1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

Landry over Hill now?

Discussion in 'Houston Rockets: Game Action & Roster Moves' started by Arun Sharma, Jan 6, 2011.

  1. houseofglass21

    Joined:
    May 11, 2009
    Messages:
    1,741
    Likes Received:
    165
    Yeah, Hill really contributed on defense the other night against Portland letting Aldridge walk in for dunks and lay ups anytime he felt like it.
     
  2. chosans

    chosans Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2009
    Messages:
    162
    Likes Received:
    2
    Damn some people have been quick to forget Landry's play already. This guy was the beast who got shot and came back from it. The guy who said "GIMME DAT" when he would block shots. Not to mention he has a better faceup game and has more shooting range than Hill. I like Hill a lot but Landry brings way more energy to the game and it's infectious to the other players.
     
  3. PeppermintCandy

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2009
    Messages:
    4,480
    Likes Received:
    2,140
    Man, I sure hope so. Hill's been OK from the bench, but watching these past few games with Hill as starting center has not been fun.

    I know the dude's a long-term project and I'm sure he'll improve given a season or two. But I have yet to see signs that he'll make a dramatic jump in his game. A solid backup big seems to be his ceiling.
     
  4. rjr

    rjr Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2010
    Messages:
    190
    Likes Received:
    5
    Landry imo is very similar to Pat.Pat may have more upside while Landry is better now, but we're not going too far in the playoffs with him.I'll take Hill, Pat combination based on upside, and secure the position for the future.
     
  5. bcast89

    bcast89 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2009
    Messages:
    1,388
    Likes Received:
    557
    Jordan Hill, no question. I loved Landry when he played here but Hill provides more of what we need right now which his length. If he could just make smarter decisions, we'd be set. His offense and defense will come as he is given more time to play. He's got the tools to succeed.
     
  6. il italiano

    il italiano Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2009
    Messages:
    389
    Likes Received:
    11
    LANDRY WITHOUT A DOUBT. seriously he optimizes what it meant to be a rocket while he was here. jordan hill is a scrub compared to landry. people grossly overrate Hill's potential and ability here on Clutchfans. i mean what has he done with this starting opportunity when hayes went down? ill tell you what, prove that patterson should be "our project" and start for hayes. The Rockets lost their identity and toughness and true spirit when landry was traded.
     
  7. mi0304

    mi0304 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2007
    Messages:
    452
    Likes Received:
    5
    Landry the 4Q beast
     
  8. spaceage808

    spaceage808 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2008
    Messages:
    696
    Likes Received:
    18
    For those of you that are basing their judgment on Hill's recent game play...

    Throw Landry in as the starting center and see how well he does. The fact that we can even attempt to play Hill at center shows he is much more diverse (despite his struggles at C).

    I love Landry's heart just as much as anyone. But at the end of the day, he is an undersized 4 that is not getting any younger. His athleticism is only going to decline. Couple that with the fact it's a contract year.

    Landry and Hill will not have similar contracts after this year.
     
  9. BetterThanEver

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    9,931
    Likes Received:
    189
    Landry has peaked. Hill is getting better. Hill is better for a rebuilding team.
     
  10. JLOBABYDADDY

    JLOBABYDADDY Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2003
    Messages:
    1,718
    Likes Received:
    195
    That's all good, but you can't teach hieght, hops, or durability.
     
  11. JLOBABYDADDY

    JLOBABYDADDY Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2003
    Messages:
    1,718
    Likes Received:
    195
    Really?!?! For our backup center? Really? Landry didn't play defense on 4's. The know on him versus Scola was his defense, and that's saying something compared to Scola's D.
     
  12. dobro1229

    dobro1229 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Messages:
    25,770
    Likes Received:
    22,548
    You cant really say one or the other because Landry is a skilled offensive player who is not a defense/rebounding presence while Hill is a defense/rebounding PF/C right now with a very raw offensive game and low BBIQ.

    Two very different players at different points in the their careers. I think that Hill has alot more to offer the Rockets in the future. The Rockets have the scoring they need to win, just no defense/rebounding/shot blocking.

    At the trade deadline if the Rockets have to move multiple bigs then i could see him coming back after he becomes a free agent this summer but not this season.
     
  13. Sanity2disChaos

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2010
    Messages:
    2,610
    Likes Received:
    438

    Bingo!! Patterson>>>>>Hill......and thats with less minutes and experience.
     
  14. JuanValdez

    JuanValdez Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 1999
    Messages:
    35,078
    Likes Received:
    15,261
    I'm not one of the Landry-lubbers, but for the immediate future, I'd still take him over Hill. For all Hill's physical advantages, he obviously doesn't get it like Landry did. Hill is inconsistent and has trouble reading stuff on the court. Landry saw things better and was able to integrate himself into the team plan on the court much more easily (though he hasn't been able to do that in Sac, noted). So, I'm taking the guy who has demonstrated the intelligence to make things work on the court.

    Maybe Hill will eventually get it, and if he does he'll be quite an asset to have given his physical gifts. You can hang on to him so you can take that gamble for the long-term. But, our long-term future won't be hinging on Hill or Landry anyway. We need a new superstar. I can't bother worrying about Landry vs. Hill when the elephant is in the room.
     
  15. Arun Sharma

    Arun Sharma Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2010
    Messages:
    643
    Likes Received:
    23
    There is not much of a size difference between the 2:

    Jordan Hill is 6'10 and 235 lbs
    Carl Landry is 6'9 and 248 lbs
     
  16. BEAT LA

    BEAT LA Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2009
    Messages:
    7,662
    Likes Received:
    197
  17. Prince

    Prince Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2009
    Messages:
    5,375
    Likes Received:
    161
    and who will be going out?
     
  18. HeyDude

    HeyDude Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2001
    Messages:
    2,751
    Likes Received:
    43
    I think a bigger question would be, would you rather have Scola or Landry starting next year? What I mean is, with Landry's value regressing, his contract value can't be more than about 1/2 of Scola's. Carl would probably fetch something like the MLE, maybe 5 years $30 mil as opposed to Scola's $ 50 +. So if Sacramento offered you Carl straight up for Scola, would you do it? Remember, they both had about equal production in Houston before Landry got traded...

    Since neither are really all star type players (Scola close this year but is now fading off, Landry almost got 6th man last year), and they would give Rockets similar production (Scola a better rebounder, Ladry is younder), I would think about it. Hell, to save about $ 4 mil a year, I would probably do it. Of course chances are, Sacramento wouldn't offer us such a trade, but I just think that's a better discussion, and always has been, Scola vs Landry, rather than Landry vs Hill. Hill is a project, you can't compare him to players who've played for 5 years...
     
  19. Landry92

    Landry92 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2009
    Messages:
    754
    Likes Received:
    12
    One thing I found out about Hill is that he's a startin PF not a C

    He can be a C with the 2nd unit but not the 1st
     

Share This Page