Who is our best young player?

[SSj4Wingzero]

I'd take prime T-Mac over Kobe. T-Mac in his prime was unstoppable. He probably wasn't better than Shaq, though, but I would've taken 2002-2003 T-Mac over Kobe.

That and I'll freely admit that I ride T-Mac's jock a lot so that's that. But prime T-Mac was the best scorer in basketball

 

[keyser soze]

I'd take prime T-Mac over Kobe. T-Mac in his prime was unstoppable. He probably wasn't better than Shaq, though, but I would've taken 2002-2003 T-Mac over Kobe.

That and I'll freely admit that I ride T-Mac's jock a lot so that's that. But prime T-Mac was the best scorer in basketball

Nah, prime Kobe was better.

 

[SSj4Wingzero]

Agree to disagree, then, although Prime T-Mac was a top 5 player which is all that really matters when it comes to this discussion (ie elite talent shows itself...in various different ways).

 

[dan1608]

Anthony Randolph

 

[Toby Kimbal]

Isiah !!!!!!!!!!!!

Can't believe these people going around and saying what a great drafter this guy was and accumulator of talent.

Curry, J. James, Marbury, frye, S. franchise, so many pickups and a crappy team that was over the salary cap by like 80 mil.

 

[ronoranina]

Can't believe these people going around and saying what a great drafter this guy was and accumulator of talent.

Curry, J. James, Marbury, frye, S. franchise, so many pickups and a crappy team that was over the salary cap by like 80 mil.

Off topic much?! Or were you attempting to post something that's relevant to this thread somehow. If, so pls explain..

 

[New New York]

How can you say that Weedson is better than Gallo when they had near identical ppg averages for the 09'-10' season. This is inspite of the fact that Weedson should be a year more advanced than Gallo due to him being out with the back injury for most of 08'-09'. Weedson also averaged 2 more minutes per game than Gallo. Shouldn't that translate into a bit more production too?

The reason Weedson's FG % is higher is because Gallo shoots alot of threes and he was streaky due to it being his first full season. Also Gallo played in more games and therefore had more attempts, which will generally effect one's FG% too. I'd like to see Weedson's percentage after 81 games and as many attempts.

Weedson's numbers:

Season Team G GS MPG FG% 3p% FT% OFF DEF RPG APG SPG BPG TO PF PPG
09-10 NYK 65 64 35.7 0.479 0.267 0.806 1.4 3.9 5.4 2.1 0.7 0.8 1.7 2.8 15.3

Gallo's:

09-10 NYK 81 74 33.9 0.423 0.381 0.818 0.8 4.1 4.9 1.7 0.9 0.7 1.4 2.4 15.1

And on Randolph, the man has talent, but can't stay on the floor because he's dumb (low court IQ), can't guard anyone and he's foul prone. That's the reason Gallo played 12 more minutes than AR. And again, that sample you mentioned was from 33 games. Yeah, that's all AR actually played in.. Gallo played in all but one game last season, so maybe you shouldn't use that example.

If Randolph is that talented how come he played himself off of the court in G State? I f he was so good he should of been given more minutes. The reason is because he has holes in his game, make him a liability if he's on the court for too long. Like Clyde says he's enigmatic. If he continues this trend he'll be in Coach D's doghouse too.

Just because you have some talent it doesn't make you a starter, just ask Nate..

Wilson shot the ball more effectively than Gallo! Wil shot the ball at at 47% clip with Gallo shooting at around 42% which means if they scored the same amount of points Wilson needed less shots to do so! Wilson also showed more versatility on the offensive end scoring points on jumpers and drives while Gallo is primarily a jump shooter.

So my reply to your comment "I liked to see Wilson shooting pct. after 81 games"; in Wilson's sophomore season in which he played all 82 games he still shot the ball better, averaged more rebs, assist and blocks then Gallo

Advantage: Wilson

Now check the facts Ace! Randolph didnt play himself out of Nellies rotation, Don Nelson has love/hate relationships with players (see Jamal Crawford and Al Harrington for examples) The most talented players get buried on his bench due to his own stubborness! Randolph being on the bench in G-State had nothing to do with skill level.

Again lets look at the versatility of the two players and who gives the a team more. Gallo is a shooter and while he blocks shots and grabs rebounds, he is not a shot blocker or rebounder! You can consider Randolph a bonafied shot blocker and rebounder.

