Abbott: Beasley might be one of the only potential future MVPs who can be had on the cheap. But Gallinari is one of the biggest and best spot-up shooters in NBA history, and he plays some D, too. Any team could use a guy like that. Another question: What's more likely to go haywire: Gallinari's back or Beasley's judgment?

Broussard: Beasley. His talent is greater than Gallinari's and though he's got a long way to go, he's showing signs of maturity. Gallinari's a great shooter, but Beasley's got more versatility.

Ford: Beasley. He's a more complete player. He rebounds, he can score inside and he doesn't have a bad back.

Hollinger: Beasley. Gallinari is a better shooter, but Beasley is the better athlete and has more ways to develop his game in the future. Additionally, there's the issue of Gallinari's back. Gallo will be a great shooter for many years, but Beasley is the only one of the two with All-NBA potential.

Sheridan: Beasley. I'll take the multidimensional player over the one-trick specialist every time, and it's a bonus that Beasley can shoot 3s, too. Plus, Gallinari gets attacked every night on defense.

Sheridan see's what I see , not the majority of posters here, also Sheridan has no bias.

An intelligent question is whether you'd rather have Gallinari, or Gordon, Lopez, Bayless, or Jason Thompson?

I'd prefer any of those 4 players as things stand right now. However, Gallinari is at the very least a very good shooter at the NBA level and that is not bad.

oohah

simrud wrote:Beasley was taken like top 3 was he not? How could have we gotten him?

Holy crap, look who it is? My long last pal- interestingly his return coincides with that of playa2 :)

Yeah he was no.2- the reality is that it would be an upset if reporters said they'd prefer Gallinari to him only this far into their 2nd year in the league. The fact that at least one reporter (abbott) seemingly prefers Gallinari is pretty good praise. Gallo's D is far underrated by Sheridan. He has his troubles, but the guy is fighting hard defensively and has made quite a few impact plays on that end. Actually I think his agressiveness in going after blocked shots sometimes rubs off on his teammates and causes better overall play.

I'd still take Beasley, because I believed (and still believe) he has the kind of offensive potential to lead the league in scoring, but Gallo is definitely an excellent prospect and has a very promising career ahead of him.

playa2 wrote:Sheridan: Beasley. I'll take the multidimensional player over the one-trick specialist every time, and it's a bonus that Beasley can shoot 3s, too. Plus, Gallinari gets attacked every night on defense.

Sheridan see's what I see , not the majority of posters here, also Sheridan has no bias.

so u see a 1 dimensional shooter when u see Gallo too? u don't notice that he's been blocking a shot per game, is a much better on ball defender than anyone suspected he might be, & has excellent basketball instincts & maturity for a kid his age who hits big shots in big moments?

playa2 wrote:Which Sophomore would you rather have:
Michael Beasley or Danilo Gallinari?

Abbott: Beasley might be one of the only potential future MVPs who can be had on the cheap. But Gallinari is one of the biggest and best spot-up shooters in NBA history, and he plays some D, too. Any team could use a guy like that. Another question: What's more likely to go haywire: Gallinari's back or Beasley's judgment?

Broussard: Beasley. His talent is greater than Gallinari's and though he's got a long way to go, he's showing signs of maturity. Gallinari's a great shooter, but Beasley's got more versatility.

Ford: Beasley. He's a more complete player. He rebounds, he can score inside and he doesn't have a bad back.

Hollinger: Beasley. Gallinari is a better shooter, but Beasley is the better athlete and has more ways to develop his game in the future. Additionally, there's the issue of Gallinari's back. Gallo will be a great shooter for many years, but Beasley is the only one of the two with All-NBA potential.

Sheridan: Beasley. I'll take the multidimensional player over the one-trick specialist every time, and it's a bonus that Beasley can shoot 3s, too. Plus, Gallinari gets attacked every night on defense.

Sheridan see's what I see , not the majority of posters here, also Sheridan has no bias.

Kind of interesting that not one of those interviewed commented on Beasley's D, which is spotty at best, and negligent at worst, or noted that the "6'10"" Beasley is supposed to be a PF, but rarely blocks a shot and is rarely a presence in the post when on D, while Gallinari has been supplying both of these things to the Knicks.

Beasley is probably the best scorer to come out of his draft, but he has a lot of holes in his game, and also, it would seem, in his head.

The real question should have been: Which sophomore would you rather have- Lopez or Beasley, because Lopez would have been a made to order fit for Miami-the perfect big man companion for Wade.

