Bonn1997 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:Gallinari is a FA if he opts out so give him 20m+

Yeah, that's an issue. I find it ironic though that he's playing really well now but we gave him and other players and picks up just to get a guy we wish we could get rid of. Gallo at $20 mil a year would be less bad than most of Phil's signings but it still would be bad (only because of the health issues). But his contract right now is much more movable than Melo's if you don't want to keep either one.

Gallo and Will Chan, the two best pieces going to Denver, each missed like 3 years of playing time out of 6 since the trade...Is this a joke or a Briggs spoof??? Are you channeling Briggs now after Gallo dropped 34 on a team on the second of last game of the year??? Do you realize it's his contract year and they feed players the ball to score during these times to help their negotiations???

Gallo shot like 41% from the field for about 5 years of his 7 year career...MDA said he was the greatest shooter he has ever seen...

Obviously we're going to disagree here and it looks like 60% of the Knicks fans who voted would prefer Gallo. But I'd rather have Gallo for 300 games and the picks we gave up than Melo for 400 games.
Half of Gallo's shots are 3s. Of course his FG% is going to be lower. His effective field goal percentage and TS% are both typically higher than Melo's. That said, having Gallo and the picks probably means better records and no KP or top 6 pick this year.

I don't want to get lost in the weeds but it's not true and you don't know that half of his shots are three point shots...free throws aren't counted as field goals attempts and ts% awards free throws as a higher value than 2 point field goals for no apparent reason...NONE..

And better record based on your polls?? Certainly not facts or stats...

We're talking about FG%, right? That's the topic you raised. So almost half of Gallo's official shots (the shots that are counted for FG%) are 3s. I don't know what you mean about FT% weighting. Are you talking about the fact that it weighs each attempted free throw as 0.44 FGs? It has to do that since the average free throw corresponds to 0.44 possessions. There is no other logical weight you could possibly give it. And certainly giving free throws zero weight (and 3 pointers zero extra weight) by just looking at FG% is not more logical.
Regarding your last point, I've posted a lot of stats. If you have ones that contradict what I've said feel free to post. When I said having Gallo and the picks would likely lead to a better record than having Melo, I should have also mentioned the extra $10 mil a year in cap space. That would make it an even more clear cut comparison IMO. Then again, if you want a team full of guys like DeMarcus Cousins, Melo, and Rose, we're obviously going to disagree anyway.

Well 41% of Gallo's "official" shots since he left the Knicks were three point fg%, not close to 50%...Regardless of what the free throw corresponds to .44% possession or whatever, the unequal weighing of that value as compared to a fg doesn't accurately convey what points really mean on the court...9 points via one method can never be better than 10 points by another method by any measure whatsoever, and be called a reliable way to assess value or contribution...

This shouldn't happen though unless a player gets all his FT attempts from only one method - not over the course of a full season's data anyway. You haven't given any reason to think it would be the case with Gallo. And you definitely haven't given any reason to think the solution is to give zero weight to FTs (by looking at FG%). In an imperfect world where they don't record in the box score the scenario for each FT, the current TS% weighting is the best solution. Either that or you could separately compare two players' EFG% and FT%s. However, Gallo comes out ahead of Melo in both comparisons.

This is only a small piece of the equation though. You've gotta look at win shares, on/off #s, player tracking data, and more. Or join the Nets and Lakers by ignoring all the metrics.

It's not a small piece of the equation because free throws are an important part of the game and stats..Gallo took 8 ft per this past year..90% shooter will certainly skew the value of the ts% significantly...Win shares have team wins as a skew...i look at different players in their rookie season some time ago and saw that team wins significantly affected win share values..So, I'm not sure how you put your trust in such means to assess individual players...

Metrics does have value, I do however think it's well overstated...

You've got it reversed. TS% is the best possible method to accurately account for the value of free throws. A stat that ignores free throws like FG% is skewed against players who get to the line. Yeah, win shares is definitely imperfect and just one part of the equation. The defensive win share stat is more flawed than offensive win shares. The tracking data are important too but there is no one perfect stat.