Fine you say you can't compare the two players because of how many fewer games Randolph played then Gallo....fair enough.....but look at Randolph's production his rookie season playing in 63 games; he still was statistically more productive then Gallo in fewer minutes!

8pts 6 rebs and 1.2 blocks in 17 mins trumps Gallo's 15pts 4 rebs in 34 mins.

Advantage:Randolph

You mentioned Gallo's shooting a lot of 3's for an explanation of low shooting PCT. but that only strengthens the argument that these players are more talented than Gallo. Gallo shot 6 3's per game and hit 2.2 per game on average, he led the league in attempts but was only 27th in shooting PCT. my point is that Gallo had Q-Rich in Phoenix inflated type stats because of many 3's he was shooting his scoring average reflected that of a solid player.

At this point Gallo is one demensional! He is an X factor type player who keeps you from being able to double a player in the post because his shot spreads the floor so well and he would be a great peice to a championship calliber team! But he is not a cornerstone player....and I am not saying Wilson or Randolph are either, but the question is "who is the most talented" and both players have more overall talent than Gallo.

Advantage: New New York

 

[Real NY Baller]

^^ yes sir, one dimensional is an understatement. Wilson and Randolph are the best younglins on the team. I wouldn't worry about Wilson's smoking either because Jordan and many other players puffed all the time. Some are just better at keeping their biz away from the public than others...

I only care what happens on the court, anything off of it is for gossipers. I don't do the girlie thing and talk about others as if I know them personally.

 

[TheBigCock]

Danilo Gallinari, he can actually shoot the ball.
I mean there is nothing wrong with having a good post game, in fact sometimes it's wise to to take the high percentage shot.
But sometimes you need to judge a talent based on their ability to play basketball and shoot the ball.
Gallinari>Randolf>>>>>>>Chandler

 

[LJ4ptplay]

Wilson shot the ball more effectively than Gallo! Wil shot the ball at at 47% clip with Gallo shooting at around 42% which means if they scored the same amount of points Wilson needed less shots to do so! Wilson also showed more versatility on the offensive end scoring points on jumpers and drives while Gallo is primarily a jump shooter.

So my reply to your comment "I liked to see Wilson shooting pct. after 81 games"; in Wilson's sophomore season in which he played all 82 games he still shot the ball better, averaged more rebs, assist and blocks then Gallo

It is deceiving to say Chandler is the better "shooter" and that he "shot the ball more effectively" based on fg%. Eddy Curry is a career 54.5 fg% and I don't consider him a better "shooter".

Most of Chandler's shots come from driving to the basket (he can only drive one direction by the way) and getting points from layups and dunks. Although Wilson scored 15 pts per game last season, it was with a 3-pt fg% of 26.7%.

Clearly Gallo is the better shooter. He is also the better passer, ball handler, stealer, turns the ball over less and has a higher IQ.

 

[Oldtimer]

Gallo, Randolph and Wilson

Gallo, Randolph and Chandler all have bright upsides. Gallo certainly does not have the athleticism of Randolph or Chandler and he is hardly as strong as Chandler, but he is the superior shooter and probably has the highest basketball IQ of the three.

Gallo gets some grief with many of the posters because he is perceived to be teacher D'Antoni's pet. I like his upside but his quickness and handle are suspect. His decent first steps are the result of craftiness rather than quickness. Randolph appears to have all the tools except, perhaps, for outside or midrange shooting. I love his potential.

Chandler needs to develop a better jump shot. Although some have suggested that he is a more efficient shooter than Gallo, at least in one important respect that is inaccurate. Because of his relatively better three point shooting, Gallo averaged 1.046 points per shot and Chandler averaged 1.004 points per shot. That translates into an extra point for Gallo for every 24 shots. Not much of a difference, but the difference favors Gallo. I think Gallo's shooting percentage will improve with the new team. He just turned 22 years old.

Chandler can improve his shot. Gallo is unlikely to be able to improve his quickness which tends to be more genetically hard wired than shooting ability.

I expect all three of them to improve and to continue to improve. I am not ready to pick the best one yet.

 

[jimkcchief88]

:gony: Like most of you on this Forum I like the moves the Knicks org has made recently. The talent level that we have on this team is exciting to me.

