Aldridge has an amazing turnaround fade away jumper. I was amazed at how many he made with a hand in his face. He is also very long unlike.
Even if LA is significantly better that Landry in terms of talent, Landry has one thing goin for him 1-0 (in head-2-head playoff series)
Simple answer. No. Its good to know that we have fans who really believe that Landry could be as good as Aldridge and that Von Wafer could be as good as Kobe.
I think that if Carl Landry is looking to become one of the upper echelon players in this league. It's like a lot of guys have said already. He's not going to be much more than a role player for any team unless he can decide that he has to play the position that gives him the best chance to excel. Guys like Charles Barkley don't come around often or grow on trees. Very few players can be great when they're undersized. Landry has shown flashes of ability to finish around the bucket, even in traffic. But he's usually best in those instances when he's got a head of steam, not from a low post position with bigger defenders waiting on him. I've felt since I first watched Carl in the preseason last season, that the best thing he could do (from the Rockets' standpoint) was move his game to the perimeter and become more of a swingman. I think if I were to ask Landry to pattern his game after any NBA player, I'd think of Linus Kleiza in Denver. Kleiza is one of those 'tweener players (6'8", 240 lbs.) who learned to do that. From what I've learned of what Kleiza had to do to change his game from what it was in college (low post player) to what he is now in the NBA (versatile swingman), it definitely wasn't easy. Kleiza had to develop dribbling skills and a face-up game. He had to increase his range in order to get on the floor with his team's better players. He had to adopt an entirely different approach to playing the game in order to maximize his potential. It's like Craig Biggio, when he came up as a catcher for the Astros and got from behind the plate and made a hall of fame career for himself. More guys could do that, I think. More guys SHOULD do that. Not simply change their game. Kleiza can still be physical and bang against second unit bigs. He can rain threes or dunks on your head all the same. I'd LOVE to see Carl Landry do that. Because he's got the athleticism. He's got the heart.
I posted this question after the Rockets defeated the Blazers in the play-offs and now I am going to ask it again. Can Carl Landry be as good as LaMarcus Aldridge? Aldridge Stats HTML: SEASON AVERAGES Season Team G GS MPG FG% 3p% FT% OFF DEF RPG APG SPG BPG TO PF PPG 09-10 POR 19 19 32.8 0.480 0.500 0.828 1.8 5.7 7.5 1.7 0.4 0.5 1.0 2.8 14.9 Landry Stats HTML: SEASON AVERAGES Season Team G GS MPG FG% 3p% FT% OFF DEF RPG APG SPG BPG TO PF PPG 09-10 HOU 17 0 25.6 0.556 0.000 0.896 2.6 3.2 5.8 0.5 0.5 0.8 1.3 3.1 15.9 I just look at the comparison between these two and I can not say that Aldridge is better. Landry is proving to be a better offensive player than Aldridge period. Landry shoots a much higher percentage, averages more points, shoots a better free throw percentage and is a better offensive rebounder. Landry does all of this averaging less minutes than Aldridge. Imagine if Landry got starters minutes. Landry would also average at least a block a game if he had starters minutes and Aldridge really does not come close. I'm not knocking LaMarcus because Landry likes to take it strong to the basket a lot more than LaMarcus but Landry also has a very deadly mid range game. The more aggressive Landry gets the better he gets.
I voted no. I would like to change my vote. Landry's aggressiveness to the hoop is stronger than Aldrige's. His outside shot isn't quite as refined and he's not as long, but his aggressive behavior and strong moves should put him on equal offensive footing.
they have completely different play styles. Aldridge is a great jumpshooter. Landry is a very good low post player. Neither is particularly strong at the other's forte.
But that is not the point. Aldridge was a very high lottery pick and plays for a team that is considered an up and coming team. He plays a pivotal role on that team and is seen as an all star caliber player. Landry was a second round pick. He is not suppose to be as good as Aldridge but I think the evidence is proof to the contrary. I like Aldridge but I don't know if I would trade Landry for him. I think at this point if a one to one trade of Landry for Aldridge were offered I would turn it down.
the other side of the argument is - take roy off that team and put more emphasis on aldridge in offense and see.
Would his LA's offensive efficiency go up? I don't think so. He is already the second or third option on that team. And if teams make him the main focus of their defense then I don't think his FG% goes up at all. Landry is the second or third option on the Rockets most nights but I think RA is grooming him to be a first option and possible closer. I think Landry is that good and I think RA believes Landry can be that good. Landry's FG% is almost .100 higher than LA's.
I voted "No" but would also like to change my vote. The stats don't lie. Also, why are people still underrating Carl's jump shot? It's as good as any PF's from 16 feet and in.
we would not really know. landry has been playing against reserves of other team for most of his career. and landry and aldridge have different styles. aldrige is more comparable to someone like david west imo.
Landry has spent a lot of his time playing against starters this year. RA has left him in at crunch time a lot this year leaving Scola or Chuck on the bench late in games.
that's where people get impressed by. but there are other parts of the game, too. no one knows if landry starts and plays 30-35 mins a game, how he'd fare. that's all.
