dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Knixkik wrote:Comparing an injury prone role player to an all-star/recent scoring champ is a bad comparison.

perhaps you need to revisit the term "value" and really try to figure out what it means to you.

Better player: Anthony, no argument there. More valuable, Anthony, because he is much more valuable to his team than Gallinari is. I understand he is an analytics sweet heart, but Gallinari is not going to command a max contract next go-around, no question there. If multiple teams are willing to offer him a max contract as they were Melo, then i'm wrong. But this conversation is pointless, we know where you stand...

perhaps you can delineate in what way melo is more valuable to the knicks because i don't see it. also, as i have explained very clearly: "what the market will bear" has no bearing on a player's true value. you apparently disagree but you should try to explain why.

No point in explaining, you won't agree. There's nothing i can tell you that everyone else doesn't every day you argue with them about Melo.

well all you have to say is "i believe that value is based upon what the market will bear."

can you say that?

When comparing 2 players of this degree, all it takes is common sense. But there will always be some fancy metrics that show Gallinari is better, which is fine. Numbers can tell you whatever you want them to if you are creative.

i am sorry but you sound evasive. i asked a very simple question. never mind about advanced numbers... do you equate "value" with "what the market will bear?

a player's value = what the market will bear

do you agree with this equation?

No i don't, but i think in many cases it supports it.

thank you for answering my simple question, i am grateful! however... "many cases" sure okay but what about in the case of carmelo anthony? do you agree with the following equation:

carmelo anthony's value to the knicks = what the market bore

i'd appreciate another simple answer to this question, thanks!

How is Ariza's value/salary compared to Gallo's value/salary??..I would appreciate a simple answer to this question, thanks!

by the same measures i have been using, trevor ariza no doubt has been a bit underpaid for his career and as a result is the better value overall:

gallinari will make 11.5 million and his ws/48 is 1.29, his box plus minus is 1.1
carmelo will make 24.5 million and his ws/48 is 1.36, his box plus minus is 1.4
trevor will make 8.2 million and his ws/48 is 0.98, his box plus minus is 1.6

note that his ws/48 is lower but his box plus minus is higher. seems like a bargain.

yet for some reason he keeps getting traded, so there may be an attitude and professionalism issue there. how else do you explain seven teams in 11 seasons?

Does win shares have anything to do with number of wins of a team??..So a roster of d league players might have an effect on that number??..Gallo shoots 40%, 35% from the three and about 1.8 assist per game...Not great defense..Yet you think he is a star??..Any thoughts on your reasoning??..Personally I think he is a good player, just not a star..

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Knixkik wrote:Comparing an injury prone role player to an all-star/recent scoring champ is a bad comparison.

perhaps you need to revisit the term "value" and really try to figure out what it means to you.

Better player: Anthony, no argument there. More valuable, Anthony, because he is much more valuable to his team than Gallinari is. I understand he is an analytics sweet heart, but Gallinari is not going to command a max contract next go-around, no question there. If multiple teams are willing to offer him a max contract as they were Melo, then i'm wrong. But this conversation is pointless, we know where you stand...

perhaps you can delineate in what way melo is more valuable to the knicks because i don't see it. also, as i have explained very clearly: "what the market will bear" has no bearing on a player's true value. you apparently disagree but you should try to explain why.

No point in explaining, you won't agree. There's nothing i can tell you that everyone else doesn't every day you argue with them about Melo.

well all you have to say is "i believe that value is based upon what the market will bear."

can you say that?

When comparing 2 players of this degree, all it takes is common sense. But there will always be some fancy metrics that show Gallinari is better, which is fine. Numbers can tell you whatever you want them to if you are creative.

i am sorry but you sound evasive. i asked a very simple question. never mind about advanced numbers... do you equate "value" with "what the market will bear?

a player's value = what the market will bear

do you agree with this equation?

No i don't, but i think in many cases it supports it.

thank you for answering my simple question, i am grateful! however... "many cases" sure okay but what about in the case of carmelo anthony? do you agree with the following equation:

carmelo anthony's value to the knicks = what the market bore

i'd appreciate another simple answer to this question, thanks!

How is Ariza's value/salary compared to Gallo's value/salary??..I would appreciate a simple answer to this question, thanks!

by the same measures i have been using, trevor ariza no doubt has been a bit underpaid for his career and as a result is the better value overall:

gallinari will make 11.5 million and his ws/48 is 1.29, his box plus minus is 1.1
carmelo will make 24.5 million and his ws/48 is 1.36, his box plus minus is 1.4
trevor will make 8.2 million and his ws/48 is 0.98, his box plus minus is 1.6

note that his ws/48 is lower but his box plus minus is higher. seems like a bargain.

yet for some reason he keeps getting traded, so there may be an attitude and professionalism issue there. how else do you explain seven teams in 11 seasons?

Does win shares have anything to do with number of wins of a team??

there's "total win shares" which is an accumulated statistic, and there's "win shares per 48" which is derived from total win shares and shows how much a particular player contributes to team success, with the average player in the league being set at 1.00. hence ariza for his career is below average in this regard. as you can see, he in fact is quite off the pace compared with gallo and melo.

