Posted by McK1:

how about using gallo to get our lottery pick back

Gallinari Jeffries Mobley for KnickKiller Kerilinko and our first.

give ourselves the chance to draft Wall

nike hoops summit highlights


on a side note:
i really can't see rubio matching up with guys like Wall and Jennings on the perimeter.


[Edited by - McK1 on 07-06-2009 3:14 PM]

Posted by TMS:

Posted by McK1:

how about using gallo to get our lottery pick back

Gallinari Jeffries Mobley for KnickKiller Kerilinko and our first.

give ourselves the chance to draft Wall

nike hoops summit highlights


on a side note:
i really can't see rubio matching up with guys like Wall and Jennings on the perimeter.


[Edited by - McK1 on 07-06-2009 3:14 PM]

i don't think we're gonna be bad enough to land the #1 overall pick in next year's draft lottery... probably a late lottery pick at worst, playoffs at best.

Posted by McK1:

why are we so eager to move our young sf who has proven he can be a consistent scoring threat while doubling as the teams best wing and post defender instead of the rooster who along with maybe having Bird's outside shot also has Bird's back circa 91?

Posted by Pharzeone:

MCK1, that's a good question because I asked it several times as well as other non-Knick fans that I talked to and read on their blogs. I am of the belief that Walsh is trying to protect himself and protect his last year pick as was speculated on Sporting News radio. Like I said Conlangelo is higher on Gallinari than Chandler, so why no Bosh for Gallinari cries? Why haven't I heard Gallinari, Lee and Hill (two lottery picks) for Rubio as the Star Tribune suggest that will be the starting point for Rubio from the NY media? The T-Wolves already turned down Chandler and the #8 for the 5th pick, so I can only assume they aren't interested in just Chandler and Hill for Rubio so why the continue trade scenarios that just involve Chandler, Lee and Hill? This notion that Gallinari is not involve in trade talks because back injury reduce his trade value is ridiculous. Greg Oden was out the entire season on crutches and still had great trade value. A #6 pick doesn't lose trade value after one season if they really had trade value to begin with.

From Jerry Zgoda/Star Tribune:
* The Wolves did turn down that Knicks’ offer of No. 8 and Wilson Chandler for the No. 5, which Donnie Walsh would have used to take Rubio and not Stephen Curry. The Knicks would need to package a deal that includes future pick/s and from the names of Wilson Chandler, Danilo Gallinari, David Lee, Nate Robinson and first round pick Jordan Hill.

sounds like Khan is trying to take the old man for everything including his office recliner and sleep number pillow

great point on Oden. Gallo is in the same "potential" boat

[Edited by - McK1 on 07-06-2009 3:43 PM]

Posted by McK1:

Posted by TMS:



i don't think we're gonna be bad enough to land the #1 overall pick in next year's draft lottery... probably a late lottery pick at worst, playoffs at best.

we loss 50 in an East that only had 3 teams. As it stands there are now 5 teams in the East with a shot at winning 50 games. Cle, Bos, Orl, Was (if Arenas is healthy), Atl (results may be much better with a team smart enough to use Craw as the 3rd guard instead of a 40 minute starting 2). Philly gets Brand back and re-signs or ably replaces Miller and you can add them to the list.

this team will win at least 35 games next year IMO... probably end up w/a #10 pick or around there.

Posted by TMS:

Posted by McK1:

Posted by TMS:



i don't think we're gonna be bad enough to land the #1 overall pick in next year's draft lottery... probably a late lottery pick at worst, playoffs at best.

we loss 50 in an East that only had 3 teams. As it stands there are now 5 teams in the East with a shot at winning 50 games. Cle, Bos, Orl, Was (if Arenas is healthy), Atl (results may be much better with a team smart enough to use Craw as the 3rd guard instead of a 40 minute starting 2). Philly gets Brand back and re-signs or ably replaces Miller and you can add them to the list.

this team will win at least 35 games next year IMO... probably end up w/a #10 pick or around there.

how low was Chi when they got Rose?

