for.
Thats exactly what makes him so good, other teams don't game plan for him, so he just comes out and contributes, i wouldn't say he's over hyped...he's very valuable to us
But these stat gurus are going a little too goo-goo-ga-ga over Landry's per 48 minute stats. I just don't like it because it confuses people and they start calling for him start over Scola who is without question the more consistently reliable player at this point.
Noones treating him like a franchise player. we all know who Landry is. he's a bruiser who's very explosive around the basket, like a Brandon Bass and Paul Millsap. we found a gem in Landry no doubt about it. when was the last time we had a PF as agile and explosive as him? if it wasn't for him we would've lost in 5 against the Jazz. By year's end Landry will probably be our 4th best player and starting.
Yeah pretty sure it was from Seattle, we nearly bought that pick from the Suns but someone else bought it first.
According to who? Those who love the ol dunkaroo? Scola may not be flashy, but I will bet my house that he won't lose the starting job to Carl Landry. Scola is the more consistently efficient player at this point in his carreer. Rick Adelman knows this, and so should you.
Scola is the more consistently efficient player? Landry was no. 19 in Hollinger's efficiency rating, right behind Gasol and in front of Melo, while Scola was no. 90. Scola's job is far from safe. He knows it and so does Adelman, who let Landry start against KG and the Celtics. Scola might be more experienced, but the things he had over Landry last year (shooting, defending) are getting slimmer and slimmer. Landry is already the better midrange shooter and getting better defensively. He's also a MUCH BETTER finisher. Scola's at his peak while Landry is just cracking the surface.
What do you mean by consistently efficient? Last year, Landry shot under 50% from the field in only 10 out of 42 games (24% of them). Scola shot under 50% from the field in 34 out of 82 games (41% of them). Overall, if last year and this preseason is any indication, we should expect Landry to shoot better from the field and on the line than Scola, and he'll also turn it over less. When you say efficiency, you must mean something else.
See this is what I'm talking about. Hollingers efficency rating, stick it up your bahooza, just joking, but no, this is what is pissing me off. All you need to know about Hollinger effiecny rating is this, Kelvin Cato at one time, according to Hollinger rating would have been the top rebounder in the league. Dude, please, just stop.
When I say efficiency I mean the actual mintues one plays, not what would happen IF this guy playes 48 minutes. Landry, look, if he played the amount of minutes Scola played, yeah maybe he has a higher fg percnetage but he doesn't score as many points because he is not as offensively skilled as Scola, he can't create as many shots. I can't believe I have to try to explain this, see Holllinger has ruined your brain
It's funny. Your initial claim is that Scola has been consistently more efficient than Landry. And then here you say that you're talking about their "actual minutes". Alright. But you follow this not by comparing what they actually have done, but rather considering the hypothetical case of Landry playing as many minutes as Scola. In this hypothetical scenario, you say Landry will not score as much or (I guess) be overall as efficient. But none of that is based on what they did in their "actual minutes". In fact, if you look at what they did in their actual minutes, Landry produced better numbers than Scola for every minute he was on the court. Really, both of us are extrapolating. The difference is I'm projecting based on what both players have measurably done in their actual minutes, where as you're projecting that Landry won't be as efficient as Scola based on some other immeasurable qualities. In any case, I don't think there's any way to support your initial claim that Scola has been consistently more efficient that Landry. Based on what has actually happened, and not hypothetical projections, that simply isn't the case.
No actually there is. My support to my claim is the actual fact that Landry does not start and get as many mintues that Scola gets because overall he is not as consistent as Scola is at this point in his carreer.
Isn't this a rather circular argument? The question was: why should Scola continue to start over Landry? Your answer is that he should start because he's been more consistently efficient. Then the question is: how do you know he's been more consistently efficient? And your answer is because he starts over Landry. I'm sorry, but that's not a convincing answer.
