Landry officially done for the season (edited title)

[funkykingston]

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.

To me the best case scenario with Landry was that he and IT would lead the bench and provide the majority of the 2nd unit scoring. Thomas is a talented scorer and Landry's best qualities are his ability to bang inside despite his height and a pretty reliable midrange jumper. Then the rest of the 2nd unit could be filled with typical role players - rebounders, defenders and catch and shoot wings. But even in that best case scenario you're paying your 7th man almost $7 million a year and at this point it will probably cost at least $6-7 million to bring back IT in either a starting or bench role. I think you can possibly get away with paying ONE outstanding bench player that kind of cash but not two. And while I don't like IT as a starter I'd prefer him as an overpaid bench player to Landry. Because we know IT can function alongside Cousins. Landry is a poor fit next to DMC even in limited minutes let alone if someone was foolish enough to think he could start alongside him at the 4.

 

[KingsFanSince85]

I would love to say I'm sorry for saying I told you so. But I'm not.

Who exactly did you tell so? I don't recall one person being overly in favor of the signing. The vast majority hated it from the get go. I hate to break this to you, but pretty much everyone saw this as a bad move. There are no bragging rights to be had.

 

[KingMilz]

I don't wish injuries on anyone but I can't say I'm upset, this was a ill-advised signing and was made further worse by getting Reggie/Williams and Acy basically we pissed away good money a piece we didn't need.

 

[pdizo916]

i hope he comes back next year healthy.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

I can agree with half of that: I hope he's healthy next year...

 

[ParniValjak]

I can agree with half of that: I hope he's healthy next year...

Unfortunately before he is traded he will need to come back healthy and doing what he has done his entire NBA career. Otherwise, no team willl take on that contract with that sort of non-production attached to it for at least 2 more seasons

 

[peacelate]

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.

I knew he wouldn't play differently because at this stage in his career, he is what he is. However, with different personnel than was under Westphal and with a coach who understands how to mask his players' weaknesses, I could envision a scenario in which Landry would be productive. Westphal was an awful coach who didn't know down from up and poorly utilized his players.

He is certainly a defensive sieve, but with the right personnel he could thrive. If you have seen Carl Landry play when he isn't injured, you would know he isn't a blackhole. He has a good midrange and was one of the better power forwards at finishing shots at the rim. He was ranked 11th in PF averaging 20+ mins last year in 20+ games at finishing at the rim. Using the same parameters, he was 8th among PF's in eFG% and TS%, so he certainly isn't some blackhole on offense.

Fact is that he wasn't himself when you compare his career averages to his Sac numbers.

Career:
eFG% .536
TRB% 12.4
TS% .596

Sac:
eFG% .492
TRB% 10.2
TS% .545

If you sign Landry to be your cornerstone next to Cousins, then I would agree terrible signing all the way. However, I firmly believe he was envisioned to lead the second unit along with IT.

 

[NewArena]

3 more years? yuck

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

I knew he wouldn't play differently because at this stage in his career, he is what he is. However, with different personnel than was under Westphal and with a coach who understands how to mask his players' weaknesses, I could envision a scenario in which Landry would be productive. Westphal was an awful coach who didn't know down from up and poorly utilized his players.

He is certainly a defensive sieve, but with the right personnel he could thrive. If you have seen Carl Landry play when he isn't injured, you would know he isn't a blackhole. He has a good midrange and was one of the better power forwards at finishing shots at the rim. He was ranked 11th in PF averaging 20+ mins last year in 20+ games at finishing at the rim. Using the same parameters, he was 8th among PF's in eFG% and TS%, so he certainly isn't some blackhole on offense.

You cannot be serious. [/McEnroe]

Carl Landry's career assist percentage is 5.2. That suggests that, when someone passes Carl Landry the ball, nineteen times out of twenty, the next "pass" is going to the rim. Now, that's not literally true, but what is literally true is that he's not passing the ball to teammates that are in position to score.

His career assist-per-game average is 0.7. As in, zero-point-seven. He has the eighth-worst career assist-per-game average of any player getting 24+ minutes a game, in NBA history. When the ball goes in to Carl Landry, it's not coming back out, except as a field goal attempt. That's pretty much the textbook definition of a black hole. I have no idea how you, personally, are defining "black hole," but if your definition does not include some variation of "guy who does not pass the ball," then you're defining it incorrectly.