The reason we are in the position we are now, as a promising young team, is because Donnie Walsh is a great GM. Say whatever you want about Isiah, but when he was coaching the Pacers, Walsh was the guy directing player moves. W the team he constructed, Isiah took them to the playoffs 3 straight years. That says something about what kind of GM Walsh is:

He later took a position as general manager with the Pacers, where in 1987 he made the then-controversial decision to select Reggie Miller in the NBA Draft over local hero Steve Alford of Indiana University. The decision later proved to be brilliant, as Miller had a magnificent NBA career where as Alford was a bust in the pros. He was later promoted to the position of CEO and president and held that position until shortly before the end of the 2007?08 season. During Walsh's tenure the Pacers reached the playoffs in 16 of the previous 17 years heading into the 2006?07 season.

Walsh years in Indiana were extremely successful if you judge teams by how often they make the playoffs. Championships?? Well, we all know he hasn't been a part of a Championship team yet, but the Knicks are rebuilding and he is the perfect guy to do this as we've seen our team get under the cap, bring in a 5 time All Star and add nice pieces while steadily cultivating home grow talent.

Having said all of that, I think it is important to quantify exactly what we have. I think the selection of Gallo 6th in the 2008 draft is comparable to the pick of Miller in 87'. Both are sharp shooters. Both are smart and tenacious. Gallo is taller however, a better ball-handler already and I think will end up being the better defender. For those of you who doubt my assessments of him as a ball-handler lets flash back to the summer league, his first taste of American pro talent, where he, "showed off his ball handling skills by executing a "Shammgod" dribble move in order to beat his defender to the basket and draw a foul" (incidentally, on said foul he incurred the infamous back injury that has stunted his progress somewhat). If you haven't seen it go to You Tube and bring yourself up to speed. How many 6'10' guys can you think of that have that kind of skill off the dribble?? The answer is not many..

He is the best shooter we've had since Allan Houston (also a pure shooter), but I think he has the chance to be in Reggie Miller's class in this area. Combine this potential w his gifts of height, mental toughness and other the skills I've already mentioned and this is why I'm so high on him.

Obviously STAT is somewhat young, but he's already an all-star so let?s not include him as most of us can agree that he's our best player overall. The rest of our players are fair game for comparison and discussion.


The pick of Gallo at 6 could end up being pure genius on the part of Walsh. I think he is our best young player and will be a perrenial All-Star.

Gallo a pure shooter???? Where is this MYTH coming from??? Gallo was 71st in the the league in 3 point %. 71st. He came in DEAD LAST in the 3 point shootout. DEAD LAST. Reggie Miller is STILL a BETTER SHOOTER than Gallo to this day. Are you old enough to remember Reggie Miller in his prime??? If not watch that ESPN movie on how Reggie killed the Knicks. You can't even give Gallo the ball in end game situations because his ball handling skills are so poor. I am 40 and Gallo couldn't take me to the cup because he dribbles to high and with one hand only. Gallo is a decent set shooter that needs to improve many aspects of his game. I saw glimpses last year, but not enough to justify 6th overall pick. Nepotism for sure. For my money, give me Wil the Thrill.

 

[N.Y.knicksstateofmind]

Anthony Randoplh i think i our best young player next to Gallo because i think he is tailor made for this system of running and gunning. I think his athletic skills and ability is very impressive and will exciting with his impressive skills. I think azabuik will also surprise many of us.

 

[ronoranina]

ridiculous..

Gallo a pure shooter???? Where is this MYTH coming from??? Gallo was 71st in the the league in 3 point %. 71st. He came in DEAD LAST in the 3 point shootout. DEAD LAST. Reggie Miller is STILL a BETTER SHOOTER than Gallo to this day. Are you old enough to remember Reggie Miller in his prime??? If not watch that ESPN movie on how Reggie killed the Knicks. You can't even give Gallo the ball in end game situations because his ball handling skills are so poor. I am 40 and Gallo couldn't take me to the cup because he dribbles to high and with one hand only. Gallo is a decent set shooter that needs to improve many aspects of his game. I saw glimpses last year, but not enough to justify 6th overall pick. Nepotism for sure. For my money, give me Wil the Thrill.

You are so way off base.. This is how you come off most of the time so i'm not surprised.

First of all, Gallo is a pure shooter. I'm not saying this based on anything other than what the mechanics of his shot look like to me. For your info I'm 31. I've been watching and playing basketball since the age of 12, so I feel qualified to judge somewhat confidently who I feel is a pure shooter and who is not. Yes Gallo's numbers do not bear this out, yet. But again, when I watch the man shoot, with what I know from my experience watching and playing basketball, I see a pure shooter. Okay?!

