Landry or Jarret Jack ? Off-season moves

Discuss anything related to Golden State Warriors basketball here

Moderators: Mr. Crackerz, JREED, Guybrush, hobbes

Who would you keep during the off-season

Keep Landry ?
5
63%
Keep Jarrect Jack ?
1
13%
Keep neither ?
2
25%
 
Total votes : 8


Rookie
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 12:29 pm
Poster Credit: 2
PostPosted: Fri May 24, 2013 3:37 am
Reggie Evans vs Carl Landry 2013 Stats


Reggie
Min Off Def Tot Ast TO Stl Blk PF PPG
24:36 3.3 7.9 11.1 0.5 1.4 0.9 0.2 2.5 4.5
Carl
23:11 2.2 3.7 6.0 0.8 1.4 0.4 0.4 2.3 10.8


My point is in almost the same amount of time on the court, Reggie is averaging one more Offensive rebound than Carl. Of course his points are less, but he's not in there to shoot, he's in the game to solely rebound.

Warriors were 21st in Offensive rebounds. If we had more offensive rebounds = more 2nd shot attempts and seeing as how the Warriors are a perimeter oriented team, 1st in 3pt %, 2nd shot attempts are huge.
Last edited by JebronLames on Fri May 24, 2013 11:51 am, edited 1 time in total.

All Star
Posts: 1352
Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 1:57 am
Poster Credit: 22
PostPosted: Fri May 24, 2013 4:08 am
Offensive rebounding is less important when you are a good offensive team and defensive rebounding is more important when you are an average defensive team.

Evans ability are vastly overrated. Super high turnover rate, mediocre synergy numbers. He sucks, basically, but people like him. I don't know why, but they do. Maybe because he hustles hard? I can see why people like that. The high turnover rate is important to acknowledge because most of his offensive rebounds become turnovers. You usually aren't getting more shots with him on the floor. You shoot worse from threes, but you may get a very negligible amount more of these threes.

Landry is in a whole another level compared to Evans.

I think it's also important to note that Evans doesn't improve faults of the team, he is a redundancy.

If we can't keep Landry I hope the replacement is not Evans. I would not be happy about that at all.

Rookie
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 12:29 pm
Poster Credit: 2
PostPosted: Fri May 24, 2013 12:02 pm
Blackfoot wrote:Offensive rebounding is less important when you are a good offensive team and defensive rebounding is more important when you are an average defensive team.
l.


This statement is wierd. IMHO: Good offensive teams have good off Rebounding, and good defensive teams have good defensive rebounding. The very definition of a good offensive team, is that they rebound offensively, and the same for defense, the definition of a good defensive team is the fact that they rebound the ball at the end of the possession to finish the defense. When coaches tell players to rebound the ball, its part of the defensive possession. You can't play good defense and not rebound the ball defensively.

Anyways, I don't know how much of Reggie you've watched this season, but I live on the east coast and I watched a ton of Nets games cuz they're on TV all the time, and I do agree part of the reason I enjoy his game is because he is a great hustle guy and has a knack for the ball. He is like a poor mans Dennis Rodman, and I think he will bring a toughness and energy to this Warriors team that at times looked tired and slow to the ball.

Also, you say Evans turns the ball over too much, but they have the exact same average numbers for TO's, 1.4.

I didn't focus on the Defensive rebounding #'s but Evans vs Landry is 7.9 to 3.7. Thats a huge difference right there. And Reggie is averaging more steals 0.9 vs Landry's 0.4.

I love Landry, but at 4mill vs 1.7 mill, I don't see how Evans isn't a better deal.

All Star
Posts: 1352
Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 1:57 am
Poster Credit: 22
PostPosted: Fri May 24, 2013 4:40 pm
Reggie Evans has a usage rate of a 11 is the difference, Landry had a usage rate of 19.

Landry's turnover per 100 possessions is 13.7. Reggie's is 23 turnovers per 100 plays.

