Yes. Landry per was like 22 one of the best in the leaue hill's is close to 15 which is an avg player.
Landry's 18 and 7 that he putting up with the Kings probably represents his ceiling or at least close to it. Hill may never put up the offensive numbers that Landry puts up but when you combine his defense and his upside its hard not to get excited.
Comparing the two is great and all but Landry's stats are out of 42 games, Jordan's is out of 17...to soon for this.
I'm sorry, but there's really no comparison when it comes to offense. You simply can't ignore basically 8% shooting difference. That's HUGE. Landry's offense as a rookie was miles ahead of Hill's that it's not even close. Hill doesn't have anywhere near the finishing ability Landry showed in his rookie year. Hill is simply a much, much more raw than Landry. That said, Hill does have much more potential on defense. His length and athleticism is something Landry will never have. Will that potential turn into reality? Maybe, maybe not. But Hill's potential is different from Landry's. He's likely going to be more of a two-way player. Similar to Eddie Griffin if he was able to develop.
These two are so different from each other it's hard to compare. Offensively, we know Carl was a much, much better player. It would be like comparing Kevin Martin to Trevor Ariza. Defensively, Jordan is already better than Carl is/was simply because of his height and length. I can see Hill becoming a 14/8 player in the league. He won't ever be a go-to scorer like Landry is with single coverage but he will make plays defensively and on the glass the Carl can't. I would love to see Jordan Hill get around 1.5+ blocks per game once his minutes hit 25mpg or so. This team sorely needs a weak side shotblocker to compliment Yao the way Horry did for Dream.
Yes its pretty easy to dunk everything when Yao's drawing your man away from you and Tmac's spoonfeeding you underneath the basket. Landry was extremely efficient, but you're deluding yourself if you think he was anything more than a scorer (albeit one of the most efficient at the time). Landry's rebs and D were subpar when he started out and even until now. I'd rather have someone like Hill who is younger and has a more well rounded game. He can work on his game onething at a time, and if he worked on his scoring then next year he'll be an efficient scorer who rebs and defends decently, rather than Landry who so good at scoring but has to work on everything else. I don't know why their games being different is an issue with you. The question was which one had a more impressive rookie performance, and that's what I answered, and not whether their games are similar or not.
Hill will have a very similar development arc to Landry's, imo. The team basically traded away present Landry + T-mac's expiring for Kevin Martin + rookie Landry with more defense. And yes, the rookie Landry was basically Shawn Kemp reincarnated. The rookie could seemingly dunk on anyone as long as he was close to the basket. But he lost a lot of that athleticism in his 2nd season, but more than made up for it with skill. Then made yet another leap this season, avging 16 points off the bench. I have a feeling Hill will follow a similar progression. He doesn't have the otherworldly leaping ability that Landry exhibited as a rookie, but neither did Landry by his 2nd season.
Uhhhh... Carl Landry=36.5 inch max vert Jordan Hill=35 inch max vert Jordan Hill has a 9 foot standing reach. Carl has a 8 foot 6 inch standing reach... Jordan Hill has elite length and athleticism, and let's not forget that Jordan Hill has not been playing basketball for all that long. Still, these players are completely different basketball players.
Anyone that watched Landry play in his rookie season and Hill this season will know Landry had way more explosiveness and athleticism than Hill. Now, it's pretty much a wash since Landry lost that after his leg injury. Hill has superior size and length though, which helps his defense and rebounding. I don't miss Landry that much since Hill has the potential to become a way more well-rounded player.
Yup, I agree. Landry is best off the bench imo... Tonight he had a great 20 points, but only 2 rebounds. That will never cut it as a starting PF.
Landry in his rookie year was extremely explosive, somehow he lost a bit of that athleticism after that due to his injuries. Jordan Hill is less athletic, but he got the length. While I'm not sure he would be as good as Landry offensively I'm pretty sure he could be a better rebounder/defender and an overall better player for the Rockets.
Yao missed 1/3 of the games that season. Tmac missed 20%. It's not like Landry had Yao and Tmac spoon feeding him all season. Landry was averaging 2.3 offensive rebounds and 8.1 points per game. Landry was scoring basically half his points off put backs and dunks off the offensive glass. You posted that Hill could be having a better season if you factor in Yao and Tmac. That's patently false any way you look at it. Landry's per and Hills isn't comparable at all. Landry was one of the most efficient offensive players in the league his rookie season. Hill is average. Their games being different is an issue because if you want to compare stats you have to compare similar players. What's the point of comparing Yao to Brooks??? With Landry and Hill you're looking at an explosive, offensive oriented player versus a defensive, power type player. About the only similar thing is that they both play PF and grab about 5 boards a game. Even in terms of rebounds however, they're different types of players. Hill is a better defensive rebounder using his strength and smarts while Landry got his rookie offensive boards simply jumping over people in the lane. If you said Hill had more upside then no argument. Because that **** is speculative no one knows, you could be right. But you made it seem like Hill was having a better season than Landry from a certain point of view and that's simply not true.