My argument has always been why would you want to look at an offensive player stat as a singular statistical number..I doesn't tell you how and where he scores his points when building a team..If Gallo is skilled at getting to the free throw line then that is valuable information that needs to be broken down into its components...But that's just me, old school I guess...

But the thing is FG% is a singular stat that ignores FTs and gives equal weight to 2s and 3s. Based on what you're saying the most logical thing to do would be to look at the 2 point FG%, 3 point FG%, and FT% each separately for each player. The problem is that if you're a GM you have to have some way to get an overall judgment of the player. You have to figure out who you'd rather have on offense when you're comparing players even if one is better in one category and another is better in another category. So you could either used the statistically least flawed method to combine the numbers, or just look at all 3 categories separately and then go with your gut I guess.

That's why you look at all components which is what I said in the previous post...You act like fg,ft,3pts etc are hidden and cant be accessed ..

I'm not sure if you read my post too quickly. Based on what you're saying, you should be rejecting FG% because it's a singular stat that combines two very different things (2 pointers and 3 pointers). And it combines them in a totally illogical way (where 2s equal 3s). It's not slightly off like TS% might in theory be in small samples. It's totally illogical. You should be looking at 2 point FG% and 3 point FG% separately if you object to singular stats, and I'd have no problem if someone wanted to do that.
That said, how are you going to compare two players when one is better in one category and another is better in another category? You have to either have the least flawed statistical way to combine the categories (TS%) or just go with your gut.

Or I'll put it another way. If another team's GM wants to trade his player for your player, you can't reach *one* judgment (yes or no to doing the trade) from *three* categories (2s, 3s, and FTs). You have to either statistically combine the categories or just go with your gut. Or even if you're trying to decide which of your two players at the same position is helping the team more on offense and should get more playing time, you have to have a way to combine all of the available offensive numbers.
There is value in also looking at all the numbers separately, especially if you want to work on improving weak areas for a player, though.

I can never ever imagine a scenario where an GM won't look at a player twenty ways til sunday determine whether or not to trade for this player...What lazy GM would want to look at one stat...FG is not flawed..I look at FG and 3pt % in one breath and figure out 2 pt%..It's not that complicated, it one glance...

You got me in the weeds again..You are amazing....hahahahahahah...

How do you reach one judgment, then? (Like who is better Gallo or Melo)? You're either statistically combining the info or just going with your gut. If you're a GM, you eventually do have to reach one judgment.
If you're looking at 3 point % and 2 point %, that's fine but then there's no need to look at overall FG% (that's the totally illogical, lazy man's singular stat).
There is value in looking at all of these stats individually actually. In most years, Melo and Gallo are both very good at 3s and FTs and very poor at 2 point shooting. Since a lower proportion of Gallo's offense comes from his weak area (2s) than for Melo, he comes out ahead in measures of efficiency.

Well if you are a GM and you are asking who had the better career since the trade and you can't figure it out then this line of work isn't for you...

holfresh wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:Gallinari is a FA if he opts out so give him 20m+

Yeah, that's an issue. I find it ironic though that he's playing really well now but we gave him and other players and picks up just to get a guy we wish we could get rid of. Gallo at $20 mil a year would be less bad than most of Phil's signings but it still would be bad (only because of the health issues). But his contract right now is much more movable than Melo's if you don't want to keep either one.

Gallo and Will Chan, the two best pieces going to Denver, each missed like 3 years of playing time out of 6 since the trade...Is this a joke or a Briggs spoof??? Are you channeling Briggs now after Gallo dropped 34 on a team on the second of last game of the year??? Do you realize it's his contract year and they feed players the ball to score during these times to help their negotiations???

Gallo shot like 41% from the field for about 5 years of his 7 year career...MDA said he was the greatest shooter he has ever seen...

