JrZyHuStLa wrote:

fishmike wrote:of the guys we gave up, Felton, Gallo, Chandler and Mosgov Fields has the LEAST talent. He plays hard and he's smart. Lets not mistake that with a superstar talent. Fields is a very average defender, has a hard time keeping his man in front of his and shown no ability to create his own shot. He plays really hard, has shot the ball pretty good and makes some nice passes. The best part of our young roster is playing in Denver.

I disagree. We kept the player with the best basketball instincts. Unlike Gallo and Chandler, Fields does not need the ball to have an impact on the game. You need a guy who focuses on intangibles while Stat and Melo will be responsible for carrying the offensive load.

Although I agree with you JrzyHustla, Fishmike is right...out of the four he was the least talented. What fields does, that no one else seems to do, is that he crashes the boards from the weak side a lot. which is great, but he cant defend 4 positions like Chandler can and he cant shoot the rock like Gallo. Both things that we need right now.

I was all for keeping Fields and HOPEFULLY keeping Gallo from the Melo trade but its evident that a Wilson Chandler type player is what the Knicks need right now. He was the most complete player out of the four, and like Fields, did not need the ball to be effective.

SlimChin wrote:

JrZyHuStLa wrote:

orangeblobman wrote:

JrZyHuStLa wrote:

fishmike wrote:of the guys we gave up, Felton, Gallo, Chandler and Mosgov Fields has the LEAST talent. He plays hard and he's smart. Lets not mistake that with a superstar talent. Fields is a very average defender, has a hard time keeping his man in front of his and shown no ability to create his own shot. He plays really hard, has shot the ball pretty good and makes some nice passes. The best part of our young roster is playing in Denver.

I disagree. We kept the player with the best basketball instincts. Unlike Gallo and Chandler, Fields does not need the ball to have an impact on the game. You need a guy who focuses on intangibles while Stat and Melo will be responsible for carrying the offensive load.

Gallo, even when he didn't have the ball, he balled hard on D and made it tough for the other team. We saw this in his first game for Denver. The guy has the best basketball instincts in the league, or close to it. So don't tell me Fields has better instincts.

Gallo was a decent defender, he was far from great. He'll never be all nba defensive team material, so I think your post has limited validity to it. And he really hurted the team with some of his awful shooting nights. Gallo was asked to do too much in NY, and was struggling. Im so glad we kept Fields over this guy. Hes going to learn a lot of good things from Chauncey that won't show up in the box score. The last thing a Dantoni team with 2 of the top 5 scorers needed was a chucker like Gallo.

+1

the hypnotic spell that Gallo has on some of the grown men on this forum amazes me.

The visceral aversion some folks have to him, and underrating him as a player is even more amazing. The chucker comment just points to ignorance.

I love Fields, and you can even say he is a better fit on this team because of the postion he plays, but he is well below Gallo in talent level, and in a couple of years some of you guys are going to be crying for him to be here again.

You can probably ask any GM in the NBA, and they will tell you that they'd take Gallinari over Fields if starting a team from scratch. Honestly, guys... it is not even that close.

Ultimate success for a player is determined by talent, system played in, circumstances, and surrounding teammates. Gallo may be in a better situation now, and I expect that his numbers will improve substantially over the next few years, as will his value.

Time will tell, as will the silence of some around here when the Rooster finally roars.

Marv wrote:

Paladin55 wrote:

SlimChin wrote:

JrZyHuStLa wrote:

orangeblobman wrote:

JrZyHuStLa wrote:

fishmike wrote:of the guys we gave up, Felton, Gallo, Chandler and Mosgov Fields has the LEAST talent. He plays hard and he's smart. Lets not mistake that with a superstar talent. Fields is a very average defender, has a hard time keeping his man in front of his and shown no ability to create his own shot. He plays really hard, has shot the ball pretty good and makes some nice passes. The best part of our young roster is playing in Denver.

I disagree. We kept the player with the best basketball instincts. Unlike Gallo and Chandler, Fields does not need the ball to have an impact on the game. You need a guy who focuses on intangibles while Stat and Melo will be responsible for carrying the offensive load.

Gallo, even when he didn't have the ball, he balled hard on D and made it tough for the other team. We saw this in his first game for Denver. The guy has the best basketball instincts in the league, or close to it. So don't tell me Fields has better instincts.

Gallo was a decent defender, he was far from great. He'll never be all nba defensive team material, so I think your post has limited validity to it. And he really hurted the team with some of his awful shooting nights. Gallo was asked to do too much in NY, and was struggling. Im so glad we kept Fields over this guy. Hes going to learn a lot of good things from Chauncey that won't show up in the box score. The last thing a Dantoni team with 2 of the top 5 scorers needed was a chucker like Gallo.

+1

the hypnotic spell that Gallo has on some of the grown men on this forum amazes me.

The visceral aversion some folks have to him, and underrating him as a player is even more amazing. The chucker comment just points to ignorance.