I felt I drew a reasonable parallel between Reggie and Danilo based on the evidence I shared in my opening post. Both Walsh and Coach D'ant appreciate extremely competent shooters. D'ant himself was a dead-eye shooter and had Nash who is also a dead-eye shooter. Walsh choose Reggie who is one of the greatest shooters of all time. Now don't get it twisted (as you seem to do sooooo well) I'm not comparing Reggie to Danilo. That would be crazy, as obviously Gallo doesn't have the resume of Reggie. What I'm saying is that based on what I've seen from Coach D'ant and Walsh, they both agreed that Gallo had the foundation to become one of the best shooters we've ever seen.. That is why they picked him 6th.

From what I've seen from him, his mechanics I mean, he has what he needs to average 48-49% from the field, and over 40% or close to it from 3 for many seasons in the NBA. If you don't agree that's fine. We will see what happens.

Wilson shot the ball more effectively than Gallo! Wil shot the ball at at 47% clip with Gallo shooting at around 42% which means if they scored the same amount of points Wilson needed less shots to do so! Wilson also showed more versatility on the offensive end scoring points on jumpers and drives while Gallo is primarily a jump shooter.

So my reply to your comment "I liked to see Wilson shooting pct. after 81 games"; in Wilson's sophomore season in which he played all 82 games he still shot the ball better, averaged more rebs, assist and blocks then Gallo

Advantage: Wilson

Now check the facts Ace! Randolph didnt play himself out of Nellies rotation, Don Nelson has love/hate relationships with players (see Jamal Crawford and Al Harrington for examples) The most talented players get buried on his bench due to his own stubborness! Randolph being on the bench in G-State had nothing to do with skill level.

Again lets look at the versatility of the two players and who gives the a team more. Gallo is a shooter and while he blocks shots and grabs rebounds, he is not a shot blocker or rebounder! You can consider Randolph a bonafied shot blocker and rebounder.

Fine you say you can't compare the two players because of how many fewer games Randolph played then Gallo....fair enough.....but look at Randolph's production his rookie season playing in 63 games; he still was statistically more productive then Gallo in fewer minutes!

8pts 6 rebs and 1.2 blocks in 17 mins trumps Gallo's 15pts 4 rebs in 34 mins.

Advantage:Randolph

You mentioned Gallo's shooting a lot of 3's for an explanation of low shooting PCT. but that only strengthens the argument that these players are more talented than Gallo. Gallo shot 6 3's per game and hit 2.2 per game on average, he led the league in attempts but was only 27th in shooting PCT. my point is that Gallo had Q-Rich in Phoenix inflated type stats because of many 3's he was shooting his scoring average reflected that of a solid player.

At this point Gallo is one demensional! He is an X factor type player who keeps you from being able to double a player in the post because his shot spreads the floor so well and he would be a great peice to a championship calliber team! But he is not a cornerstone player....and I am not saying Wilson or Randolph are either, but the question is "who is the most talented" and both players have more overall talent than Gallo.

Advantage: New New York

Dude, I don't even know where to start. The evidence you posted does not even counter the core of what I was arguing..

As others have pointed out, I think your misunderestimating (love that Bushism , lol) what you see in Wilson's stats. He is simply not a better shooter than Gallo. The man has no range, is primarily a slasher and the stats you used were from a 65 game sample. You compared that 65 game stat line to Gallo's from 81 games, which makes no sense. Are you really that confident that he would've been able to maintain that FG% for the entire season?

Secondly your comparing Wilson's third season to Gallo's second season. Really one could argue that last season was Gallo's first since he only played 28 games his rookie year due to injury. In Gallo's first full season he averaged 15.1ppg, while Wilson averaged 14.4ppg in his first. Wilson averaged 15.3ppg during his second season. That's less than a 1ppg difference- not much growth there. We'll see what Gallo does in his third season. Do you really think he'll average only .9ppg more this year??? Stop..

I think Gallo will average 19-20ppg this season to really show us all what he is , which is an All-star caliber forward.

Next you used Crawford and Harrington as examples in you argument in favor of Randolph. Now I don't know about you, but to me these are precisely the kind of players that didn't cut it NY, are flawed and wouldn't and shouldn't start on good teams, which we hope to be. Is it any wonder that all three of those guys were in Nellie's dawg house?? They are all bench players on good teams. Crawford and Harrington are chuckers who play no defense. And Randolph plays no defense (except for selective weak side D), making him foul prone, can't shoot and has a very low basketball IQ. I see the connection. Do you??