TMS wrote:

playa2 wrote:Sheridan: Beasley. I'll take the multidimensional player over the one-trick specialist every time, and it's a bonus that Beasley can shoot 3s, too. Plus, Gallinari gets attacked every night on defense.

Sheridan see's what I see , not the majority of posters here, also Sheridan has no bias.

so u see a 1 dimensional shooter when u see Gallo too? u don't notice that he's been blocking a shot per game, is a much better on ball defender than anyone suspected he might be, & has excellent basketball instincts & maturity for a kid his age who hits big shots in big moments?

Hitting big shots still falls under the category of shooting.

I completely disagree with you when it comes to Gallinari's man to man defense, he's pretty bad, but his willingness to go for shot blocks, blocking them when it counts is refreshing. David Lee could sure learn a lot from Gallinari when it comes to making a defensive effort. I might add that gallinari also alters some shots that he does not block. this gives me hope that he may develop an inside game because that is what will make him a star, not chucking from 25 feet.

I say Gallinari has 1.75 dimensions: Shooting (1.25) and blocking shots (.5).

oohah

martin wrote:
passing. big man who can dribble.

Gallinari is a good passer but it really isn't a "dimension" of his game. Chris Duhon gets a few rebounds a game but it really isn't a "dimension" of his game, you see what I am saying?

Dribbling: This has to be the most overrated part of Gallinari's game. He doesn't crack ankles off the dribble like reputed. He has an okay handle, enough so that he does not get himself in trouble, but again this is not a "dimension" of his game. He dribbles as much as he has to then he giove the ball to a real ball handler (Smartly)You want to see similar sized players who really have a dribbling dimension? Check out old footage of Van Horn or Gugliotta, Zach Randolph, Turkoglu, even the Italian in Toronto.

This reminds me of David Lee througout the ages: "He dribbles like a guard! He passes like Magic Johnson!" No he doesn't. Lee rebounds and finishes. The other parts of his game are not what makes him the player he is.

Similarly, Galinari shoots well with range, he has heart, and he blocks some shots. The other parts of his game are not developed enough to qualify as "dimensions".

oohah

oohah wrote:

TMS wrote:

playa2 wrote:Sheridan: Beasley. I'll take the multidimensional player over the one-trick specialist every time, and it's a bonus that Beasley can shoot 3s, too. Plus, Gallinari gets attacked every night on defense.

Sheridan see's what I see , not the majority of posters here, also Sheridan has no bias.

so u see a 1 dimensional shooter when u see Gallo too? u don't notice that he's been blocking a shot per game, is a much better on ball defender than anyone suspected he might be, & has excellent basketball instincts & maturity for a kid his age who hits big shots in big moments?

Hitting big shots still falls under the category of shooting.

I completely disagree with you when it comes to Gallinari's man to man defense, he's pretty bad, but his willingness to go for shot blocks, blocking them when it counts is refreshing. David Lee could sure learn a lot from Gallinari when it comes to making a defensive effort. I might add that gallinari also alters some shots that he does not block. this gives me hope that he may develop an inside game because that is what will make him a star, not chucking from 25 feet.

I say Gallinari has 1.75 dimensions: Shooting (1.25) and blocking shots (.5).

oohah

i don't think that's necessarily the case... hitting big shots refers to the clutch factor that a guy possesses... not all shooters have that & you don't necessarily have to be a sharpshooter to have that intangible... certain guys like Kobe, Ben Gordon, Jamal Crawford, Ray Allen, James Posey, Robert Horry, Mike Bibby, etc. have that clutch factor and not all of them are necessarily describable as sharpshooters... i think Gallo possesses that intangible.

Anyway, Beasley is a more natural scorer but the guy has yet to figure out the fact he has teamates and coach that has a game plan he needs forfilled. Gallo is the exact opposite...Gallo is a natural shooter that can do everything else well but not great. Gallo is a good team player almost to a fault.

Potential??? Well everyone has a hard on cuz of what Beasley did in college. So far Beasley has been exposed in the NBA. He's learning the game now, so that knowledge is trying to catch up to the talent...He could become a 20pt scorer or he can stay where he is at now...its 50-50. Gallo has pro experience so his knowledge of the game is far more advanced. Gallo can also become a 20pt scorer or he can stay where he is. History has proven you don't need to be an off the scale athlete to be a huge threat in this league. Gallo's potential is on that same 50-50 range Beasley is on.....and thats as real as it can get.