Posted by TMS:

Posted by McK1:

Posted by TMS:

Posted by McK1:

Posted by TMS:



i don't think we're gonna be bad enough to land the #1 overall pick in next year's draft lottery... probably a late lottery pick at worst, playoffs at best.

we loss 50 in an East that only had 3 teams. As it stands there are now 5 teams in the East with a shot at winning 50 games. Cle, Bos, Orl, Was (if Arenas is healthy), Atl (results may be much better with a team smart enough to use Craw as the 3rd guard instead of a 40 minute starting 2). Philly gets Brand back and re-signs or ably replaces Miller and you can add them to the list.

this team will win at least 35 games next year IMO... probably end up w/a #10 pick or around there.

how low was Chi when they got Rose?

so we're gonna trade away our #6 pick from last year on the slimmest of hopes that we can somehow land the #1 pick in the lottery this coming season? not smart if u ask me.

even if Gallo landed us AK47 and a top 10 in next years loaded draft.

Posted by Bippity10:

Posted by Pharzeone:

MCK1, that's a good question because I asked it several times as well as other non-Knick fans that I talked to and read on their blogs. I am of the belief that Walsh is trying to protect himself and protect his last year pick as was speculated on Sporting News radio. Like I said Conlangelo is higher on Gallinari than Chandler, so why no Bosh for Gallinari cries? Why haven't I heard Gallinari, Lee and Hill (two lottery picks) for Rubio as the Star Tribune suggest that will be the starting point for Rubio from the NY media? The T-Wolves already turned down Chandler and the #8 for the 5th pick, so I can only assume they aren't interested in just Chandler and Hill for Rubio so why the continue trade scenarios that just involve Chandler, Lee and Hill? This notion that Gallinari is not involve in trade talks because back injury reduce his trade value is ridiculous. Greg Oden was out the entire season on crutches and still had great trade value. A #6 pick doesn't lose trade value after one season if they really had trade value to begin with.

From Jerry Zgoda/Star Tribune:
* The Wolves did turn down that Knicks’ offer of No. 8 and Wilson Chandler for the No. 5, which Donnie Walsh would have used to take Rubio and not Stephen Curry. The Knicks would need to package a deal that includes future pick/s and from the names of Wilson Chandler, Danilo Gallinari, David Lee, Nate Robinson and first round pick Jordan Hill.

If Colangelo is higher on Gallo then Chandler is it possible that Walsh and the rest of the Knick staff is higher on him than Chandler as well and aren't ready to trade him?I think the answer would be limited to Walsh, since he was the only management personnel that spoke highly about him to my knowledge. They had close door workouts for him and much of Walsh's top management staff were either brought in after Gallinari was selected with the exception of Grunwald who was high on Chandler back in the 07 draft. As I recall Kevin Wilson liked him but Walsh sent Isiah over there to get a look at him but Thomas also said he would have taken Gordon over him. D'Antoni took himself out of the equation on draft night with his comments, I know he said he can be a very good player but he said the same thing about Chandler. As of April, D'Antoni said Chandler was the Knick he was most impressed with this past season.

Is it possible that Walsh is more than willing to trade him but wants to wait until he can showcase him and get full value? No, what is full value? That's why I pointed out Oden. The Blazers were still fielding trade offers with the guy on crutches. The GS Warriors were fielding offers for Anthony Randolph who wasn't getting playing time.

Is it possible that they want to see Gallo play before making a trade/keep because they saw potential? If potential is there it wouldn't matter if he plays for your team or not. That's why teams scout prior to the draft. That's why Oden and Randolph still had interest without playing time.

Is it possible that they have tried to trade him but you just haven't heard about it? Possible but unlikely.

Is it possible that the papers aren't reporting all or the correct trade scenarios? Possible.

Is it possible that Walsh is trying to protect himself and protect his last year pick as was speculated on Sporting News radio? Very much possible IMO.