 

[Bricklayer]

You cannot be serious. [/McEnroe]

He has the eighth-worst career assist-per-game average of any player getting 24+ minutes a game, in NBA history.

crikey

 

[Insomniacal Fan]

Yep, terrible signing.

Though in the best case (healthy, motivated Landry) maybe it had a shot.

We are a different team from when Landry was first here; then Evans was the first and only real option, and many of Cousins' shots were desperation midrange jumpers with a winding down shot clock. There's more focus on getting Cousins time to work in the low post this year, and this year he's started to get double teamed consistently. That's a different situation for Landry than last time; where he had to create for himself.

 

[Bricklayer]

Yep, terrible signing.

Though in the best case (healthy, motivated Landry) maybe it had a shot.

We are a different team from when Landry was first here; then Evans was the first and only real option, and many of Cousins' shots were desperation midrange jumpers with a winding down shot clock. There's more focus on getting Cousins time to work in the low post this year, and this year he's started to get double teamed consistently. That's a different situation for Landry than last time; where he had to create for himself.

That's precisely Landry's main use.

Cuz wingman needs: does NOT need shots, does NOT take shots from Cuz, DOES defend, DOES protect the rim
Cuz wingman wants: be nice if he could rebound too so that we could win the boards every single night, have some faceup jumper for spacing be handy
Carl Landry: DOES need shots, does NOT rebound, does NOT defend, does NOT block shots, does NOT pass, DOES have faceup jumper

gerbil/Malone = let's give him $24million!!

dips.

An accumulation of stupidity over the years has worn my patience paper thin on frontcourt people. I said no you idiots!!! when they traded for Kenny Thomas and the rest of the flexible pieces. No you idiots! when they signed Shareef Abdur Rahim, No you idiots! when they signed Chuck Hayes, No you idiots! when they decided to draft Thomas Robinson over Andre Drummond, and No you idiots! when they wasted more money on Carl Landry. There are a couple of common themes to all of that crap, 1) I said No you idiots! And the idiots in charge did it anyway; 2) within a year of each signing it was completely obvious WHY I'd said no you idiots!; and 3) how many ****ing times are Kings front offices going to sign undersized midget PFs with no length who can't defend the rim? How many times? Its come to grief Every. Single. Time. And gee, I wonder why. Longterm contracts for stupid midgets at a critical power position, all while Jerry bleepin' Reynolds bleats about how the league is going small and all our short undersized overpaid crap is really better than all the not short not undersized crap that the good teams continually beat the crap out of us with.

If you see this front office remotely sniff a stumpy defenseless PF this summer not named Reggie Evans I FULLY expect, nay demand, that at least one member of this board makes the police blotter the next day beneath the headline "Enraged Fan Beats Idiot GM With Smelly Fish"

 

[Capt. Factorial]

crikey

Of course, part of the reason he's 8th on that list is because over his career he's at 24 minutes per game on the nose. If you look at assists/36 (and drop out anybody who hasn't played 3000 minutes) he comes in an only-marginally-more-respectable 16th, but it really is the better measure.

The really interesting thing is that of the 15 players in front of him on that list (24 mpg, 3000 min total) a whole 9 of them are active (counting Okafor, who hasn't played this season but is getting paid and traded, as active) and two more in the top 20 behind him are also active. Only four of the top-20 in fewest assists per minute did not retire in 2007 or later. I'm not going to bother to figure out the best way to run a statistical test on that, but that's way, way, way more current players than you would expect by chance. So something has changed about the modern game which either 1) makes poor-passing players much more palatable, 2) discourages post players from passing, or 3) makes getting a recorded assist harder to come by. Those seem to be the possible explanations. I have no idea what it is, but that's odd to say the least.

 

[Gilles]

Well, early entry became massive only in mid-90s, so current crop of players lacks fundamentals as a whole in comparison. Without looking at the actual list I would easily guess, that it is dominated by front court players: changes in the rules in early 2000s stiffening inside defense and loosening outside, reduced most centers to finishers (not many chances to get assists), while inside creators had to adjust to execute quicker and more decisively to avoid rotations and rotations are main source of assists for inside creators.