Obviously we're going to disagree here and it looks like 60% of the Knicks fans who voted would prefer Gallo. But I'd rather have Gallo for 300 games and the picks we gave up than Melo for 400 games.
Half of Gallo's shots are 3s. Of course his FG% is going to be lower. His effective field goal percentage and TS% are both typically higher than Melo's. That said, having Gallo and the picks probably means better records and no KP or top 6 pick this year.

I don't want to get lost in the weeds but it's not true and you don't know that half of his shots are three point shots...free throws aren't counted as field goals attempts and ts% awards free throws as a higher value than 2 point field goals for no apparent reason...NONE..

And better record based on your polls?? Certainly not facts or stats...

We're talking about FG%, right? That's the topic you raised. So almost half of Gallo's official shots (the shots that are counted for FG%) are 3s. I don't know what you mean about FT% weighting. Are you talking about the fact that it weighs each attempted free throw as 0.44 FGs? It has to do that since the average free throw corresponds to 0.44 possessions. There is no other logical weight you could possibly give it. And certainly giving free throws zero weight (and 3 pointers zero extra weight) by just looking at FG% is not more logical.
Regarding your last point, I've posted a lot of stats. If you have ones that contradict what I've said feel free to post. When I said having Gallo and the picks would likely lead to a better record than having Melo, I should have also mentioned the extra $10 mil a year in cap space. That would make it an even more clear cut comparison IMO. Then again, if you want a team full of guys like DeMarcus Cousins, Melo, and Rose, we're obviously going to disagree anyway.

Well 41% of Gallo's "official" shots since he left the Knicks were three point fg%, not close to 50%...Regardless of what the free throw corresponds to .44% possession or whatever, the unequal weighing of that value as compared to a fg doesn't accurately convey what points really mean on the court...9 points via one method can never be better than 10 points by another method by any measure whatsoever, and be called a reliable way to assess value or contribution...

This shouldn't happen though unless a player gets all his FT attempts from only one method - not over the course of a full season's data anyway. You haven't given any reason to think it would be the case with Gallo. And you definitely haven't given any reason to think the solution is to give zero weight to FTs (by looking at FG%). In an imperfect world where they don't record in the box score the scenario for each FT, the current TS% weighting is the best solution. Either that or you could separately compare two players' EFG% and FT%s. However, Gallo comes out ahead of Melo in both comparisons.

This is only a small piece of the equation though. You've gotta look at win shares, on/off #s, player tracking data, and more. Or join the Nets and Lakers by ignoring all the metrics.

It's not a small piece of the equation because free throws are an important part of the game and stats..Gallo took 8 ft per this past year..90% shooter will certainly skew the value of the ts% significantly...Win shares have team wins as a skew...i look at different players in their rookie season some time ago and saw that team wins significantly affected win share values..So, I'm not sure how you put your trust in such means to assess individual players...

Metrics does have value, I do however think it's well overstated...

You've got it reversed. TS% is the best possible method to accurately account for the value of free throws. A stat that ignores free throws like FG% is skewed against players who get to the line. Yeah, win shares is definitely imperfect and just one part of the equation. The defensive win share stat is more flawed than offensive win shares. The tracking data are important too but there is no one perfect stat.

My argument has always been why would you want to look at an offensive player stat as a singular statistical number..I doesn't tell you how and where he scores his points when building a team..If Gallo is skilled at getting to the free throw line then that is valuable information that needs to be broken down into its components...But that's just me, old school I guess...

But the thing is FG% is a singular stat that ignores FTs and gives equal weight to 2s and 3s. Based on what you're saying the most logical thing to do would be to look at the 2 point FG%, 3 point FG%, and FT% each separately for each player. The problem is that if you're a GM you have to have some way to get an overall judgment of the player. You have to figure out who you'd rather have on offense when you're comparing players even if one is better in one category and another is better in another category. So you could either used the statistically least flawed method to combine the numbers, or just look at all 3 categories separately and then go with your gut I guess.

