playa2 wrote:Why we are judging offensive potential for (gallo-Hill) against a team(GS) that plays recreation league defense is laughable. Golden State gives up a league leading 117 pts per game and the knicks only scored 107. Anybody who's trying could look good playing against them.

I guess we must continue to watch when the knicks plays the better defensive teams in the league who limits what you do best.

Playa, I agree with you - to a point. Judging a player by his numbers against Golden State, or in D'Antoni's offense for that matter does not give the real picture. That is why David Lee and Robinson got no offers this past summer. But these guys need a ray of sunshine so they will take it wherever it comes from.

However, the jury is still out on Gallinari and Hill. The only thing we know for sure is that in the last 2 drafts there were other pro-ready players at obvious positions of need ready to be picked who have already been and are almost certainly going to be better than they.

oohah

i'ma address this thread to the guys who can actually turn an objective eye & see some promise in the kids we drafted whether they wanted to draft them or not, cuz the rest of u guys just refuse to see anything positive in anything these kids do, it's pretty obvious.

i agree on the points that they should be going to Gallo more in the 4th quarter... i think a big problem there was Al Harrington forcing up shots on his own down the stretch in the post... he says he wants to be a leader & for his part i believe he is being sincere in his desire to be one, but his penchant to force up shots is hurting this team... he's our best low post scorer but he's gotta know that he's not the only guy who can score on this team, & he needs to learn how to trust his teammates more.

i think w/the continued growth of guys like Gallo & Hill, i no longer want the Knicks to re-sign David Lee, especially if we're gonna go after someone like Chris Bosh in free agency... he is way too much of a liability on defense, we need someone who can play on both sides of the ball & both Gallo & Hill have shown at least a desire to do so, something Lee has never done during his NBA career... the way he "plays" defense is a joke... we really should have traded Lee & Nate last year before the deadline like i said.

NineMike2Whiskey wrote:

TMS wrote:yeah, the jury's still out on Gallo & Hill, except that we whiffed on both picks & shoulda taken guys like Jeff Teague & Ty Lawson instead right? OK.

i'ma address this thread to the guys who can actually turn an objective eye & see some promise in the kids we drafted whether they wanted to draft them or not, cuz the rest of u guys just refuse to see anything positive in anything these kids do, it's pretty obvious.

i agree on the points that they should be going to Gallo more in the 4th quarter... i think a big problem there was Al Harrington forcing up shots on his own down the stretch in the post... he says he wants to be a leader & for his part i believe he is being sincere in his desire to be one, but his penchant to force up shots is hurting this team... he's our best low post scorer but he's gotta know that he's not the only guy who can score on this team, & he needs to learn how to trust his teammates more.

i think w/the continued growth of guys like Gallo & Hill, i no longer want the Knicks to re-sign David Lee, especially if we're gonna go after someone like Chris Bosh in free agency... he is way too much of a liability on defense, we need someone who can play on both sides of the ball & both Gallo & Hill have shown at least a desire to do so, something Lee has never done during his NBA career... the way he "plays" defense is a joke... we really should have traded Lee & Nate last year before the deadline like i said.

I agree with you about Gallo, kids got talent and his offensive game is so diverse we should run more plays through him. I like that brief cameo he showed of a Dirk-like post game against the warriors. Also his vision and range of passing is pretty good, really we should look to have him involved more.

He's about average on defense though, he's got solid fundamentals but tends to get killed by faster players out on the wing, but he makes it up with his fair share of blocks so i guess it evens out.

He has extremely quick hands on D, and when he gets stronger, he will give most PFs hell when he is guarding them.

I would like to see him playing at PF a little bit by the end of the year. He will create a lot of match-up problems at that position, and his quickness and good positional play should allow him to compensate for his lack of strength at this point.

Some people hate when he is compared to Dirk, but he is the kind of player Gallo should be looking to become.

Paladin55 wrote:

McK1 wrote:maybe they wanna protect gallo's back so they are not having him guard 4's. however he can't guard the 3 either and I'm sure other teams will emulate how GS just totally destroyed the zone.

Hard for me to respond to this, since it would seem you are not actually watching him play, except noticing the times he is beat. The exception never make the rule, my friend.

And the team plays a zone because we have nobody in the middle regulating. I really don't think MDA wants to play it. You play the odds with the zone, hoping that your opponent will not shoot like GS did the other night.

MDA is coming to the realization that guys like Duhon, Lee, and Harrington, who should be the leaders on this team and showing the kids how to play the game through their examples, are not doing their respective jobs.

Hill showed more aggressiveness on D in his few minutes than Lee has shown the entire year.

He is also in a situation where he may feel that he cannot simply bench all his vets, because he risks losing the things they can give the team at this point, and he will also kill any trade value they might have.

Tough times... tough times.

It's clear that Hill should eventually be more of what we're looking for. He's got so much to learn tho and he's got to get MUCH stronger. But I like his energy and his jumper is pure. When we actually get a running PG that will push the tempo consistently and make the right pass, Hill is gonna be throwin down a lot of fastbreak dunks.

Gallo has the goods mentally. I also noticed that his release is quicker now. He's finally adjusting to the speed of the game and I don't think anyone is gonna be able to stop him once he gets stronger. So to me we have two solid young bigs for the future. I don't care about some 6-5 guy with blinding speed getting by Gallo every so often. He more than holds his own when he can keep his spacing. A lot of times he gets caught being too close and that's how they get by him. Overall he actually does a very good job keeping guys in front of him.

