fishmike wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

fishmike wrote:this was interesting:
http://www.82games.com/1415/14NYK4.HTM
Galloway's +/- #s are fantastic. He's tracked as mostly playing off guard, and opposing offguards are shooting an incredibly low .388 EFG% (this factors for 3's and FTs)... so if you think that Galloway is having a positive impact and playing top flight defense the #s are backing that up.

The #s look good for a min contract rookie. You're right about his defense too.
That said, the +/- #s basically just indicate that the team is doing a lot better with him than with Calderon or anyone else at PG.

they have logged him mostly at SG, so a large sampling there is with him playing w/ Calderon which they had been alot. I was mostly interested in what the opposing player does, and that opposing FG% I posted is a very impressive # granted its a small sample size. The point is the #s reflect the eyeball test which is Galloway is playing excellent defense. He doesnt just *look* like he's playing it, the guys he's guarding are shooting very very poorly.

Here is the post I was referring to earlier.
http://knickerblogger.net/knicks-morning-news-2015-02-26/#comment-489545

Frank February 26, 2015 at 8:40 am

This goes under the “looking for any silver lining” category, but we’re 18 games- nearly 25% of a season – into Galloway’s career and his defensive #s are actually getting better as the sample size grows. In fact I did a quick look through the reputation-ally great backcourt defenders in the league (Tony Allen, Chris Paul, Wesley Matthews, George Hill, Eric Bledsoe, etc.) and Galloway’s numbers are way better than any of theirs — and that’s with zero rim protection behind him — no Gasol, Jordan, Lopez, Hibbert, etc.

http://stats.nba.com/player/#!/204038/tracking/defense/

his shooting continues to suck (TS 48) but he’s shooting semi-adequately from 3P range (34%) and my feeling is he is taking a lot of shots that he wouldn’t be taking in any offense with actual, you know, NBA talent on it.

He remains a great rebounder for a guard – top 5 if we consider him a PG, top 11 or so if we consider him a SG according to the Hollinger player stats. And he really never turns the ball over — best in the league if we consider him a PG, would be 4th in the league as SG.

fishmike wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

fishmike wrote:this was interesting:
http://www.82games.com/1415/14NYK4.HTM
Galloway's +/- #s are fantastic. He's tracked as mostly playing off guard, and opposing offguards are shooting an incredibly low .388 EFG% (this factors for 3's and FTs)... so if you think that Galloway is having a positive impact and playing top flight defense the #s are backing that up.

The #s look good for a min contract rookie. You're right about his defense too.
That said, the +/- #s basically just indicate that the team is doing a lot better with him than with Calderon or anyone else at PG.

they have logged him mostly at SG, so a large sampling there is with him playing w/ Calderon which they had been alot. I was mostly interested in what the opposing player does, and that opposing FG% I posted is a very impressive # granted its a small sample size. The point is the #s reflect the eyeball test which is Galloway is playing excellent defense. He doesnt just *look* like he's playing it, the guys he's guarding are shooting very very poorly.

Fair enough. I watched early in the season but lost interest when the team kept losing.
The +/- is still partly inflated because the players subbing for him suck but I give him credit for doing well too.

Bonn1997 wrote:

fishmike wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

fishmike wrote:this was interesting:
http://www.82games.com/1415/14NYK4.HTM
Galloway's +/- #s are fantastic. He's tracked as mostly playing off guard, and opposing offguards are shooting an incredibly low .388 EFG% (this factors for 3's and FTs)... so if you think that Galloway is having a positive impact and playing top flight defense the #s are backing that up.

The #s look good for a min contract rookie. You're right about his defense too.
That said, the +/- #s basically just indicate that the team is doing a lot better with him than with Calderon or anyone else at PG.

they have logged him mostly at SG, so a large sampling there is with him playing w/ Calderon which they had been alot. I was mostly interested in what the opposing player does, and that opposing FG% I posted is a very impressive # granted its a small sample size. The point is the #s reflect the eyeball test which is Galloway is playing excellent defense. He doesnt just *look* like he's playing it, the guys he's guarding are shooting very very poorly.

Fair enough. I watched early in the season but lost interest when the team kept losing.
The +/- is still partly inflated because the players subbing for him suck but I give him credit for doing well too.

Look at his "Opponent Counterpart 48-Minute Production" - essnetially nobody is scoring on him. Its an impresive # that opposing FG%

TPercy wrote:I think how much Galloway works this off season would impact the deciosn whether or not he is starting NBA material.
On a side note: Galloway to make all Rookie team?(POY out of question cuz of Wiggins)

+1 fish.
I like the guy we have.

CrushAlot wrote:

TPercy wrote:I think how much Galloway works this off season would impact the deciosn whether or not he is starting NBA material.
On a side note: Galloway to make all Rookie team?(POY out of question cuz of Wiggins)

He has been in Sheridan's top 10 for rookies almost every week since he was called up.

He's been in cbs sports top 10 too

fishmike wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

TPercy wrote:I think how much Galloway works this off season would impact the deciosn whether or not he is starting NBA material.
On a side note: Galloway to make all Rookie team?(POY out of question cuz of Wiggins)

He has been in Sheridan's top 10 for rookies almost every week since he was called up.

He's been in cbs sports top 10 too

Does the GM get any credit for that? Seeing a player in the summer, signing him to the D league, grooming him, bringing him up and now he's rated as a top 10 rookie after being undrafted? Would that factor into anyone's assesment of what Phil is doing here? Or has that WHOLE process just been dumb luck?

It's not dumb luck until we trade him and 3 first round picks for Rudy Gay.