Are the Knicks better WITHOUT Gallo?

NicksKnicks

Rotation player
Yeah. We really played a traditional line-up last night because we didn't have Gallo. *sarcasm*

Try watching some games. Chandler played PF most of the game. Our lineup wasn't any different than normal except for about 4 minutes at the start of the game.

And Gallo is not getting us Melo. In all likelihood, Chandler is the one that Denver will ask for. Chandler + Fields.

who mentioned anything about chandler?
 

LJ4ptplay

Starter
Ultimately, you have to ask the question, why is there so much hatred for Gallo?

I mean, I haven't seen this much hatred for a Knick since Marbury. What has he done to deserve it? Where does this hate come from?

I have my suspicions but I doubt anybody will really fess up.

He's a good player. He's inconsistent at this point but he shows flashes of brilliance and we can see where his career could go. He was really aggressive his last game. All game he was aggressive until he got injured. He was playing very well. That's all he needs to learn. Is to stay aggressive.

Chandler has been inconsistent his whole career up until now. The reason he's become consistent is because he's stayed aggressive at driving the lane and has gained confidence. That's all Gallo needs too. I am personally glad we didn't give up on Chandler. Heck, I wanted to trade him for Rudy. I was wrong and I'm glad I was wrong.
 

LJ4ptplay

Starter
who mentioned anything about chandler?

You blamed Gallo for players not playing their natural positions. Gallo did not play last night, yet nobody really played their natural position. Hence my example of Chandler playing PF, as he's done this whole season, for the majority of last night's game.
 
Are we better without Gallinari?
Wilson Chandler back @ his NATURAL position as was Amare...

Wilson inparticular was a beast.
Gallo is too streaky and is suited for a bench role at best imo.

Is Gallo trade bait... would you rather keep him or Chandler IF you had to choose.

I don't like the urging to vote for Felt, Amare and him BUT not Chandlr who to me is more deserving

I also don't like the feeling that we force Gallo shots and force his role, and now that I see us without him, it looks more glaring.

He can contribute, he has size, but his effciency may hinder us, plus consider the CENTER we might be able to replace him with...

That big is needed more than an inconsistent 3pt shooter


I think they're a better starting 5 without Gallo. Gallo does add shooting, so he isnt totally useless.
 

OGKnickfan

Enlightened
I think that, when a guy is so hyped (both by himself, basically drafting himself to the Knicks, and the media) the way Gallo has been: being promoted as a possible all-star, commercials comparing him to Dirk, banners in my neighborhood, for example, etc., even when an unheralded guy, Chandler, is clearly outplaying him, during his entire time on a team, it makes some people cynical.

I like Gallo. I do not think we are better without him, but we might be better with Chandler, who has had a superior season, in all significant statistical categories, starting at SF, with STAT at his normal position: PF, and Turiaf at center.

I also think that it's laughable to have Gallo as our candidate for forward for the all-star game, when Chandler is playing superior basketball. I wonder who chose him over Chandler. And why isn't STAT listed as an option for center.
 
You dumb how can we be better without Gallo?

The question should be is should Turiaf start, and should Will or Gallo move to the bench?



Damn Red you nearly made a Quiggle thread
 

KBlack25

Starter
I also think that it's laughable to have Gallo as our candidate for forward for the all-star game, when Chandler is playing superior basketball. I wonder who chose him over Chandler. And why isn't STAT listed as an option for center.

I posted this in another thread but...they create the All Star Ballots in the pre-season, a committee picks (I believe) 2-3 players based on pre-season projections. It has to do with printing or something (has to be done preseason to be out in time). Gallo was the projected starter, and STAT was not projected at C, hence the issue with faulty ballots. Paul Millsap was left off the ballot as well.
 

Blas

Benchwarmer
For those of you who fail at reading comprehension, do not read posts and just reply, or just fail at watching basketball games:

Wilson Chandler played PF most of the time last night.

Yet, more people will post, "Its awesome seeing Chandler play his natural SF position again!"

Wilson Chandler played PF most of the time last night.