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Knixkik wrote:Comparing an injury prone role player to an all-star/recent scoring champ is a bad comparison.

perhaps you need to revisit the term "value" and really try to figure out what it means to you.

Better player: Anthony, no argument there. More valuable, Anthony, because he is much more valuable to his team than Gallinari is. I understand he is an analytics sweet heart, but Gallinari is not going to command a max contract next go-around, no question there. If multiple teams are willing to offer him a max contract as they were Melo, then i'm wrong. But this conversation is pointless, we know where you stand...

perhaps you can delineate in what way melo is more valuable to the knicks because i don't see it. also, as i have explained very clearly: "what the market will bear" has no bearing on a player's true value. you apparently disagree but you should try to explain why.

No point in explaining, you won't agree. There's nothing i can tell you that everyone else doesn't every day you argue with them about Melo.

well all you have to say is "i believe that value is based upon what the market will bear."

can you say that?

When comparing 2 players of this degree, all it takes is common sense. But there will always be some fancy metrics that show Gallinari is better, which is fine. Numbers can tell you whatever you want them to if you are creative.

i am sorry but you sound evasive. i asked a very simple question. never mind about advanced numbers... do you equate "value" with "what the market will bear?

a player's value = what the market will bear

do you agree with this equation?

No i don't, but i think in many cases it supports it.

thank you for answering my simple question, i am grateful! however... "many cases" sure okay but what about in the case of carmelo anthony? do you agree with the following equation:

carmelo anthony's value to the knicks = what the market bore

i'd appreciate another simple answer to this question, thanks!

How is Ariza's value/salary compared to Gallo's value/salary??..I would appreciate a simple answer to this question, thanks!

by the same measures i have been using, trevor ariza no doubt has been a bit underpaid for his career and as a result is the better value overall:

gallinari will make 11.5 million and his ws/48 is 1.29, his box plus minus is 1.1
carmelo will make 24.5 million and his ws/48 is 1.36, his box plus minus is 1.4
trevor will make 8.2 million and his ws/48 is 0.98, his box plus minus is 1.6

note that his ws/48 is lower but his box plus minus is higher. seems like a bargain.

yet for some reason he keeps getting traded, so there may be an attitude and professionalism issue there. how else do you explain seven teams in 11 seasons?

Does win shares have anything to do with number of wins of a team??

there's "total win shares" which is an accumulated statistic, and there's "win shares per 48" which is derived from total win shares and shows how much a particular player contributes to team success, with the average player in the league being set at 1.00. hence ariza for his career is below average in this regard. as you can see, he in fact is quite off the pace compared with gallo and melo.

Do you recall Ariza in LA??..He was the difference on the Championship team..How does one measure that..Winning a Championship.?..I also had another question regarding Gallo..

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Knixkik wrote:Comparing an injury prone role player to an all-star/recent scoring champ is a bad comparison.

perhaps you need to revisit the term "value" and really try to figure out what it means to you.

Better player: Anthony, no argument there. More valuable, Anthony, because he is much more valuable to his team than Gallinari is. I understand he is an analytics sweet heart, but Gallinari is not going to command a max contract next go-around, no question there. If multiple teams are willing to offer him a max contract as they were Melo, then i'm wrong. But this conversation is pointless, we know where you stand...

perhaps you can delineate in what way melo is more valuable to the knicks because i don't see it. also, as i have explained very clearly: "what the market will bear" has no bearing on a player's true value. you apparently disagree but you should try to explain why.

No point in explaining, you won't agree. There's nothing i can tell you that everyone else doesn't every day you argue with them about Melo.

well all you have to say is "i believe that value is based upon what the market will bear."

can you say that?

When comparing 2 players of this degree, all it takes is common sense. But there will always be some fancy metrics that show Gallinari is better, which is fine. Numbers can tell you whatever you want them to if you are creative.

i am sorry but you sound evasive. i asked a very simple question. never mind about advanced numbers... do you equate "value" with "what the market will bear?

a player's value = what the market will bear

do you agree with this equation?

No i don't, but i think in many cases it supports it.

thank you for answering my simple question, i am grateful! however... "many cases" sure okay but what about in the case of carmelo anthony? do you agree with the following equation:

carmelo anthony's value to the knicks = what the market bore

i'd appreciate another simple answer to this question, thanks!

How is Ariza's value/salary compared to Gallo's value/salary??..I would appreciate a simple answer to this question, thanks!

by the same measures i have been using, trevor ariza no doubt has been a bit underpaid for his career and as a result is the better value overall:

gallinari will make 11.5 million and his ws/48 is 1.29, his box plus minus is 1.1
carmelo will make 24.5 million and his ws/48 is 1.36, his box plus minus is 1.4
trevor will make 8.2 million and his ws/48 is 0.98, his box plus minus is 1.6

note that his ws/48 is lower but his box plus minus is higher. seems like a bargain.

yet for some reason he keeps getting traded, so there may be an attitude and professionalism issue there. how else do you explain seven teams in 11 seasons?