That's why you look at all components which is what I said in the previous post...You act like fg,ft,3pts etc are hidden and cant be accessed ..

I'm not sure if you read my post too quickly. Based on what you're saying, you should be rejecting FG% because it's a singular stat that combines two very different things (2 pointers and 3 pointers). And it combines them in a totally illogical way (where 2s equal 3s). It's not slightly off like TS% might in theory be in small samples. It's totally illogical. You should be looking at 2 point FG% and 3 point FG% separately if you object to singular stats, and I'd have no problem if someone wanted to do that.
That said, how are you going to compare two players when one is better in one category and another is better in another category? You have to either have the least flawed statistical way to combine the categories (TS%) or just go with your gut.

Or I'll put it another way. If another team's GM wants to trade his player for your player, you can't reach *one* judgment (yes or no to doing the trade) from *three* categories (2s, 3s, and FTs). You have to either statistically combine the categories or just go with your gut. Or even if you're trying to decide which of your two players at the same position is helping the team more on offense and should get more playing time, you have to have a way to combine all of the available offensive numbers.
There is value in also looking at all the numbers separately, especially if you want to work on improving weak areas for a player, though.

I can never ever imagine a scenario where an GM won't look at a player twenty ways til sunday determine whether or not to trade for this player...What lazy GM would want to look at one stat...FG is not flawed..I look at FG and 3pt % in one breath and figure out 2 pt%..It's not that complicated, it one glance...

You got me in the weeds again..You are amazing....hahahahahahah...

How do you reach one judgment, then? (Like who is better Gallo or Melo)? You're either statistically combining the info or just going with your gut. If you're a GM, you eventually do have to reach one judgment.
If you're looking at 3 point % and 2 point %, that's fine but then there's no need to look at overall FG% (that's the totally illogical, lazy man's singular stat).
There is value in looking at all of these stats individually actually. In most years, Melo and Gallo are both very good at 3s and FTs and very poor at 2 point shooting. Since a lower proportion of Gallo's offense comes from his weak area (2s) than for Melo, he comes out ahead in measures of efficiency.

Well if you are a GM and you are asking who had the better career since the trade if it would be better to have Gallo, $10 mil per in cap space, and draft picks or Melo, and you can't figure it out, then this line of work isn't for you...

Bonn1997 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:Gallinari is a FA if he opts out so give him 20m+

Yeah, that's an issue. I find it ironic though that he's playing really well now but we gave him and other players and picks up just to get a guy we wish we could get rid of. Gallo at $20 mil a year would be less bad than most of Phil's signings but it still would be bad (only because of the health issues). But his contract right now is much more movable than Melo's if you don't want to keep either one.

Gallo and Will Chan, the two best pieces going to Denver, each missed like 3 years of playing time out of 6 since the trade...Is this a joke or a Briggs spoof??? Are you channeling Briggs now after Gallo dropped 34 on a team on the second of last game of the year??? Do you realize it's his contract year and they feed players the ball to score during these times to help their negotiations???

Gallo shot like 41% from the field for about 5 years of his 7 year career...MDA said he was the greatest shooter he has ever seen...

Obviously we're going to disagree here and it looks like 60% of the Knicks fans who voted would prefer Gallo. But I'd rather have Gallo for 300 games and the picks we gave up than Melo for 400 games.
Half of Gallo's shots are 3s. Of course his FG% is going to be lower. His effective field goal percentage and TS% are both typically higher than Melo's. That said, having Gallo and the picks probably means better records and no KP or top 6 pick this year.

I don't want to get lost in the weeds but it's not true and you don't know that half of his shots are three point shots...free throws aren't counted as field goals attempts and ts% awards free throws as a higher value than 2 point field goals for no apparent reason...NONE..

And better record based on your polls?? Certainly not facts or stats...

