Posted by Pharzeone:

There are these internet annoying rumors are that the Knicks are trying to manage his playing time for his back and his psyche. Playing against bench guys. Not unusual with 1st year guys and normally done for European players going into the league. I think he is game to play against starting lineups, so I don't see the big deal. As far as his injury, I haven't heard anything but positives in that regard. If he is playing back to back games, I assuming that the disc has subsided and isn't a major problem. Don't know what the overly protective atttitude is all about. This organization already asked Lee to play with bone spurs while contemplating paying him $8-9 million a year. I think it is safe to say they aren't concern about long term investments as far as their players health. For pete's sake this organization asked their players to play extended minutes as they made trades and sat players for discpline reasons. That cat is out of the bag.

Jeffries does a little of everything but nothing well. I am not sure where you would use him but it shouldn't be in the starting lineup.

Posted by BlueSeats:

Posted by BRIGGS:

Posted by BlueSeats:

Posted by Vmart:

Posted by BlueSeats:

Posted by Vmart:

If he can play back-back games then he can start. I don't want to see Jefferies and Q anymore than 5 minutes each.

Your feelings about Q and JJ are irrelevant to how Gallo's injury should be handled. The kid's long term health is far more important than your viewing pleasure.

How they handle the Kid? If you are afraid he will get hurt then he can get hurt at any moment in the game. If you want to develop him slowly so you can see Q and Jefferies is your viewing pleasure and frankly I wish not to see how you see it. The Kid needs minutes winning be damned. There is no more injury its over with now its time for him to rack up minutes in vital time of the game. This has nothing to do with his back that is a situation of the past. If he is hurt then he should not be out there. That means the Knicks are not concerned with his long term out look.

You're just making pronouncements that have no basis in fact. Your position is, if he can play one minute he can play 48, and that's just not based in reality. It's analogous to saying if an infant can crawl he can play soccer, or if a first grader can add 10+10 he can do astrophysics. It's just nonsense.

No what he is saying is if he has no physical restrictions that he should replace Jefferies in the starting line up to help improve the team. He's the 6th pick in the draft and played 4 years of pro ball already. Most high draft picks start because 25 win teams need the talent in the line up immediately. Why would you even care if someone else says start him? If he plays 25 minutes off the bench or starts--he's still playing 25 minutes. The scouting report from the KNicks is he is a superstar type talent--so as a sht team--what exactly would we be waiting for?
If he honestly is that talented--why wouldnt anyone want to repalce Jefferies with him? I think we need to remove Jefferies from the rotation--I want to give Gallo the same opportunity Brook Lopez and Ryan Andersen have had. Lets see what he has. Is it that hard to get it?
The only reason I can think of why someone would say this guy cant start is because they don't think he can handle tier 1 NBA competition and needs to go against second line type players. And then we will use the word will bring him along slowly or he's hurt or anything else that can mask the issue. Let him start for 10-15 games--if it doesnt work out then move him to the bench again and start over.

Briggs, what isn't hard to get is that your position is based on your need to prove you are a better talent evaluator than anyone with the Knicks. Gallo is just your vehicle of the day and you'd gladly see them run his back into the ground if it would make your point.

I'm not here to say I think Gallo will be great, or better than anyone else. I just don't see the point in doing an Allan Houston job on him. How many years have we complained about management rushing back players, against better judgment, for futile attempts at playoff runs when we're better served placing in the lottery, or to placate the petty needs of childishly impatient fans.

If he wasn't able to play back to back games when he came back, could it be possible that what you were saying about management rushing back players, is still happening?

Posted by islesfan:

Posted by BlueSeats:

Posted by BRIGGS:

Posted by BlueSeats:

Posted by Vmart:

Posted by BlueSeats:

Posted by Vmart:

If he can play back-back games then he can start. I don't want to see Jefferies and Q anymore than 5 minutes each.

Your feelings about Q and JJ are irrelevant to how Gallo's injury should be handled. The kid's long term health is far more important than your viewing pleasure.

How they handle the Kid? If you are afraid he will get hurt then he can get hurt at any moment in the game. If you want to develop him slowly so you can see Q and Jefferies is your viewing pleasure and frankly I wish not to see how you see it. The Kid needs minutes winning be damned. There is no more injury its over with now its time for him to rack up minutes in vital time of the game. This has nothing to do with his back that is a situation of the past. If he is hurt then he should not be out there. That means the Knicks are not concerned with his long term out look.

You're just making pronouncements that have no basis in fact. Your position is, if he can play one minute he can play 48, and that's just not based in reality. It's analogous to saying if an infant can crawl he can play soccer, or if a first grader can add 10+10 he can do astrophysics. It's just nonsense.