 

[Hoovtrain]

FA signing of the year

 

[Capt. Factorial]

Well, early entry became massive only in mid-90s, so current crop of players lacks fundamentals as a whole in comparison. Without looking at the actual list I would easily guess, that it is dominated by front court players: changes in the rules in early 2000s stiffening inside defense and loosening outside, reduced most centers to finishers (not many chances to get assists), while inside creators had to adjust to execute quicker and more decisively to avoid rotations and rotations are main source of assists for inside creators.

Yep: Drummond, Ibaka, DeAndre Jordan, Dalembert, Eddy Curry, Ratliff, Olowokandi, Tyson Chandler, Okafor, Pekovic, Valanciunas, Dampier... a bunch of recent low post guys. Now I'd expect a bunch of low post guys to be on the list due to what they are asked to do and the skillsets they are expected to have, but it surprised me how many are recent. I suppose your theory is likely at least a part of the answer.

 

[EJF]

Hey guys, long time lurker and just finally signed up. Hello to all! Ive learned a ton of basketball from this forum, and I really appreciate the knowledge this forum has. The mods seem pretty cool too (not trying to kiss any butts lol its true). Love reading the grades every night and they are really nice because I cant watch most games (love the themes as well). Didnt find a welcome forum so Ive posted that stuff here.

Anyways, hated the Landy signing at the time, and it looks even worse now. Just wish we never signed him. I see potential as a bench scorer and from what I hear hes a good locker room guy, so it could be worse I guess. Still, Landy never should have been signed at his current price and length of his contract. I really hope we can trade him espcially with the way Evans has been playing.

 

[Insomniacal Fan]

That's precisely Landry's main use.

Cuz wingman needs: does NOT need shots, does NOT take shots from Cuz, DOES defend, DOES protect the rim
Cuz wingman wants: be nice if he could rebound too so that we could win the boards every single night, have some faceup jumper for spacing be handy
Carl Landry: DOES need shots, does NOT rebound, does NOT defend, does NOT block shots, does NOT pass, DOES have faceup jumper

gerbil/Malone = let's give him $24million!!

Last year, Landry was in the top 20 in Offensive Rebounding Percentage (ok, he was #20) and gathered 3.5 offensive rebounds per 36. Overall he's not a good rebounder, but I don't think it's fair to say he doesn't.

Given that he doesn't pass, offensive rebounds account for 3.5 of his 11.6 fga/36; leaving about 8 fgas per 36. That's not going to starve anybody too badly.

I'm also not too concerned about his sticky fingers, since we're running the offense through Cousins; Landry will only get the ball when Cousins, Rudy, and Thomas are good and done with it.

As for defending and blocking shots... umm, did I mention that I thought this was a terrible signing?

"Enraged Fan Beats Idiot GM With Smelly Fish"

What's that you say?! You want to try and acquire John Salmons again? Excellent idea! Let's get right on it!

 

[Dreadnought]

We might as well have signed Andrew Bynum.

 

[KingMilz]

We could have signed Drew Gooden (which I suggested) for minimum like Washington did to do the same stuff as Landry

 

[SacKings2002NBAChampions]

Blah, this team/franchise is sinking lower and lower.

 

[Chubbs]

The problem remains Landry is redundant. The team needs passing, defense. He brings neither. Now that they've collected a large number of mediocre bigs, it's even worse. Where do you even find minutes for him? Frankly, I'd like to see JT in a reserve role with Isaiah more than Landry. Isaiah's ability to score in a hurry off the bench doesn't leave room for anyone else to do that same.

The long term problem is that it's hard to pay Isaiah and Landry to play the same role, while also finding (and paying) a starting PG. Frankly, Isaiah is much better at what Landry was supposed to do. They're both undersized.

We'd have been better off with someone like gooden, no doubt about it.

 

[The_Jamal]

The problem remains Landry is redundant. The team needs passing, defense. He brings neither. Now that they've collected a large number of mediocre bigs, it's even worse. Where do you even find minutes for him? Frankly, I'd like to see JT in a reserve role with Isaiah more than Landry. Isaiah's ability to score in a hurry off the bench doesn't leave room for anyone else to do that same.