I am not sure how many more times this needs to be repeated.

Now the next point. Conventional line-up?

Chandler played the 5 at one point in the game, WHAT conventional line-up? We were small ball just like every game. Oh btw:

Wilson Chandler played PF most of the time last night.

The thing we did different then other games was we ran less P&R in the 1 quarter and went with elbow plays featuring Amare. Other then that, same old same old. We still chucked 27 threes (this is not a complaint its the system we run) and we ran the other team into the floor.

So guess what, Chandler STILL played outside of his "natural posistion."
 
For those of you who fail at reading comprehension, do not read posts and just reply, or just fail at watching basketball games:

Wilson Chandler played PF most of the time last night.

Yet, more people will post, "Its awesome seeing Chandler play his natural SF position again!"

Wilson Chandler played PF most of the time last night.

I am not sure how many more times this needs to be repeated.

Now the next point. Conventional line-up?

Chandler played the 5 at one point in the game, WHAT conventional line-up? We were small ball just like every game. Oh btw:

Wilson Chandler played PF most of the time last night.

The thing we did different then other games was we ran less P&R in the 1 quarter and went with elbow plays featuring Amare. Other then that, same old same old. We still chucked 27 threes (this is not a complaint its the system we run) and we ran the other team into the floor.

So guess what, Chandler STILL played outside of his "natural posistion."

+1 but these Gallo haters will still find a way to argue
 
I honestly think Will can play the SF and PF very well. So, I think he's a natural Forward, not a C or SG.

With Gallo out of the mix we are a more focused and cohesive unit. This has never been more evident, especially when watching the games. I'm wondering if people are actually watching the games. Do they see where our weaknessess lie?

If Gallo was who alot of his fans claim he is...I would have no problem cheering for him too. But since he's not, and I clearly see how his flaws and hugh minutes are hampering the teams chemistry...I cannot support him. I want a great team and if we can package Gallo with our dead weight (since the coach is not playing them) we have the rare chance to upgrade. Why keep him if we don't have to, especially knowing we can do better?

I have very good reason to hate, I question the commitments of the fans...are they player fans or Knick fans? The proof isn't hard to see.
 

LJ4ptplay

Starter
I posted this in another thread but...they create the All Star Ballots in the pre-season, a committee picks (I believe) 2-3 players based on pre-season projections. It has to do with printing or something (has to be done preseason to be out in time). Gallo was the projected starter, and STAT was not projected at C, hence the issue with faulty ballots. Paul Millsap was left off the ballot as well.

You're right. The ballots are set up before the season even starts and based on last year.

Gallo was tearing it up the last 15-20 games of the season last year. He was scoring about 22 pts a game and ended the last 6 games with 22, 24 ,19, 28, 17 and 31 points. He was looking like a potential all-star.

Chandler missed the last 15 games of the season and was as inconsistent as Gallo is now the entire season.

This is why Gallo is on the ballot and Chandler is not.

To Chandler's credit, he has really developed a complete game. I think a lot of us believed Chandler would become very good if he improved his 3-point shot, ball handling and became more aggressive at attacking the rim and not settling. He's done that and has gained a lot of confidence which has also been key. Gallo just needs to do the same. He has 1 less year than Chandler too.

I think both Chandler and Gallo can become consistent 20 ppg players. We have plenty of assets/cap space other than Chandler and Gallo that can get us the missing pieces to ADD to this roster that will make us a contender.
 
Last edited:

skisloper

Starter
Yes we do play way better without him in the lineup, and it will be even more evident in the following games. We can find anybody in this league to contribute streaky points and lack luster defense. Now that he is out of the line up, we can keep our flow/tempo/rhythm of the game up on both ends of the court. I'am so glad he is not playing and hurting our team. His little contributions can easily be replaced but our bench. This will be a very telling time for all Gallo supporters. The truth always comes out....

:gony:

He held Durant to 8 points and 2 assists in the 2nd against the Knicks...
Thats defense....go root for the Heat
 

skisloper

Starter
I guess if we lost by 14 everyone would be saying Gallo is a superstar and we need him back. We can win and lose with out Gallo.