 

[jimkcchief88]

You are so way off base.. This is how you come off most of the time so i'm not surprised.

First of all, Gallo is a pure shooter. I'm not saying this based on anything other than what the mechanics of his shot look like to me. For your info I'm 31. I've been watching and playing basketball since the age of 12, so I feel qualified to judge somewhat confidently who I feel is a pure shooter and who is not. Yes Gallo's numbers do not bear this out, yet. But again, when I watch the man shoot, with what I know from my experience watching and playing basketball, I see a pure shooter. Okay?!

I felt I drew a reasonable parallel between Reggie and Danilo based on the evidence I shared in my opening post. Both Walsh and Coach D'ant appreciate extremely competent shooters. D'ant himself was a dead-eye shooter and had Nash who is also a dead-eye shooter. Walsh choose Reggie who is one of the greatest shooters of all time. Now don't get it twisted (as you seem to do sooooo well) I'm not comparing Reggie to Danilo. That would be crazy, as obviously Gallo doesn't have the resume of Reggie. What I'm saying is that based on what I've seen from Coach D'ant and Walsh, they both agreed that Gallo had the foundation to become one of the best shooters we've ever seen.. That is why they picked him 6th.

From what I've seen from him, his mechanics I mean, he has what he needs to average 48-49% from the field, and over 40% or close to it from 3 for many seasons in the NBA. If you don't agree that's fine. We will see what happens.



Dude, I don't even know where to start. The evidence you posted does not even counter the core of what I was arguing..

As others have pointed out, I think your misunderestimating (love that Bushism , lol) what you see in Wilson's stats. He is simply not a better shooter than Gallo. The man has no range, is primarily a slasher and the stats you used were from a 65 game sample. You compared that 65 game stat line to Gallo's from 81 games, which makes no sense. Are you really that confident that he would've been able to maintain that FG% for the entire season?

Secondly your comparing Wilson's third season to Gallo's second season. Really one could argue that last season was Gallo's first since he only played 28 games his rookie year due to injury. In Gallo's first full season he averaged 15.1ppg, while Wilson averaged 14.4ppg in his first. Wilson averaged 15.3ppg during his second season. That's less than a 1ppg difference- not much growth there. We'll see what Gallo does in his third season. Do you really think he'll average only .9ppg more this year??? Stop..

I think Gallo will average 19-20ppg this season to really show us all what he is , which is an All-star caliber forward.

Next you used Crawford and Harrington as examples in you argument in favor of Randolph. Now I don't know about you, but to me these are precisely the kind of players that didn't cut it NY, are flawed and wouldn't and shouldn't start on good teams, which we hope to be. Is it any wonder that all three of those guys were in Nellie's dawg house?? They are all bench players on good teams. Crawford and Harrington are chuckers who play no defense. And Randolph plays no defense (except for selective weak side D), making him foul prone, can't shoot and has a very low basketball IQ. I see the connection. Do you??

Let me help you out with the definition of a "pure shooter". Being a "pure shooter" doesn't mean having good mechanics. If really watched basketball for as long as you say you have, you would know that alot of pure shooters have ugly shots. That includes your bad comparison of Gallo and Reggie Miller. This also includes Larry Bird, Craig Hodges, Jamaal Wilkes, and Micheal Cooper to name a few. My best friends uncle had the ugliest, unblockable, two-handed set shot that was "pure" with 40 feet. No foolin. So don't confuse a "pretty shot" with a "pure" shot. "Pure" simply means your shot goes in more often then not and that's it.

I hope Gallo develops this year as we burned a 6th pick for him, but to compare Gallo to HOF Reggie Miller is laughable. Reggie's jumper was "pure" and consistently went in. Gallo will shoot you out of a game in a "New York" minute with all the bricks he throws up. Gallo is a streaky shooter at best, while there was nothing streaky about Reggie. Reggie was a true two guard who worked to get his shot off, while Gallo camps out 5 feet behind the 3 point line waiting for a pass. Reggie had handles so in an end game situation, he could work to get his shot off or draw a foul. Gallo's ball handling skills are such a liability that he gets stripped by quicker guys on the floor on the regular. Reggie had quick enough feet to stay with a defender to again draw a foul, where Gallo is too slow to stay with other quicker 3's he goes up against. All in all, really a reach and a POOR comparison. Try again.