No what he is saying is if he has no physical restrictions that he should replace Jefferies in the starting line up to help improve the team. He's the 6th pick in the draft and played 4 years of pro ball already. Most high draft picks start because 25 win teams need the talent in the line up immediately. Why would you even care if someone else says start him? If he plays 25 minutes off the bench or starts--he's still playing 25 minutes. The scouting report from the KNicks is he is a superstar type talent--so as a sht team--what exactly would we be waiting for?
If he honestly is that talented--why wouldnt anyone want to repalce Jefferies with him? I think we need to remove Jefferies from the rotation--I want to give Gallo the same opportunity Brook Lopez and Ryan Andersen have had. Lets see what he has. Is it that hard to get it?
The only reason I can think of why someone would say this guy cant start is because they don't think he can handle tier 1 NBA competition and needs to go against second line type players. And then we will use the word will bring him along slowly or he's hurt or anything else that can mask the issue. Let him start for 10-15 games--if it doesnt work out then move him to the bench again and start over.

Briggs, what isn't hard to get is that your position is based on your need to prove you are a better talent evaluator than anyone with the Knicks. Gallo is just your vehicle of the day and you'd gladly see them run his back into the ground if it would make your point.

I'm not here to say I think Gallo will be great, or better than anyone else. I just don't see the point in doing an Allan Houston job on him. How many years have we complained about management rushing back players, against better judgment, for futile attempts at playoff runs when we're better served placing in the lottery, or to placate the petty needs of childishly impatient fans.

If he wasn't able to play back to back games when he came back, could it be possible that what you were saying about management rushing back players, is still happening?

It's possible, by why jump to that conclusion - aren't we some weeks after-the-fact now? Isn't it equally possible, if not more plausible, that he's simply on a sensible recovery schedule?

Posted by BlueSeats:

Posted by islesfan:

Posted by BlueSeats:

Posted by BRIGGS:

Posted by BlueSeats:

Posted by Vmart:

Posted by BlueSeats:

Posted by Vmart:

If he can play back-back games then he can start. I don't want to see Jefferies and Q anymore than 5 minutes each.

Your feelings about Q and JJ are irrelevant to how Gallo's injury should be handled. The kid's long term health is far more important than your viewing pleasure.

How they handle the Kid? If you are afraid he will get hurt then he can get hurt at any moment in the game. If you want to develop him slowly so you can see Q and Jefferies is your viewing pleasure and frankly I wish not to see how you see it. The Kid needs minutes winning be damned. There is no more injury its over with now its time for him to rack up minutes in vital time of the game. This has nothing to do with his back that is a situation of the past. If he is hurt then he should not be out there. That means the Knicks are not concerned with his long term out look.

You're just making pronouncements that have no basis in fact. Your position is, if he can play one minute he can play 48, and that's just not based in reality. It's analogous to saying if an infant can crawl he can play soccer, or if a first grader can add 10+10 he can do astrophysics. It's just nonsense.

No what he is saying is if he has no physical restrictions that he should replace Jefferies in the starting line up to help improve the team. He's the 6th pick in the draft and played 4 years of pro ball already. Most high draft picks start because 25 win teams need the talent in the line up immediately. Why would you even care if someone else says start him? If he plays 25 minutes off the bench or starts--he's still playing 25 minutes. The scouting report from the KNicks is he is a superstar type talent--so as a sht team--what exactly would we be waiting for?
If he honestly is that talented--why wouldnt anyone want to repalce Jefferies with him? I think we need to remove Jefferies from the rotation--I want to give Gallo the same opportunity Brook Lopez and Ryan Andersen have had. Lets see what he has. Is it that hard to get it?
The only reason I can think of why someone would say this guy cant start is because they don't think he can handle tier 1 NBA competition and needs to go against second line type players. And then we will use the word will bring him along slowly or he's hurt or anything else that can mask the issue. Let him start for 10-15 games--if it doesnt work out then move him to the bench again and start over.

Briggs, what isn't hard to get is that your position is based on your need to prove you are a better talent evaluator than anyone with the Knicks. Gallo is just your vehicle of the day and you'd gladly see them run his back into the ground if it would make your point.

I'm not here to say I think Gallo will be great, or better than anyone else. I just don't see the point in doing an Allan Houston job on him. How many years have we complained about management rushing back players, against better judgment, for futile attempts at playoff runs when we're better served placing in the lottery, or to placate the petty needs of childishly impatient fans.

If he wasn't able to play back to back games when he came back, could it be possible that what you were saying about management rushing back players, is still happening?

It's possible, by why jump to that conclusion - aren't we some weeks after-the-fact now? Isn't it equally possible, if not more plausible, that he's simply on a sensible recovery schedule?

I'm not. As soon as he came back, I took that as a declaration by the Knicks that Gallianri was 100% and the back wasn't an issue any longer. If his back acts up again the only conclusion that can be made is that his back injury is a chronic condition and will be a factor the rest of his career. And I'm certainly not going to use his back as an excuse for anything that happens after he came back. The sensible recovery took place while he was out, not while he's playing NBA games.