As much as I love being in the Garden and the energy in the Garden I come to these posts and realize its a constant whine whine whine......

How about Kick-Ass WIN.......
 

nyk_nyk

All Star
I think the bottom line is Chandler has shown significant improvement since last season while Gallo has at best remained the same (possibly reaching his ceiling). Fans realize that and while i'm no Gallo hater, I strongly believe he would be more valuable to us coming off the bench and providing that spot shooting with the second unit.

We're all true knicks fans and it shows by our passion. It's stupid to totally hate Gallo. He's home grown and talented BUT it was the organization who made him out to be the future and face of the team and it was Dantoni who made that rediculous "best shooter i've ever seen" comment just to hype him up. Plain and simple he was over-hyped and now that we see he's just a solid role player it makes it seem like he's sub par.
 

skisloper

Starter
I think the bottom line is Chandler has shown significant improvement since last season while Gallo has at best remained the same (possibly reaching his ceiling). Fans realize that and while i'm no Gallo hater, I strongly believe he would be more valuable to us coming off the bench and providing that spot shooting with the second unit.

We're all true knicks fans and it shows by our passion. It's stupid to totally hate Gallo. He's home grown and talented BUT it was the organization who made him out to be the future and face of the team and it was Dantoni who made that rediculous "best shooter i've ever seen" comment just to hype him up. Plain and simple he was over-hyped and now that we see he's just a solid role player it makes it seem like he's sub par.


I could not disagree with you more....

As we all know Chandler is a tough read . His lack of emotion is almost mind boggling........but no doubt he is playing as good as basketball as he has played...although on a few defensive plays last night he almost stepped out of the way and looked lost...

Gallo is really only in his second year as his first year had all the back issues. The guy is so much better then last year and is now first starting to drive to the hoop and create foul shots. His defense is only getting better as u saw against Durant. With guys like Stat and Felton other players like Gallo, Chandler, Douglas and Fields will only get better....

For the record I would trade any play except Stat for Melo.
 

Red

TYPE-A
For those of you who fail at reading comprehension, do not read posts and just reply, or just fail at watching basketball games:

Wilson Chandler played PF most of the time last night.

Yet, more people will post, "Its awesome seeing Chandler play his natural SF position again!"

Wilson Chandler played PF most of the time last night.

I am not sure how many more times this needs to be repeated.

Now the next point. Conventional line-up?

Chandler played the 5 at one point in the game, WHAT conventional line-up? We were small ball just like every game. Oh btw:

Wilson Chandler played PF most of the time last night.

The thing we did different then other games was we ran less P&R in the 1 quarter and went with elbow plays featuring Amare. Other then that, same old same old. We still chucked 27 threes (this is not a complaint its the system we run) and we ran the other team into the floor.

So guess what, Chandler STILL played outside of his "natural posistion."

Chandler Started @ SF last night. At the end of the quarters, when the starting line up was reinserted... he played SF.

Chandler's natural position is SF.

Where he winds up playing during the course of the game, due to various circumstance is irrelevant except that it accentuates his ability to play other positions because he is versitile.

He is not a natural 4. Do you understand that? No matter where he plays throught the course, he's NOT a power forward. Get it.

Gallo started at the four, due to injury and circumstance. MDA doesn't mind going small as do many other coaches. That doesn't change his position, a SF.

Bringing up Walker or Williams to point out how MDA went small is another moot point. Again,does a coach choose to start his 2nd tier players, or does a coach start the best he has? Its the latter, and when its crunch time, and if circumstance permits (not in foul trouble) the starters will take presidence, so please stop trying to point out the rotations as some sort of evidence.

Same old same old... really?
We normally have 6 to's per game?
We normally blow out and make the top teams quit? Really?

We normally have 3 players almost hit 30? Nope that hasn't happened in over 2 decades. Something was different.

Conventional line up? Yes our players RARELY have a chance to play their natural positons, whether by design or circumstance...

And again something was different.

Due to his size, we are forced to play Gallo at either the 2,3, or 4.