We're talking about FG%, right? That's the topic you raised. So almost half of Gallo's official shots (the shots that are counted for FG%) are 3s. I don't know what you mean about FT% weighting. Are you talking about the fact that it weighs each attempted free throw as 0.44 FGs? It has to do that since the average free throw corresponds to 0.44 possessions. There is no other logical weight you could possibly give it. And certainly giving free throws zero weight (and 3 pointers zero extra weight) by just looking at FG% is not more logical.
Regarding your last point, I've posted a lot of stats. If you have ones that contradict what I've said feel free to post. When I said having Gallo and the picks would likely lead to a better record than having Melo, I should have also mentioned the extra $10 mil a year in cap space. That would make it an even more clear cut comparison IMO. Then again, if you want a team full of guys like DeMarcus Cousins, Melo, and Rose, we're obviously going to disagree anyway.

Well 41% of Gallo's "official" shots since he left the Knicks were three point fg%, not close to 50%...Regardless of what the free throw corresponds to .44% possession or whatever, the unequal weighing of that value as compared to a fg doesn't accurately convey what points really mean on the court...9 points via one method can never be better than 10 points by another method by any measure whatsoever, and be called a reliable way to assess value or contribution...

This shouldn't happen though unless a player gets all his FT attempts from only one method - not over the course of a full season's data anyway. You haven't given any reason to think it would be the case with Gallo. And you definitely haven't given any reason to think the solution is to give zero weight to FTs (by looking at FG%). In an imperfect world where they don't record in the box score the scenario for each FT, the current TS% weighting is the best solution. Either that or you could separately compare two players' EFG% and FT%s. However, Gallo comes out ahead of Melo in both comparisons.

This is only a small piece of the equation though. You've gotta look at win shares, on/off #s, player tracking data, and more. Or join the Nets and Lakers by ignoring all the metrics.

It's not a small piece of the equation because free throws are an important part of the game and stats..Gallo took 8 ft per this past year..90% shooter will certainly skew the value of the ts% significantly...Win shares have team wins as a skew...i look at different players in their rookie season some time ago and saw that team wins significantly affected win share values..So, I'm not sure how you put your trust in such means to assess individual players...

Metrics does have value, I do however think it's well overstated...

You've got it reversed. TS% is the best possible method to accurately account for the value of free throws. A stat that ignores free throws like FG% is skewed against players who get to the line. Yeah, win shares is definitely imperfect and just one part of the equation. The defensive win share stat is more flawed than offensive win shares. The tracking data are important too but there is no one perfect stat.

My argument has always been why would you want to look at an offensive player stat as a singular statistical number..I doesn't tell you how and where he scores his points when building a team..If Gallo is skilled at getting to the free throw line then that is valuable information that needs to be broken down into its components...But that's just me, old school I guess...

But the thing is FG% is a singular stat that ignores FTs and gives equal weight to 2s and 3s. Based on what you're saying the most logical thing to do would be to look at the 2 point FG%, 3 point FG%, and FT% each separately for each player. The problem is that if you're a GM you have to have some way to get an overall judgment of the player. You have to figure out who you'd rather have on offense when you're comparing players even if one is better in one category and another is better in another category. So you could either used the statistically least flawed method to combine the numbers, or just look at all 3 categories separately and then go with your gut I guess.

That's why you look at all components which is what I said in the previous post...You act like fg,ft,3pts etc are hidden and cant be accessed ..

I'm not sure if you read my post too quickly. Based on what you're saying, you should be rejecting FG% because it's a singular stat that combines two very different things (2 pointers and 3 pointers). And it combines them in a totally illogical way (where 2s equal 3s). It's not slightly off like TS% might in theory be in small samples. It's totally illogical. You should be looking at 2 point FG% and 3 point FG% separately if you object to singular stats, and I'd have no problem if someone wanted to do that.
That said, how are you going to compare two players when one is better in one category and another is better in another category? You have to either have the least flawed statistical way to combine the categories (TS%) or just go with your gut.