Defensive rebounding his a redudancy here and his offensive boards become turnovers a good amount of the time. And he fucks up a teams offense and plays mediocre/bad defense.
User avatar
All Star
Posts: 3621
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 1:05 am
Location: Oakland California
Poster Credit: 35
PostPosted: Fri May 24, 2013 6:19 pm
Blackfoot wrote:Reggie Evans has a usage rate of a 11 is the difference, Landry had a usage rate of 19.

Landry's turnover per 100 possessions is 13.7. Reggie's is 23 turnovers per 100 plays.

Defensive rebounding his a redudancy here and his offensive boards become turnovers a good amount of the time. And he fucks up a teams offense and plays mediocre/bad defense.


=D>

Good ****, man.
From "we believe", to "we belong", to "we gon beatcho ass!"

Image
Image
Image

Image
User avatar
Rookie
Posts: 26
Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 1:18 am
Location: Slovenia (sorry for bad English)
Poster Credit: 1
PostPosted: Sat May 25, 2013 3:03 am
Biedrins couldn't get a third of that on the open market right now as a free agent, so this was the definition of a no-brainer decision. Biedrins' agent confirmed that he'll pick up the option, and the Warriors are now stuck with him for another season. Still just 27 years old, next season will be the final year of an awful six-year, $54 million deal


:roll:
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 21413
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:50 am
Location: Perth
Poster Credit: 28
PostPosted: Sat May 25, 2013 3:40 am
Unless Landry is willing to resign for no more than 3-3.5 million a year, for multiple years, likely no more than three, than he likely won't be resigned, though his impact was deserving of the money he made.

Maybe there's a younger player that will definately come cheaper that can do most of what Landry does.
Image



Image


migya make the ring fall on ya

All Star
Posts: 3122
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2006 11:03 am
Location: san jose
Poster Credit: 19
PostPosted: Sat May 25, 2013 5:01 pm
Would be crazy if we can't keep either, never really though of that. If Landry leaves, replacing him won't be easy, our roster won't have a traditional PF other than the starter Lee. Ezeli, Beans hustle players. Green a tweener, more of a SF, no post game. That said it would be important to get a skilled PF that the warriors could dump the ball down to.

I see alot of Green/Barnes combo in the future if Landry does not sign.
User avatar
Role Player
Posts: 453
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 3:17 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia
Poster Credit: 14
PostPosted: Thu May 30, 2013 7:20 am
If Jack resigns, it will likely be for more money yet less minutes on court. Jack took a lot of minutes off Barnes during the regular season but that shouldn't happen next season. Plus, we have to find minutes for Rush.
Image
User avatar
Role Player
Posts: 453
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 3:17 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia
Poster Credit: 14
PostPosted: Thu May 30, 2013 7:22 am
thykkiss wrote:
JebronLames wrote:Don't understand why people would choose Landry over jack. Jj should and could have easily won the 6th man of the year award and people want don't think he's worth the money? I mean he is backing up steph and still managing to close out games which tells you his value. Jack has always been a solid point and I don't think the warriors should let him go. Landry otoh, even tho u love his game, I think there are a plethora of garbage guys under the rim.

If I could, I would keep both, but in a choose one only scenario, jarrett is the obvious choice to me. We can select a hustle guy from the draft or from other free agents around the league.


I think that good back-up PG is easier to find than PF. So i choose Landry.


I agree.
Image
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13539
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 53
PostPosted: Thu May 30, 2013 9:22 am
Ringo wrote:
thykkiss wrote:
JebronLames wrote:Don't understand why people would choose Landry over jack. Jj should and could have easily won the 6th man of the year award and people want don't think he's worth the money? I mean he is backing up steph and still managing to close out games which tells you his value. Jack has always been a solid point and I don't think the warriors should let him go. Landry otoh, even tho u love his game, I think there are a plethora of garbage guys under the rim.

If I could, I would keep both, but in a choose one only scenario, jarrett is the obvious choice to me. We can select a hustle guy from the draft or from other free agents around the league.