In my opinion, we have better options at the 2,3, and4. Which means we might experience a drop with him. That's not bad but it might lead to a different use of him or a change in his value.

You ask a question if the team plays better with a player and m*ther****ers skirts start showing.
 

nyk_nyk

All Star
Chandler Started @ SF last night. At the end of the quarters, when the starting line up was reinserted... he played SF.

Chandler's natural position is SF.

Where he winds up playing during the course of the game, due to various circumstance is irrelevant except that it accentuates his ability to play other positions because he is versitile.

He is not a natural 4. Do you understand that? No matter where he plays throught the course, he's NOT a power forward. Get it.

Gallo started at the four, due to injury and circumstance. MDA doesn't mind going small as do many other coaches. That doesn't change his position, a SF.

Bringing up Walker or Williams to point out how MDA went small is another moot point. Again,does a coach choose to start his 2nd tier players, or does a coach start the best he has? Its the latter, and when its crunch time, and if circumstance permits (not in foul trouble) the starters will take presidence, so please stop trying to point out the rotations as some sort of evidence.

Same old same old... really?
We normally have 6 to's per game?
We normally blow out and make the top teams quit? Really?

We normally have 3 players almost hit 30? Nope that hasn't happened in over 2 decades. Something was different.

Conventional line up? Yes our players RARELY have a chance to play their natural positons, whether by design or circumstance...

And again something was different.

Due to his size, we are forced to play Gallo at either the 2,3, or 4.

In my opinion, we have better options at the 2,3, and4. Which means we might experience a drop with him. That's not bad but it might lead to a different use of him or a change in his value.

You ask a question if the team plays better with a player and m*ther****ers skirts start showing.

Agreed 100%
 

Red

TYPE-A
Read the posts in this thread dude, including yours. You even ask, would you rather have Chandler or Gallo. It is you who is making this a Chandler vs Gallo thing, not me. Not one bit. The whole premise of this thread (and all of your threads) is "girly".

Yes, Chandler is currently playing better than Gallo. No question. Does anybody remember how inconsistent Chandler has been his entire career up until recently?

We have other assets that can get us a big. I personally like both and want to keep both and ADD to the current roster. Why do you want to get rid of Gallo so early in his career?

If you can propose a legitimate trade for Gallo that will get us the soild big that will take us to contending level, then by all means, I am willing to listen. But we all know that isn't your motivation here.

I can propose trading Chandler (his value is much higher than Gallo's) that will make this team better too. And Chandler can get us a much higher quality big in a trade than Gallo. And since this apparently isn't about Gallo vs Chandler and only about getting a quality center and playing a more traditional lineup, then why not propose that trade?

Who's better Chandler or Gallo? I, you, we, the world, the NBA, everyone and their mother knows Chandler is better, why would I ask this.

"Who would you rather keep if you had to choose" means take everything int account
Contract
Ability
Versitility
Team needs
Philosophy/ strategy
Projection

Whatever into account then make a choice. I could ask the same when it comes to 2 arbitrary players to resign. These two happen to play the same position, but it could easily be the same for Douglas or Turiaf. If you had to choose one to keep who would it be?

To reiterate, I'm assuming someone has to be used for a trade. I'm assuming we can be better with an upgrade. I also assume we can't keep everyone, so I asked who would you rather keep, not who is better, I already know that.

That came on the heels of the topic are we better w/o Gallo? Some say yes some say no. But most figured how we play was the crux not if he should be traded which is a different topic.

We all know you and some more love or like Gallo. We already know why you love him so. Until last night and for a few what we won't know is given our new improved line up, have we progressed to the point where he isn't as important.

Is he expendable? Can we be better without him? See that's a question and its valid.

Gallo is garbage... that would be an example of "hate". There is a difference. If you defend Gallo, maybe you or others could say, no we need his shooting, or no we need him for trade bait whatever, but to defend him as if he where dissed or offended b/c I even asked looks funny.

Do you love him or see his value and place on our team? Is it the bench, as a starter, etc...
 
Top