I love Fields, and you can even say he is a better fit on this team because of the postion he plays, but he is well below Gallo in talent level, and in a couple of years some of you guys are going to be crying for him to be here again.

You can probably ask any GM in the NBA, and they will tell you that they'd take Gallinari over Fields if starting a team from scratch. Honestly, guys... it is not even that close.

Ultimate success for a player is determined by talent, system played in, circumstances, and surrounding teammates. Gallo may be in a better situation now, and I expect that his numbers will improve substantially over the next few years, as will his value.

Time will tell, as will the silence of some around here when the Rooster finally roars.

see that guys? you've gotten paladin so upset that he's forgotten his animal sounds.

So I'm getting called out for my intentional mixed metaphor?

...What the heck.

SlimChin wrote:

Paladin55 wrote:

SlimChin wrote:

JrZyHuStLa wrote:

orangeblobman wrote:

JrZyHuStLa wrote:

fishmike wrote:of the guys we gave up, Felton, Gallo, Chandler and Mosgov Fields has the LEAST talent. He plays hard and he's smart. Lets not mistake that with a superstar talent. Fields is a very average defender, has a hard time keeping his man in front of his and shown no ability to create his own shot. He plays really hard, has shot the ball pretty good and makes some nice passes. The best part of our young roster is playing in Denver.

I disagree. We kept the player with the best basketball instincts. Unlike Gallo and Chandler, Fields does not need the ball to have an impact on the game. You need a guy who focuses on intangibles while Stat and Melo will be responsible for carrying the offensive load.

Gallo, even when he didn't have the ball, he balled hard on D and made it tough for the other team. We saw this in his first game for Denver. The guy has the best basketball instincts in the league, or close to it. So don't tell me Fields has better instincts.

Gallo was a decent defender, he was far from great. He'll never be all nba defensive team material, so I think your post has limited validity to it. And he really hurted the team with some of his awful shooting nights. Gallo was asked to do too much in NY, and was struggling. Im so glad we kept Fields over this guy. Hes going to learn a lot of good things from Chauncey that won't show up in the box score. The last thing a Dantoni team with 2 of the top 5 scorers needed was a chucker like Gallo.

+1

the hypnotic spell that Gallo has on some of the grown men on this forum amazes me.

The visceral aversion some folks have to him, and underrating him as a player is even more amazing. The chucker comment just points to ignorance.

I love Fields, and you can even say he is a better fit on this team because of the postion he plays, but he is well below Gallo in talent level, and in a couple of years some of you guys are going to be crying for him to be here again.

You can probably ask any GM in the NBA, and they will tell you that they'd take Gallinari over Fields if starting a team from scratch. Honestly, guys... it is not even that close.

Ultimate success for a player is determined by talent, system played in, circumstances, and surrounding teammates. Gallo may be in a better situation now, and I expect that his numbers will improve substantially over the next few years, as will his value.

Time will tell, as will the silence of some around here when the Rooster finally roars.

let me emphasize one of my previous posts on this thread that you can't compare Gallo and Fields because you're comparing a first yr player vs one that's been in the league for 3 yrs.

with that said, did Gallo ever get rookie of the month on more than one occasion? was Gallo an all star rookie?

Your hatred of Gallo truly is disheartening. I will ask you the same question I asked iSergio. Is this personal? Did Gallo steal your girl? Just to keep on ragging on Gallo is just weird.

SlimChin wrote:

NYKBocker wrote:

SlimChin wrote:

Paladin55 wrote:

SlimChin wrote:

JrZyHuStLa wrote:

orangeblobman wrote:

JrZyHuStLa wrote:

fishmike wrote:of the guys we gave up, Felton, Gallo, Chandler and Mosgov Fields has the LEAST talent. He plays hard and he's smart. Lets not mistake that with a superstar talent. Fields is a very average defender, has a hard time keeping his man in front of his and shown no ability to create his own shot. He plays really hard, has shot the ball pretty good and makes some nice passes. The best part of our young roster is playing in Denver.

I disagree. We kept the player with the best basketball instincts. Unlike Gallo and Chandler, Fields does not need the ball to have an impact on the game. You need a guy who focuses on intangibles while Stat and Melo will be responsible for carrying the offensive load.

Gallo, even when he didn't have the ball, he balled hard on D and made it tough for the other team. We saw this in his first game for Denver. The guy has the best basketball instincts in the league, or close to it. So don't tell me Fields has better instincts.

Gallo was a decent defender, he was far from great. He'll never be all nba defensive team material, so I think your post has limited validity to it. And he really hurted the team with some of his awful shooting nights. Gallo was asked to do too much in NY, and was struggling. Im so glad we kept Fields over this guy. Hes going to learn a lot of good things from Chauncey that won't show up in the box score. The last thing a Dantoni team with 2 of the top 5 scorers needed was a chucker like Gallo.

+1

the hypnotic spell that Gallo has on some of the grown men on this forum amazes me.