I think that good back-up PG is easier to find than PF. So i choose Landry.


I agree.

True, but a good backup PG is tough to fill well.

Landry added low-post scoring. That was his niche. We can find that easier than we can find a good defensive PG with enough size to give Curry the easy assignment while still being able to handle the ball. Our 3rd guard has to be good enough to start, cause giving Curry major minutes off the ball is a priority. If Landry runs into great post defense, he disappears. Like in the San Antonio series.

If we lose Jack and can't acquire a guy like Calderon, both Curry and Thompson will look much worse next year. It's not just what one does; it's how they affect the rest of the lineup. Jack was more of a catalyst than Landry. I believe he's replaceable, but he's tougher to replace than Landry. A stretch 4 would compliment both Lee and Bogut better than Landry, who liked to work where they're most comfortable and became redundant over the course of the season.
Image
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS DIE HARD
Image
Image
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 21413
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:50 am
Location: Perth
Poster Credit: 28
PostPosted: Fri May 31, 2013 10:31 pm
I think any good backup PG that can handle, distribute and defend pretty well will do. Curry will get well over 35mins if he is healthey, as likely will Klay. With Rush coming back, he takes some minutes off both as well, so the bsckup PG will likely not be as important as it was this season.
Image



Image


migya make the ring fall on ya
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13539
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 53
PostPosted: Mon Jun 03, 2013 5:40 pm
But you're making that sound much easier to find than it actually is, miggy.

A backup point guard that distributes AND plays defense. If a backup can do that, he's looking for a team to start him. See Kyle Lowry.
Image
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS DIE HARD
Image
Image

All Star
Posts: 3122
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2006 11:03 am
Location: san jose
Poster Credit: 19
PostPosted: Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:37 pm
Well they are both gone, Landry to the Kings for 4 year deal worth $26 Mill.

Jack to the Cavs on a 4 year deal worth $25 Mill.

I think the warriors were thinking impact player reason they let both go, when I say impact i mean on a higher scale (Iggy). Both Landry and Jack will be missed because they were essential to our success but hopefully Iggy provides more of what Jack brought, and warriors can find a PF that will produce enough, Elton Brand, JJ Hickson, Marrese Speights.
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13539
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 53
PostPosted: Sun Jul 07, 2013 3:33 pm
I don't think either is missed.

Firstly, Jack stopped mattering the day they shook hands with Iggy. Jarrett Jack's usefulness was putting Curry off the ball, handling the rock, and playing tight defense. Iggy does all that and more. As long as you have Curry, Iguodala, or Thompson on the floor, you've got a ball handler. Each will get 35 minutes a night, so I'm not at all worried. The surplus of playmakers virtually takes all the pressure off Nedo to develop. If he pans out, great. If not, sign a cheap veteran off the unemployment line to fill minutes and not be relied on. People who are worried about Jack's departure don't realize just what a playmaker Iggy is. Hes better than Curry at every aspect of the pick-and-roll with the exception of the step-back jumper. He splits screens better, he finds rollers better... Just watch him play. Jack will be a forgotten memory by January.

As far as Landry goes, yeah, you're short a low post scorer, but what would you rather have at the 4: two low post guys like Lee and Landry or a traditional 4 like Lee paired with a stretch 4 like Barnes. Acquiring Iguodala puts Barnes on the bench where he'll likely be the 6th man, spelling Bogut so Lee can slide up to center and the team will run in transition. I said before free agency began that a stretch 4 would be more valuable than Landry, who became redundant once Bogut came back. Just so happens we solved the problem internally with an upgrade to the starting lineup

Iguodala - and how he effects Curry, Barnes, and Lee - does more for this team than Jack and Landry would have. I'll bet anybody on here that Jack FOR SURE and possibly Landry regress next year. I said it before and I'll say it again: resigning Jack/Landry does not mean we'd get identical production out of them from their contract years.
Image
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS DIE HARD
Image
Image
PreviousNext

Return to Warriors Basketball

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests