Landry officially done for the season (edited title)

S

sactownfan

Guest
#1
#1
http://aroyalpain.com/2014/03/08/carl-landry-miss-remainder-sacramento-kings-season/

While you may still be technically still on this team your only with it in spirit this season. What a total epic fail of a signing. I hope you can play more than 18 games next season and the one after that... and the one after that. jeez... I won't keep my hopes up... Your racking up the injuries at an age where once this ball gets rolling its usually a total mess from here on out. On a positive note tho Evans has been a nice replacement
 
Big Cuz 15

Big Cuz 15

All-Star
#2
#2
everybody except the kings FO knew this was a bad signing. this offseason will be a bloated IT contract. do GSW or Denver have any other table scrap players we could sign to bloated contracts?
 
bajaden

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#3
#3
Can't say I'm surprised! I half expected it. Not to harp on the negative, but Landry is starting to look like a new Kenny Thomas on the roster. Having dealt with torn meniscus in both my knee's, I can attest that most players recover from it, and usually don't lose any athleticism. Of course it all depends on where it's torn and how much has to be removed. I can't argue about the signing. It's been a total disaster.
 
Chubbs

Chubbs

Starter
#4
#4
At this point, hard to see him even being tradeable. He was awful in the 18 games he played. Just not a factor.

A 30 year old coming off an 18 game season? Good luck unloading him. Maybe he'll be part of the next Rudy type trade where PDA starts unloading all the junk he has now acquired to replace the junk he removed. Williams, Acy, Gray, Landry Outlaw for Lebron?
 
S

sactownfan

Guest
#5
#5
I wanna play devil's advocate here for a second.

Taking over this team Vivek, Pete, and Malone had a few objectives.....

#1 Establish a new identity as being a classy/professional and stable franchise. We needed to boost the league wide respect level. Signing Carl Landry did in fact add a more respectable character to this team. Top hat?

#2 Establish Malone as the law.... with the coaching carousel being the norm, laying down the law and full support of the new coach was critical and Carl Landry was Malone's "guy". Someone that could back up Malone in the early stages and help speed up the "buy in" by Cousins and company. Malone absolutely NEEDED someone on this roster that was fully behind him and had worked with him in the past. Otherwise it would have been too easy for Cousins to check out/not buy in.

#3 Raise the overall hustle/effort/defense. ..... .... .... well.... Carl is a fighter and no one will ever question his motor. Not the greatest defender but is tough and will battle with what he's got, always. Unfortunately with Carl not being on the floor this never had much of an impact on everyone else.

I was actually ok with the signing but not the price tag. I don't know the specifics but it should have been seriously front loaded the first 2 years with a big drop off in pay the last 2 or with a team option after 3yrs. ... something!!!! again I don't know the details but it was too much no matter how you look at it.

Im just hoping that behind the scenes Carl has helped this team/Malone in ways we might never really know. It just doesn't seem like it has from the outside.
 
gunks

gunks

Hall of Famer
#7
#7
Misleading thread title!

I got all excited thinking we unloaded him some how (early retirement).

And I thought it was a crap signing even IF Landry would have been healthy.

Landry IS the new KT.
 
Gliesian

Gliesian

Bench
#9
#9
Ya I thought the thread title is one of those special reserved titles for a player that's out... and it's sarcastic. But whatever, it's just a title :rolleyes:
So we have Carl for 3 more years at 6 mil a year. Pretty much a disaster, but I do think he is tradeable. He's still a good player, I'm just not sure who would want him. I definitely don't think we should have him in our rotation, so maybe this recent news is better for his trade value.
 
Entity

Entity

Hall of Famer
#10
#10
So we got a short non athletic non rebounding PF for 6 mil a year for next three years that has just had hip surgery and will now undergo knee surgery all after a week of camp and less than 10 games. Hmmm this looks promising. Dear Carl do us same favor Shareef did
 
Pineapple

Pineapple

Prospect
#13
#13
I hope he has a full and speedy recovery... but yes, I think most people saw from the beginning that this was a horrible and dumb signing, even if he "just" missed most of the season from the original injury.
 
Padrino

Padrino

All-Star
#15
#15
peacelate said:
Agreed. There is a big difference between a player being a bad signing due to injuries vs. productivity/fit.
Click to expand...
he was certainly a bad signing due to fit at the time, and has since become a terrible signing due to injuries. while i agree with the notion that it's not exactly fair play to "i told you so" over the kind of occurrences that no one can predict, it's also worth pointing out that these are the risks you take when--out of sheer desperation to make any kind of free agent splash at all--you overpay to sign a 31-year-old to a long-term deal. with years and mileage come a greater risk of injury. and ya know what? i take that risk for a veteran talent who fills a need, but in no version of the new regime's first offseason would carl landry have ever filled a need. it was a crap signing made worse by unfortunate circumstances...
 