The visceral aversion some folks have to him, and underrating him as a player is even more amazing. The chucker comment just points to ignorance.

I love Fields, and you can even say he is a better fit on this team because of the postion he plays, but he is well below Gallo in talent level, and in a couple of years some of you guys are going to be crying for him to be here again.

You can probably ask any GM in the NBA, and they will tell you that they'd take Gallinari over Fields if starting a team from scratch. Honestly, guys... it is not even that close.

Ultimate success for a player is determined by talent, system played in, circumstances, and surrounding teammates. Gallo may be in a better situation now, and I expect that his numbers will improve substantially over the next few years, as will his value.

Time will tell, as will the silence of some around here when the Rooster finally roars.

let me emphasize one of my previous posts on this thread that you can't compare Gallo and Fields because you're comparing a first yr player vs one that's been in the league for 3 yrs.

with that said, did Gallo ever get rookie of the month on more than one occasion? was Gallo an all star rookie?

Your hatred of Gallo truly is disheartening. I will ask you the same question I asked iSergio. Is this personal? Did Gallo steal your girl? Just to keep on ragging on Gallo is just weird.

you and the others here who put him on a pedestal is just weird.

Why is that weird? We are fans. This is a Knicks forum. Gallo was a homegrown player that was pretty good and even if you hated him you should acknowledge that his talents and potential was good enough to get Melo. SO you should be happy he was here because this resulted in Melo coming here.

misterearl wrote:

AnubisADL wrote:Fields needs to be sent to the bench.

Good call. Let's send one of the hardest working players on the team, who busts his azz on each and every possession, to the bench.

Let's bench Carmelo while we're at it.

Yeah. I don't agree with that either. Without Fields then we don't have anybody rebounding.

SlimChin wrote:

Paladin55 wrote:

SlimChin wrote:

JrZyHuStLa wrote:

orangeblobman wrote:

JrZyHuStLa wrote:

fishmike wrote:of the guys we gave up, Felton, Gallo, Chandler and Mosgov Fields has the LEAST talent. He plays hard and he's smart. Lets not mistake that with a superstar talent. Fields is a very average defender, has a hard time keeping his man in front of his and shown no ability to create his own shot. He plays really hard, has shot the ball pretty good and makes some nice passes. The best part of our young roster is playing in Denver.

I disagree. We kept the player with the best basketball instincts. Unlike Gallo and Chandler, Fields does not need the ball to have an impact on the game. You need a guy who focuses on intangibles while Stat and Melo will be responsible for carrying the offensive load.

Gallo, even when he didn't have the ball, he balled hard on D and made it tough for the other team. We saw this in his first game for Denver. The guy has the best basketball instincts in the league, or close to it. So don't tell me Fields has better instincts.

Gallo was a decent defender, he was far from great. He'll never be all nba defensive team material, so I think your post has limited validity to it. And he really hurted the team with some of his awful shooting nights. Gallo was asked to do too much in NY, and was struggling. Im so glad we kept Fields over this guy. Hes going to learn a lot of good things from Chauncey that won't show up in the box score. The last thing a Dantoni team with 2 of the top 5 scorers needed was a chucker like Gallo.

+1

the hypnotic spell that Gallo has on some of the grown men on this forum amazes me.

The visceral aversion some folks have to him, and underrating him as a player is even more amazing. The chucker comment just points to ignorance.

I love Fields, and you can even say he is a better fit on this team because of the postion he plays, but he is well below Gallo in talent level, and in a couple of years some of you guys are going to be crying for him to be here again.

You can probably ask any GM in the NBA, and they will tell you that they'd take Gallinari over Fields if starting a team from scratch. Honestly, guys... it is not even that close.

Ultimate success for a player is determined by talent, system played in, circumstances, and surrounding teammates. Gallo may be in a better situation now, and I expect that his numbers will improve substantially over the next few years, as will his value.

Time will tell, as will the silence of some around here when the Rooster finally roars.

let me emphasize one of my previous posts on this thread that you can't compare Gallo and Fields because you're comparing a first yr player vs one that's been in the league for 3 yrs.

with that said, did Gallo ever get rookie of the month on more than one occasion? was Gallo an all star rookie?

it's not the "visceral aversion" to Gallo; i think he's good but some of you guys make out to be the next Larry Bird. Give me a break!

I've never said he was going to be the next Larry Bird.

Not much chance for Gallinari to gather any rookie honors since he was out with a back injury for most of the year.

The first year he was healthy he made the sophmore all-star team and the 3 PT shooting contest. Or am I mistaken?

Landry was also part of a rather poor rookie crop, in case you haven't noticed. I really like Fields, and was an early supporter- even saying good stuff about him on draft-night after I had a chance to see some clips of him- so I don't like writing anything negative about him, but if you look at both of them in 5 years, you will see much mistaken you are now.

Now you have a chance to sit back and watch Gallo develop in a more player-friendly environment. We can revisit this topic in a few years, but it won't be in a thread which you are the OP.