Knicksdabest
Benchwarmer
too early to tell but i like this starting lineup.
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?
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 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.
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."
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.
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:
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.
Gallo is really only in his second year as his first year had all the back issues.
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.
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?