 

[ronoranina]

Let me help you out with the definition of a "pure shooter". Being a "pure shooter" doesn't mean having good mechanics. If really watched basketball for as long as you say you have, you would know that alot of pure shooters have ugly shots. That includes your bad comparison of Gallo and Reggie Miller. This also includes Larry Bird, Craig Hodges, Jamaal Wilkes, and Micheal Cooper to name a few. My best friends uncle had the ugliest, unblockable, two-handed set shot that was "pure" with 40 feet. No foolin. So don't confuse a "pretty shot" with a "pure" shot. "Pure" simply means your shot goes in more often then not and that's it.

I hope Gallo develops this year as we burned a 6th pick for him, but to compare Gallo to HOF Reggie Miller is laughable. Reggie's jumper was "pure" and consistently went in. Gallo will shoot you out of a game in a "New York" minute with all the bricks he throws up. Gallo is a streaky shooter at best, while there was nothing streaky about Reggie. Reggie was a true two guard who worked to get his shot off, while Gallo camps out 5 feet behind the 3 point line waiting for a pass. Reggie had handles so in an end game situation, he could work to get his shot off or draw a foul. Gallo's ball handling skills are such a liability that he gets stripped by quicker guys on the floor on the regular. Reggie had quick enough feet to stay with a defender to again draw a foul, where Gallo is too slow to stay with other quicker 3's he goes up against. All in all, really a reach and a POOR comparison. Try again.

Your reading comprehension most be very low because I didn't say he had good mechanics. I said "what the mechanics of his shot look like to me", not anything about him having "good " mechanics, or mechanics that looked good aesthetically. I put those words specifically in bold in the first post so you would not get it twisted, but you still did. Let me see if I can make it clearer for you.. From what I see in his shot, the way he shoots it, he looks like a pure shooter to me.

I am also aware of the shooters of the past that you mentioned. That argument has nothing to do w what I was saying because I wasn't talking about guys have nice looking, or ugly shots and whether either type of shooter can be classified as pure.

And, I specifically said that I was not comparing Reggie to Gallo. Why are you making it out like I am?? :wallbash: Go back and read my post. The only thing I was comparing is that they are both shooters and they were both drafted by Walsh. That is all. I'm beginning to think you're an idiot.

I also don't agree w your assessments of Gallo. First of all I am a basketball junkie! I watched every Knicks game last season and too many other games not involving the Knicks (as my wife can attest to). I watch my B-ball.. Having said that, I watched Gallo stay w smaller quicker guys many times defensively. I've seen him step up and guard the other teams best player and not get embarrassed. I also think he's held his own defensively since he came into the league. Again I'm not comparing him to Reggie now, but I think he is a very competent ball-handler for 6'10'' forward, as I've stated many times on these forums.

I really don't understand why you went ahead comparing the two players when I specifically stated that I wasn't trying to go there. I even asked you not to get it twisted.. GO BACK AND READ! The only parallel I drew is that they were both 1st round picks taken by Walsh, who both had the potential to become great shooters - one, who became a legendary shooter and perrenial all-star, the other who has the potential to do both IMO aswell. That's all I was saying dude.

 

[jimkcchief88]

Your reading comprehension most be very low because I didn't say he had good mechanics. I said "what the mechanics of his shot look like to me", not anything about him having "good " mechanics, or mechanics that looked good aesthetically. I put those words specifically in bold in the first post so you would not get it twisted, but you still did. Let me see if I can make it clearer for you.. From what I see in his shot, the way he shoots it, he looks like a pure shooter to me.

I am also aware of the shooters of the past that you mentioned. That argument has nothing to do w what I was saying because I wasn't talking about guys have nice looking, or ugly shots and whether either type of shooter can be classified as pure.

And, I specifically said that I was not comparing Reggie to Gallo. Why are you making it out like I am?? :wallbash: Go back and read my post. The only thing I was comparing is that they are both shooters and they were both drafted by Walsh. That is all. I'm beginning to think you're an idiot.

I also don't agree w your assessments of Gallo. I've seen him stay w smaller quicker guys many times defensively. I've seen him step up and guard the other teams best player and not get embarrassed. I also think he's held his own defensively since he came into the league. Again I'm not comparing him to Reggie now, but I think he is a very competent ball-handler for 6'10'' forward, as I've stated many times on these forums.