Glenn

Glenn

Hall of Famer
#16
#16
Padrino said:
he was certainly a bad signing due to fit at the time, and has since become a terrible signing due to injuries. while i agree with the notion that it's not exactly fair play to "i told you so" over the kind of occurrences that no one can predict, it's also worth pointing out that these are the risks you take when--out of sheer desperation to make any kind of free agent splash at all--you overpay to sign a 31-year-old to a long-term deal. with years and mileage come a greater risk of injury. and ya know what? i take that risk for a veteran talent who fills a need, but in no version of the new regime's first offseason would carl landry have ever filled a need. it was a crap signing made worse by unfortunate circumstances...
Click to expand...
padrino, that was just a very kind way of saying "I told you so." :)
 
Chubbs

Chubbs

Starter
#17
#17
The_Jamal said:
obviously, huge disaster signing.

But some of you acting like you KNEW he'd miss the entire year with injuries? Tsk, tsk.
Click to expand...
I don't see anyone saying they knew he'd get injured.

But people absolutely had concerns about his age. I mean, this has been extremely bad, but not shocking either. Well,a little. One double digit game in year 1? Never thought it'd be that bad by any means (not the first year), but a healthy Landry still makes this a terrible signing.
 
Padrino

Padrino

All-Star
#18
#18
Glenn said:
padrino, that was just a very kind way of saying "I told you so." :)
Click to expand...
hey, i wasn't a fan of the signing from the start, but even i wanted to see something out of landry, if only so that he might be traded at a later date as a veteran asset. at this rate, landry will be on his way to marcus thornton status, where PDA is forced to split up his contract into smaller, seemingly more "flexible" pieces...
 
P

peacelate

Bench
#20
#20
Glenn said:
padrino, that was just a very kind way of saying "I told you so." :)
Click to expand...
How is it "I told you so?"

18 games is sufficient to declare a player a bad signing? There's nothing worse than being trigger happy.

Landry was brought in to be someone to lead the bench, not start next to Cousins. The FO obviously doesn't think too highly of JT and didn't think much of Patrick Patterson.
 
Glenn

Glenn

Hall of Famer
#21
#21
Padrino said:
hey, i wasn't a fan of the signing from the start, but even i wanted to see something out of landry, if only so that he might be traded at a later date as a veteran asset. at this rate, landry will be on his way to marcus thornton status, where PDA is forced to split up his contract into smaller, seemingly more "flexible" pieces...
Click to expand...
Now you're getting bitter. Tell us how you really feel. :)

I agree. I agree. You will find no note of mine anywhere where I thought this was a good idea not even as a guy Malone felt comfortable with. I couldn't even stretch my credulity that far.

Now back to listening to "Chicago" and continuing my inner debate on why American bands of any kind don't use cornets or flugelhorns. :eek:
 
Chubbs

Chubbs

Starter
#22
#22
peacelate said:
How is it "I told you so?"

18 games is sufficient to declare a player a bad signing? There's nothing worse than being trigger happy.

Landry was brought in to be someone to lead the bench, not start next to Cousins. The FO obviously doesn't think too highly of JT and didn't think much of Patrick Patterson.
Click to expand...
It's not 18 games. It's a full season.
 
Mr. S£im Citrus

Mr. S£im Citrus

Doryphore of KingsFans.com
Staff member
#28
#28
peacelate said:
18 games is sufficient to declare a player a bad signing?
Click to expand...
How's eighty-one? Is that sufficient? Because that's how many games Landry played for us, the first time. Or, are you one of the 2-3 people who actually thought, "You know, I know we already had Carl Landry before, but that was under Westphal; he's totally going to play completely different from how he's played his entire career, for the New World Order!"

The thing is, even under the most optimistic of all plausible circumstances, Landry was going to be a bad signing, and most of us already knew that, and some of us said so, back in the summer. Disregarding his injuries completely, the best case scenario was that we were getting a defensive sieve, and an offensive black hole, who has a very specific and limited range of efficacy, ostensibly because he is a "character" guy. And there was no hope that his "character" was going to be nearly enough to make signing him a good idea.

We already knew what Landry is, and what Landry isn't. We knew it when he played here the first time. And not one single, solitary thing has happened in the one hundred forty-five games he played between when he left, and when he came back, that would make it in any way necessary to revise that assessment. On that knowledge alone, it was a bad signing. And, when you factor in his health issues, it has become a horrible signing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.