Posted by BlueSeats:

Posted by Pharzeone:

There are these internet annoying rumors are that the Knicks are trying to manage his playing time for his back and his psyche. Playing against bench guys. Not unusual with 1st year guys and normally done for European players going into the league. I think he is game to play against starting lineups, so I don't see the big deal. As far as his injury, I haven't heard anything but positives in that regard. If he is playing back to back games, I assuming that the disc has subsided and isn't a major problem. Don't know what the overly protective atttitude is all about. This organization already asked Lee to play with bone spurs while contemplating paying him $8-9 million a year. I think it is safe to say they aren't concern about long term investments as far as their players health. For pete's sake this organization asked their players to play extended minutes as they made trades and sat players for discpline reasons. That cat is out of the bag.

Jeffries does a little of everything but nothing well. I am not sure where you would use him but it shouldn't be in the starting lineup.

What is the recovery rate of bone spurs vs bad backs?

Lots of players get bone spurs healed with a simple off-season clean-out while many careers are derailed by bad backs.

Where do you guys draw the mine? Do you believe in rushing players back after microfracture surgery too? You really have to ask yourself, what is the point?

[Edited by - blueseats on 02-08-2009 1:10 PM]

Posted by Pharzeone:

Posted by BlueSeats:

Posted by Pharzeone:

There are these internet annoying rumors are that the Knicks are trying to manage his playing time for his back and his psyche. Playing against bench guys. Not unusual with 1st year guys and normally done for European players going into the league. I think he is game to play against starting lineups, so I don't see the big deal. As far as his injury, I haven't heard anything but positives in that regard. If he is playing back to back games, I assuming that the disc has subsided and isn't a major problem. Don't know what the overly protective atttitude is all about. This organization already asked Lee to play with bone spurs while contemplating paying him $8-9 million a year. I think it is safe to say they aren't concern about long term investments as far as their players health. For pete's sake this organization asked their players to play extended minutes as they made trades and sat players for discpline reasons. That cat is out of the bag.

Jeffries does a little of everything but nothing well. I am not sure where you would use him but it shouldn't be in the starting lineup.

What is the recovery rate of bone spurs vs bad backs?

Lots of players get bone spurs healed with a simple off-season clean-out while many careers are derailed by bad backs.

Where do you guys draw the mine? Do you believe in rushing players back after microfracture surgery too? You really have to ask yourself, what is the point?

[Edited by - blueseats on 02-08-2009 1:10 PM]

Lee got his bone spurs at the beginning of the season and was asked to play more minutes once returned to the starting lineup. The bone spurs impact nerves if a person continues to do physical strenuous activities. I considered playing 35 minutes of basketball in a running system, strenuous. The head coach said he doesn't believe in fatigue, so as I say it is ridiculous to conclude that the organization is one that is overly concern about their players health. So far under this new regime from my viewpoint, the coach plays who he wants if they are active and cleared to play whether it be Lee with bone spurs, Chandler with a sprained knee, Harrington with a sprain leg, Duhon with his multiple injuries so far this season, Nate the same and even Jeffries who was hurried back and given minutes on back to back games. Hell the NBA denied a medical exception for the Knicks because basically they said the organization knew and acquired a guy with an exisiting heart condition. So as I said this is not a cautious organization when concerning health.

Posted by BasketballJones:

Where do you guys draw the mine? Do you believe in rushing players back after microfracture surgery too? You really have to ask yourself, what is the point?

I believe in putting injured players back on the court as soon as they can hobble.

can people with stiff legs hobble?

Posted by newyorknewyork:

Posted by Vmart:

Posted by newyorknewyork:

Let MDA do his job. When he feels Gallo is ready to start he will start him.

MDA has already proven himself to be a great coach.

I like the job MDA is doing but its time for him to get real about Jefferies and Q. He should know by now that they are terrible and shouldn't see the light of day. There are 5 players on the Knicks that are currently shooting less than 40% from the floor. Jefferies and Q are down right horrible.

Why Gallinari though why not Nate over Q? Why not Chandler over Jefferies? Why not Tim Thomas over Jefferies? He is shooting 46% this season.

Nate is needed to come off the bench to provide minutes for Duhon. Chandler needs to start no doubt about it in my mind. Tim Thomas can continue to come off the bench to provide backup minutes to Lee, Harrington and at times Chandler. Q needs to come off the bench to provide minutes to Gallo and Chandler. You do this because it tells Gallo and Chandler that this team is being built around your talents and those two need to get it going for the future well being of the Knicks organization. Their development is more important than Q and Jefferies to the organization at this moment in time.


Development of Gallo and Chandler is the future of the Knicks and should take precedence over all. Gallo is the 6th overall pick its not like the Knicks are good team right now he should get the minutes and should be starting since he is the teams best outside shooter.