They all seem possible. They are all guesses and speculation. Why get all worked up about one particular one when we have no idea what is the case. Keep an open mind, it prevents lots of unnecessary heartache

Posted by Pharzeone:

Posted by Bippity10:

Posted by Pharzeone:

MCK1, that's a good question because I asked it several times as well as other non-Knick fans that I talked to and read on their blogs. I am of the belief that Walsh is trying to protect himself and protect his last year pick as was speculated on Sporting News radio. Like I said Conlangelo is higher on Gallinari than Chandler, so why no Bosh for Gallinari cries? Why haven't I heard Gallinari, Lee and Hill (two lottery picks) for Rubio as the Star Tribune suggest that will be the starting point for Rubio from the NY media? The T-Wolves already turned down Chandler and the #8 for the 5th pick, so I can only assume they aren't interested in just Chandler and Hill for Rubio so why the continue trade scenarios that just involve Chandler, Lee and Hill? This notion that Gallinari is not involve in trade talks because back injury reduce his trade value is ridiculous. Greg Oden was out the entire season on crutches and still had great trade value. A #6 pick doesn't lose trade value after one season if they really had trade value to begin with.

From Jerry Zgoda/Star Tribune:
* The Wolves did turn down that Knicks’ offer of No. 8 and Wilson Chandler for the No. 5, which Donnie Walsh would have used to take Rubio and not Stephen Curry. The Knicks would need to package a deal that includes future pick/s and from the names of Wilson Chandler, Danilo Gallinari, David Lee, Nate Robinson and first round pick Jordan Hill.

If Colangelo is higher on Gallo then Chandler is it possible that Walsh and the rest of the Knick staff is higher on him than Chandler as well and aren't ready to trade him?I think the answer would be limited to Walsh, since he was the only management personnel that spoke highly about him to my knowledge. They had close door workouts for him and much of Walsh's top management staff were either brought in after Gallinari was selected with the exception of Grunwald who was high on Chandler back in the 07 draft. As I recall Kevin Wilson liked him but Walsh sent Isiah over there to get a look at him but Thomas also said he would have taken Gordon over him. D'Antoni took himself out of the equation on draft night with his comments, I know he said he can be a very good player but he said the same thing about Chandler. As of April, D'Antoni said Chandler was the Knick he was most impressed with this past season.

Is it possible that Walsh is more than willing to trade him but wants to wait until he can showcase him and get full value? No, what is full value? That's why I pointed out Oden. The Blazers were still fielding trade offers with the guy on crutches. The GS Warriors were fielding offers for Anthony Randolph who wasn't getting playing time.

Is it possible that they want to see Gallo play before making a trade/keep because they saw potential? If potential is there it wouldn't matter if he plays for your team or not. That's why teams scout prior to the draft. That's why Oden and Randolph still had interest without playing time.

Is it possible that they have tried to trade him but you just haven't heard about it? Possible but unlikely.

Is it possible that the papers aren't reporting all or the correct trade scenarios? Possible.

Is it possible that Walsh is trying to protect himself and protect his last year pick as was speculated on Sporting News radio? Very much possible IMO.


They all seem possible. They are all guesses and speculation. Why get all worked up about one particular one when we have no idea what is the case. Keep an open mind, it prevents lots of unnecessary heartache

1.) You answered question number one with more speculation.

2.) Full value is in the eye of the asset holder. Does it really matter if offers were still going out for Oden and Randolph? What does that have to do with Gallinari. If no one offers anything for him doesn't that just prove the point that he has no value and that people want to see him play first? If you aren't high on him at this point why would someone else be? So from that point of view, why not hold on to him and see what we have? What would be the rush?

3.) So what you see in scouting is what you get? From a 19 year old? No way that they saw enough in the guy that they want to see more before fielding any trade offers?

4.) You're kidding right? I used to do business to business sales in Jersey. I once walked into the office of Keith Glass. I waited in his waiting room while he was on the phone with some GM. I heard him in 1/2 hour discuss 5 or 6 trade scenarios that never made the paper. Do you really believe the papers and their "sources" that much? come on.

5.) Of course it's possible.

6.) Of course it's possible. I give it equal weight to all of these because I don't have an agenda. I'll throw another one out there for you. Right or wrong, maybe they think he is going to be f'in good and don't want to trade him. Why does it always have to be some conspiracy?

[Edited by - bippity10 on 06-07-2009 5:30 PM]