Or I'll put it another way. If another team's GM wants to trade his player for your player, you can't reach *one* judgment (yes or no to doing the trade) from *three* categories (2s, 3s, and FTs). You have to either statistically combine the categories or just go with your gut. Or even if you're trying to decide which of your two players at the same position is helping the team more on offense and should get more playing time, you have to have a way to combine all of the available offensive numbers.
There is value in also looking at all the numbers separately, especially if you want to work on improving weak areas for a player, though.

I can never ever imagine a scenario where an GM won't look at a player twenty ways til sunday determine whether or not to trade for this player...What lazy GM would want to look at one stat...FG is not flawed..I look at FG and 3pt % in one breath and figure out 2 pt%..It's not that complicated, it one glance...

You got me in the weeds again..You are amazing....hahahahahahah...

How do you reach one judgment, then? (Like who is better Gallo or Melo)? You're either statistically combining the info or just going with your gut. If you're a GM, you eventually do have to reach one judgment.
If you're looking at 3 point % and 2 point %, that's fine but then there's no need to look at overall FG% (that's the totally illogical, lazy man's singular stat).
There is value in looking at all of these stats individually actually. In most years, Melo and Gallo are both very good at 3s and FTs and very poor at 2 point shooting. Since a lower proportion of Gallo's offense comes from his weak area (2s) than for Melo, he comes out ahead in measures of efficiency.

Well if you are a GM and you are asking who had the better career since the trade if it would be better to have Gallo, $10 mil per in cap space, and draft picks or Melo, and you can't figure it out, then this line of work isn't for you...

I agree but I re-worded it to reflect the actual trade.
The poll was only about who people would rather have now, though, not about the actual trade.

Bonn1997 wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

nyknickzingis wrote:Funny how in some situations KP is a 5 and Melo is a 4 and then when it's convenient, KP is a 4 and Gallo is a 4 as well.
Getting ridiculous.

I liked Gallo. I wasn't on this board, but I didn't like the Melo trade. I was in favor of trading for Melo, or signing him in the offseason, but never trading as much as we did to get him. Dolan really messed that up.

It's water under the bridge at this point, and Gallo has never become an all-star or a top 20 player in the league. He's been injury riddles as well. I did think we made a mistake giving him up. He was developing nicely in MDA's offense and style and that team was doing pretty well with Mos at 5, Amare, Gallo, Fields, Felton. Then we also gave up a future #1 pick. Bad trade longterm.

That younger team was meshing well with D'Antoni, and Melo never meshed with D'Antoni. The trade not only made Knicks lose a good player in Gallo, it also cost draft picks, and longterm ability to rebuild. We got cap strapped with Amare/Melo who did not complement each other at all. We lost a pretty good coach in D'Antoni because he never fit with Melo. Just can't believe Melo has so many fans. He's added little to this franchise in his 7 years. He's not a bad player, but he's certainly not a player that shifts the franchise's trajectory in an upward manner.

For what's it worth KP at the 5 and Gallo at the 4 would still be a terrible defensive pairing.

KP needs an athletic stud who can cover ground and close out on shooters and rebound.

That sounds exactly like Melo...NOT!
The thread is about Melo and Gallo, not some mysterious 3rd option. But you could probably have traded Gallo for at least a late 1st round pick last Feb to a contender and could use the cap space on a player closer to what you're describing.

Ok. But there have been three fully different front offices since the Gallo trade. I don't think he'd be here. He's an awkward player without a true position. He has shown flashes of being a top scorer and has always been a good shooter. But he's also always been an injury risk. What makes you think Denver wasn't trying to trade him? I heard they were trying to move both him and Faried at the deadline as they tried to build around Jokic.

Gallo's Hall of Fame Probability:
Active 0.0%
Career 0.0%

Yes, I'd take Jim Pollard over Melo right now. Even though he's dead.