I really don't understand why you went ahead comparing the two players when I specifically stated that I wasn't trying to go there. I even asked you not to get it twisted.. GO BACK AND READ! The only parallel I drew is that they were both 1st round picks taken by Walsh, who both had the potential to become great shooters - one, who became a legendary shooter and perrenial all-star, the other who has the potential to do both IMO aswell. That's all I was saying dude.

I love the retraction!!! You should run for office!!!

 

[New New York]

You are so way off base.. This is how you come off most of the time so i'm not surprised.





Dude, I don't even know where to start. The evidence you posted does not even counter the core of what I was arguing..

As others have pointed out, I think your misunderestimating (love that Bushism , lol) what you see in Wilson's stats. He is simply not a better shooter than Gallo. The man has no range, is primarily a slasher and the stats you used were from a 65 game sample. You compared that 65 game stat line to Gallo's from 81 games, which makes no sense. Are you really that confident that he would've been able to maintain that FG% for the entire season?

Secondly your comparing Wilson's third season to Gallo's second season. Really one could argue that last season was Gallo's first since he only played 28 games his rookie year due to injury. In Gallo's first full season he averaged 15.1ppg, while Wilson averaged 14.4ppg in his first. Wilson averaged 15.3ppg during his second season. That's less than a 1ppg difference- not much growth there. We'll see what Gallo does in his third season. Do you really think he'll average only .9ppg more this year??? Stop..

I think Gallo will average 19-20ppg this season to really show us all what he is , which is an All-star caliber forward.

Next you used Crawford and Harrington as examples in you argument in favor of Randolph. Now I don't know about you, but to me these are precisely the kind of players that didn't cut it NY, are flawed and wouldn't and shouldn't start on good teams, which we hope to be. Is it any wonder that all three of those guys were in Nellie's dawg house?? They are all bench players on good teams. Crawford and Harrington are chuckers who play no defense. And Randolph plays no defense (except for selective weak side D), making him foul prone, can't shoot and has a very low basketball IQ. I see the connection. Do you??

First off if it seemed I suggested that Wilson was a better shooter than Gallo allow me to take that back, clearly anyone who has watched Knicks basketball knows Gallo is the best shooter on our team.....my argument is that he is not much more than that

Now your whole argument about not being able to compare a player who played 81 and one who played 65 is pretty flawed...now while I agreed with you that is impossible to compare what Gallo did in 81 to what Randolph did in 33 is lopsided....81 and 65 is not that major of a difference.

Plus consider how bad Wilson started the season off last year; Wilson was shooting something like 32% from the floor and was averaging like 11 pts per, the fact that he pulled his numbers up 15 ppg and shooting 47% from the feild shows that Wilson was actually on a upswing....so your suggestiong that him playing a whole season wouldve caused his numbers dip is good in theory however Wilson's numbers were set to improve.

Now.....it is foolish to think that you can't compare Gallo in his second year to Wilson in his 3rd, I mean when comparing Kobe and Lebron do you really look at it year by year or where they are at currently? Now in my humble opinion Wilson is currently a better overall player....albeit just slightly

Now my point about G-State is that Don Nelson benches players for no reason. Now while you are right both Harrington and Crawford are chuckers and their syle of play would earn them a spot on the bench with most coaches; this is simply not the case with Don Nelson! Both Crawford and Harrington play "Nellie ball" and both did well in his system (relatively speaking). Nellie just assigns players to his dog house for no good reason and that was what I was saying about Randolph.....but all of this is a moot point when you consider that Randolph's limited amount of games was in large part do to an season ending ankle injury and not just being buried in the dog house.

But while I think Wilson and Gallo is truly debatable ( I have actually flip flopped on that arguement), Randolph is clearly better than Gallo.

Look as a fan of The Knicks I want to see the best out of any of our players and Gallo has a ton of potential....but as we know potential is a word that is often talked about but seen less in sports.

As it stands now Gallo is one dimensional, I really don't see an All Star calliber season out of him next year but I have been wrong before and would love to be wrong about this too!

I guess all we can do is wait and see :gony:

P.S. despite all that I have said, I really do like Gallo and aside from trading him for a bonafied All Star I would love to keep seeing him playing for us.

 

[ronoranina]

I love the retraction!!! You should run for office!!!

There you go again, misinterpreting. You're quite good at that Jim, lol.

 

[jimkcchief88]

There you go again, misinterpreting. You're quite good at that Jim, lol.

So are you lol. The funny thing is you are denying stuff you said in black and white in the same thread. Too bad I can read......