Does win shares have anything to do with number of wins of a team??..So a roster of d league players might have an effect on that number??..Gallo shoots 40%, 35% from the three and about 1.8 assist per game...Not great defense..Yet you think he is a star??..Any thoughts on your reasoning??..Personally I think he is a good player, just not a star..

well here is the article again and you can read in there that win share/48 is a remarkably consistent stat for a player regardless of what team he plays on or the quality of teammates.

http://wagesofwins.com/how-to-calculate-wins-produced/

interestingly, this does not hold true for ariza, whose ws/48 fluctuates a bunch over his career. melo's improves over the years with only a couple of significant dips in 2008-9 with billups and a wcf appearance and again in his last partial year in denver. gallo's career has been a general trend upwards with a less of a dip the year he arrived in denver. he has been a model of consistency and growth while ariza has been the epitome of erratic.

Nice way of avoiding the questioned asked..

dk7th wrote:

mreinman wrote:Gallo is nowhere close to Melo, that is plain ridiculous.

Melo should pass more when he gets doubled (which is quite often) so that he can maximize his game but there is very little to compare. Gallo does not get double teamed and he has also been a disappointment with his shooting. Way too inconsistent. He is a solid defender.

Gallo also can't stay healthy so I am not so thrilled with paying a guy so much money to sit on IR. When he is healthy, he is a good player.

Melo can easily be a top 10 player in the league if wants to. Phil needs to get through to him and if that is the only thing that Phil is successful at then that is better than nothing.

then question is not who is better, but who is a better value. who do you feel is the better value dollar for dollar?

The question was who was better or more valuable..Also, Gallo is on an old deal, Melo's deal was drawn up with the new cap in mind..But I know u know all that..

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

mreinman wrote:Gallo is nowhere close to Melo, that is plain ridiculous.

Melo should pass more when he gets doubled (which is quite often) so that he can maximize his game but there is very little to compare. Gallo does not get double teamed and he has also been a disappointment with his shooting. Way too inconsistent. He is a solid defender.

Gallo also can't stay healthy so I am not so thrilled with paying a guy so much money to sit on IR. When he is healthy, he is a good player.

Melo can easily be a top 10 player in the league if wants to. Phil needs to get through to him and if that is the only thing that Phil is successful at then that is better than nothing.

then question is not who is better, but who is a better value. who do you feel is the better value dollar for dollar?

The question was who was better or more valuable..Also, Gallo is on an old deal, Melo's deal was drawn up with the new cap in mind..But I know u know all that..

well the title of the thread is not clear or else another poster would not have asked for clarification. as to "better" versus "valuable" they are not equal terms. "better" is for individual sports like tennis or golf or boxing or billiards or bowling or in your case pinball or angry birds. "better" has no real meaning in a team sport. it's called "most valuable player" not "best player."

"valuable" is the proper term to assess a player in a team sport, because team sports are businesses that are trying to squeeze as much value out of their employees as possible in an effort to win championships. if you were a business owner you would appreciate the distinction... so it is safe to conclude you are not a business owner.

again, "better" and "more valuable" are not interchangeable terms. amazing how many posters miss this obvious distinction but hey if you regard basketball as five one-on-one games i suppose the terms are easily conflated.....

I hope he stays healthy and has a great season, much much too late to say we shoulda kept him given the many games he's missed.

dk7th wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:Gallo has yet to play a full season wire to wire without missing significant time due to injury. At least been a while since he has. The talent is there but a few strong but meaningless games at the end of the season where the opposition might not be where it would be earlier in the season, isn't a stop the presses kind of stretch.

I hope he stays healthy and has a great season, much much too late to say we shoulda kept him given the many games he's missed.

yes he is injury prone and it's a real shame. that said i sometimes wonder if he had been able to stay in new york would he have still eventually blown out his knee and missed as many games over two seasons as he did? he is already twenty-six and is entering the prime of his career. i sure hope he can stay healthy so we can see what more he can do. i think shaw was in over his head out in denver and that didn't help.

dk7th wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:Gallo has yet to play a full season wire to wire without missing significant time due to injury. At least been a while since he has. The talent is there but a few strong but meaningless games at the end of the season where the opposition might not be where it would be earlier in the season, isn't a stop the presses kind of stretch.

I hope he stays healthy and has a great season, much much too late to say we shoulda kept him given the many games he's missed.

yes he is injury prone and it's a real shame. that said i sometimes wonder if he had been able to stay in new york would he have still eventually blown out his knee and missed as many games over two seasons as he did? he is already twenty-six and is entering the prime of his career. i sure hope he can stay healthy so we can see what more he can do. i think shaw was in over his head out in denver and that didn't help.

Hard to say what would have happened. I agree about Shaw, he was in over his head. He told mgmt that he couldn't get through to the millennials on the team which was a cop out, although I can relate. He wasnt doing a good job getting along with some of the vets either. Very glad Phil didnt put him on the staff.

Still time for Gallo to have a nice career but the clock is ticking.