TD got a bit more into the passing game, which was good to see. He needs to play in a unit with Gallo and Hill more often so they can get their timing down on pick and roll plays. There's no reason Hill shouldn't be getting 3 alleyoops a game. The same goes for Chandler. I haven't given up on Chan yet. He just needs better PG play so he doesn't have to make the most out of already poorly executed plays.

rp wrote:As season goes, I just hope Hill, Galo and TD get a lot more minutes. They are smarter players and skilled compare to Zeke's draft picks...

Even if we keep losing, if we can get our young guys to shine it might still be enough to convince FA's that we've got some good core players to build with. In Cleveland do they have a young guy with the promise of Gallo? I think mostly they've got a lot of OK guys and we could easily add that level of player to the roster next year. In addition to Hill, TD and Chan I think that's a nice group. Also we still haven't seen what Curry might be able to do. If somehow Curry really showed something that would only help to make the other kids shine by taking some of the pressure off. Remember Curry shoots a high % and for every shot he takes that's one less that Duhon and Al don't get to take. That can only help.

nixluva wrote:
They should be, considering where they were picked. Aside from TD who fell more due to being considered a short SG, both Hill and Gallo are legit lottery prospects.

what do you see us getting from from hill at 8 that the bulls aren't going to get from taj gibson at 16.

Paladin55 wrote:
What??!! Question their unchangeable belief that Gallinari and Hill were the worst picks in the history of the franchise?! Aren't you asking a little too much of some people?

I'll give you any combination of the three picks after Gallo and the three picks after Hill... would we be worse off with any of those combinations? That's why people are upset.

JohnWallace44 wrote:

Paladin55 wrote:
What??!! Question their unchangeable belief that Gallinari and Hill were the worst picks in the history of the franchise?! Aren't you asking a little too much of some people?

I'll give you any combination of the three picks after Gallo and the three picks after Hill... would we be worse off with any of those combinations? That's why people are upset.

Gallo has a greater upside than Gordon. I will admit that Jennings is looking to be a much better choice for us than Hill, especially since MDA needs a PG. Douglas' development may cause you to rethink things, especially if Hill comes around.

Please see my previous post.

A lot of you guys continue to think that what seems to the case now, may not be so in the future.

Lopez may have been the only pick that may have changed our situation, but he has not been able to turn things around with the Nets, and may have his limitations, also.

TMS wrote:

McK1 wrote:

nixluva wrote:
They should be, considering where they were picked. Aside from TD who fell more due to being considered a short SG, both Hill and Gallo are legit lottery prospects.

what do you see us getting from from hill at 8 that the bulls aren't going to get from taj gibson at 16.

Jordan Hill has a better jumpshot for starters... Taj Gibson is a nice role player, plays tough defense & blocks shots, but that's pretty much all he is... Hill has the talent to be much more... he can be a scorer in the low post, he's already got a developed turn around J that he uses effectively which is tough to guard, & can stretch a defense w/his perimeter shooting ability... once he gets a handle on his footwork & on where he needs to be on the floor on defense, he can be a nice 2-way player for this team... i'm telling u this based on games i've watched him play in the NBA as well as all last year in college... i'd be highly shocked if all Jordan Hill ever became was a role player a-la Taj Gibson.

hill's turnaround was tough to guard when he wss shooting over 6'7 centers in college. we saw in the sl's he had alot of trouble getting that shot off over people his height. he gets no lift off the ground when performing that move nor does he get alot of extension on the shot. with no big man coach to help him here, I don't see that minus turning into a plus.

watching him on the bulls, taj gibson's straight away shot is as good as hill's. playing pick n pop thats the shot he'll see most anyway.

Paladin55 wrote:

McK1 wrote:

nixluva wrote:
They should be, considering where they were picked. Aside from TD who fell more due to being considered a short SG, both Hill and Gallo are legit lottery prospects.

what do you see us getting from from hill at 8 that the bulls aren't going to get from taj gibson at 16.

Hill has a greater upside, IMO, especially as a potential center with a good outside shot and some shot blocking ability. I liked Gibson, but at 24 1/2, I am not sure he will get much better than he is at this time.

I was not someone who wanted to take Hill in the draft, but I am not blind to his potential.

You are also making a comparison based on a very limited number of games for both of them, especially Hill.

Do you feel comfortable predicting how a career will turn out based on the 35 minutes Hill has played so far? I would admit that given what I've seen of the people we could have drafted, Jennings would have been the best choice for this team, but even with him, it is too early to tell where he will eventually end up.

Take 2 years and see where Hill is before comparing him to any other player in this draft. You should do the same thing with the Gallo draft. Some of the guys picking ahead of Gallo are looking shakier (Some injuries, yes- but if you go after an injured Gallo you have to do the same with others in his class). Rose and Mayo have not been better this year. Love is a nice player, but has limitations at PF, and Beasley can never be trusted over the long haul. Augustine is good, but not the PG I expected him to be, Randolph still has issues, despite his great ability, and Alexander is a true bust at this time. Need I go on. Westbrook is improving, but still can't shoot, and averages over 4 turnovers a game. Gordon and Lopez are solid, and Thompson is looking better and better, but none of them are so ahead of Gallinari that he can't overtake them as a player at some point in his career.

(I would love to see some of the posts you were making about Gallinari last year. He has come a long way after playing only 40 regular season games and having back surgery earlier this year. More difficult to look for things to criticize, but you continue to try, even though the guy is not even 50+% of the player he will probably become someday, and he just turned 21.)

We still may end up with 3 of the best picks from the last 2 drafts. You don't know how things will shake out.

look them up. I was ho hum about the pick (wanted westbrook, mayo, or speights) but the only thing i've ever questioned was the bad back issue.

don't believe a junior big out of college taken 8th should need that long to show he is a pro 4.