No it's not a circualr argument, I am winning and your are losing. Here's why. The facts do not lie. Scola plays more because he's more consistent than Landry at this point in their respective careers. Now. When Landry minutes are equal or more than Scola's it will be because he has become just as consistent or more consistent than Scola. In other words, Coach Rick A knows best. Which means I have the mind of pro basketball coach and you have the mind of a Hollinger stat kid, which makes me right and you wrong.
Ok, but how do you know he's more consistent? Answer: because Scola plays more. You really don't see the problem there? It seems to me that you don't have any mind at all here. You're just assuming that whatever Coach A does must be the right choice, and that's the end of it. But when the question is "How do we know if Adelman is making the right choice in starting Scola over Landry?", answering "Because Adelman always makes the right choice" doesn't cut it.
No, I'm saying Scola plays more mintues "for a reason" not "just because" Oh, Now you are saying Adelman doesn't know better than you. Ok then, If a professional basketball coach of so many years doesn't know better than you, even though he is there in practice watching the Scola compete with Landry everyday, who am I to convice you, right?
You've given two reasons: "he's more consistently efficient" and "Adelman knows best, don't question it." The first is totally unsubstantiated, and the second is needlessly dismissive. I'm not saying I know more than Adelman. I'm sure I don't. But that doesn't mean he'll make the right decision, every time. And Adelman has never said that Scola is a more efficient player than Landry. You said that. And when I asked you to explain that, your only response was "Adelman knows best." Well, maybe Adelman is starting Scola for another reason. Maybe he thinks Scola makes the other guys on the floor more efficient. Maybe he likes Scola's defense more. Maybe he likes the energy Landry would bring off the bench. I've never heard Adelman say that Scola was a better player than Landry, and he certainly has never said Scola is more efficient. Let's imagine the following interview with Coach Adelman: That's what this conversation has been like so far.
I still feel Landry would be effective even if teams had a special plan for him. If he works on his free throws, his physical play pays off from the charity stripe. In a sense, yeah he is kind of over hyped, but you can also argue that Landry is the reliable 6th Man we've been looking for (Almost all the Great teams had a solid 6th Man). I've probably said this a hundred times, Landry is a Diet Dr. Pepper Shawn Kemp, and I'd love to see Landry in a Rocket uniform for a loooong time
durvasa: You've given two reasons: "he's more consistently efficient" and "Adelman knows best, don't question it." "The first is totally unsubstantiated, and the second is needlessly dismissive." Stoke: He's more consistently efficient is the reason he plays more mintues than Landry. I mean why would a coach play a player who is less consistent than the next guy, I mean that only happens in Hollingers confusing stat world. Durvasa: "I'm not saying I know more than Adelman. I'm sure I don't. But Adelman has never said that Scola is a more efficient player than Landry. " Stoke: Yes you are. And yes Adleman has. Thats why he plays him more minutes most nights. Durvasa: You said that. And when I asked you to explain that, your only response was "Adelman knows best" Well, maybe Adelman is starting Scola for another reason. Maybe he thinks Scola makes the other guys on the floor more efficient. Maybe he likes Scola's defense more. Maybe he likes the energy Landry would bring off the bench. Stoke: You are assuming, maybe this, maybe that, maybe nothing, Scola plays more minutes because ____ fill in the blank. It's not that hard to figure out. Durvasa: I've never heard Adelman say that Scola was a better player than Landry, and he certainly has never said Scola is more efficient. Stoke: You haven't heard it(from Hollingers stat charts) but you seen it... On the court. Durvasa:Let's imagine the following interview with Coach Adelman: That's what this conversation has been like. Stoke: Oh now you are calling me Adelman, not cool. My loyalty lies with JVG, I don't like that ahole Rick A, but the facts are facts, and it's not ever personal, i am all about whats best for the team.
Stoke - Durvasa's not even really arguing with you?? And of course Landry's numbers wouldn't be as high as projected if he played Scola's minutes. But to say that there's "no way" Landry will take Scola's job might be jumping the gun a bit.