The long term problem is that it's hard to pay Isaiah and Landry to play the same role, while also finding (and paying) a starting PG. Frankly, Isaiah is much better at what Landry was supposed to do. They're both undersized.

We'd have been better off with someone like gooden, no doubt about it.

I don't think we envisioned IT blowing up like he did. ( I did, so go me) I imagine Malone wanted to recreate the bench punch he had in GSW with IT replacing Jack. We were probably hoping to get IT and Landry together for around $10-$11mil together long-term. As a bench scoring punch, that would have been excellent value.

 

[Chubbs]

I don't think we envisioned IT blowing up like he did. ( I did, so go me) I imagine Malone wanted to recreate the bench punch he had in GSW with IT replacing Jack. We were probably hoping to get IT and Landry together for around $10-$11mil together long-term. As a bench scoring punch, that would have been excellent value.

Yeah, I would imagine that was the vision. But Landry never was healthy enough and things changed. And an IT/Landry bench duo leaves no room for Williams at all. Even with seemingly no one off the bench to take shots from Williams, he's still been pretty invisible. That's a 6 million per year guy basically doing nothing.

Right now we've got Landry and Williams making around 12 million doing next to nothing. We need to stop getting these kinds of guys. Your role players better have a clear role.

Right now, Evans seems to be the low post threat off the bench. At no point in his career has he shown being capable of doing that nightly. A post up play to Evans shouldn't be in the play book. I love what he brings at the price he brings it, but posting him up? That would be quite an amazing late career transformation.

 

[The_Jamal]

Yeah, I would imagine that was the vision. But Landry never was healthy enough and things changed. And an IT/Landry bench duo leaves no room for Williams at all. Even with seemingly no one off the bench to take shots from Williams, he's still been pretty invisible. That's a 6 million per year guy basically doing nothing.

Right now we've got Landry and Williams making around 12 million doing next to nothing. We need to stop getting these kinds of guys. Your role players better have a clear role.

Right now, Evans seems to be the low post threat off the bench. At no point in his career has he shown being capable of doing that nightly. A post up play to Evans shouldn't be in the play book. I love what he brings at the price he brings it, but posting him up? That would be quite an amazing late career transformation.

Well, Williams was also before we got Gay. Our team has changed so much mid-year, that the direction the FO originally had for the team has all been thrown out the window. We've sacrificed fit and continuity to acquire more talent. Which to me, is fine year 1 of new management. It poses a much more serious problem if we have these same questions by this time next year.

 

[upinsmoke]

Hey guys, long time lurker and just finally signed up. Hello to all! Ive learned a ton of basketball from this forum, and I really appreciate the knowledge this forum has. The mods seem pretty cool too (not trying to kiss any butts lol its true). Love reading the grades every night and they are really nice because I cant watch most games (love the themes as well). Didnt find a welcome forum so Ive posted that stuff here.

Anyways, hated the Landy signing at the time, and it looks even worse now. Just wish we never signed him. I see potential as a bench scorer and from what I hear hes a good locker room guy, so it could be worse I guess. Still, Landy never should have been signed at his current price and length of his contract. I really hope we can trade him espcially with the way Evans has been playing.

I would say Landry's deal may be the hardest contract to move on the team with Williams not far behind right now but that can change if one of them turns it up next year.

 

[FaStRmAn]

I think what we need to focus on is not the fact that he got injured (which was predictable considering his age and the fact that he was coming of another major surgery), but the fact that is was not a good signing from the start. Carl was a known quantity. What is not known is how if ever he was going to fit into the Kings plans. Even healthy he would not have played much. He is a player on the back end of his career and he would have seen sporadic minutes at best. He is however seen as a very solid veteran and if he rehabs and shows he can still play he is a tradeable player. But it was a bad signing. Hindsight is 20/20 though.

 

[EJF]

I would say Landry's deal may be the hardest contract to move on the team with Williams not far behind right now but that can change if one of them turns it up next year.

Yeah agreed. Gonna be hard to trade him.

 

[BamBam52]

In D'Alessandro, I trust! I believe in the man & his vision

 

[sdballer]

In D'Alessandro, I trust! I believe in the man & his vision

Based on...?