orangeblobman wrote:

fishmike wrote:

orangeblobman wrote:Look. Gallo is simply a superstar in the making. He will be better than Dirk. No one, no one can deny this.

no he's not. Not even close. Thats the point. Gallo is just as close to Kyle Korver as he his to Dirk. Your not helping here dude.

The good part about what we have seen from Gallo this year is he's answered some big doubts about how good he can be. (Except you) Nobody thought he could be an impact player on defense and or show the athleticism to break down guys off the dribble or create his own shot. He's shown those abilities this year and thats very exciting. Showing ability and producing on a nightly basis as two things that are VERY far apart.

However I think because Gallo has shown he has the ability to do some of these things it puts his ceiling much higher that originally thought.

Fishmike, i have a headache from all of this. So what I will do is just stop defending Mr. Gallo.

But I will leave with these words: Gallo will be a superstar, is so clear to me.

he's got a LONG-ass way to go before he's a superstar. his next step in the progression is more movement without the ball, more demanding of the ball, quicker decision-making with the ball, more pounding of the offensive boards.

and more surprise visits to the bargnani women.

Bippity10 wrote:Kind of like GAllo he has skills but the jury is still out. His career willarch will come down to his work ehtic and ability to learn some skills. ButGallo has the ability to pass this guy in my view.

It's your View and you Opinion but the same can be said for Lopez. And the lower the pick the more leverage in say the player at picked position would have for surprising or making a case.

If we drafted Lopez and he produced like he has the past several, several, several games would we as Knick fans honestly be capping his potential? I think not!!!

This draft class' talent has yet to be determined. What we are witnessing, there were players picked well after 6 who are in the discussion of being Tops in their class.

Some of us thought the 2008 draft after say pick 10 wasn't worth sweating over, say had we thought about trading down. Appears if we had, we stood the potential to get a very good player.

I remember guys were thinking it would have been the dumbest move to trade down and to be honest maybe outside of the Nets, considering Gallo didn't work out for hardly any teams, I think we still could have picked him.

nixluva wrote:Let's step back for a sec. Since when has Lopez been considered a high ceiling prospect? Some had him pegged to have a rather lack luster career and to his credit he's been better than advertised but let's not make crap up now. Gallo was always considered a player with a higher ceiling and it's only been jaded Knick fans that doubted his potential. Rather than accept Gallo as a top prospect worthy of being #6 many have tried to say he was a reach or there was some kind of nepotism in his being picked. Anything to invalidate him as our pick cuz guys were convinced other players were better picks. The draft analysts have said from the start that Gallo has star potential and a high ceiling.

People are only now saying Lopez is a high ceiling guy based off his early success but IMO nothing else suggests he's special. What particular attributes would you say makes Lopez one of the possible special prospects? What exceptional talents does he possess that would hint at a possible stellar future?

exactly... good post...

tkf wrote:

djsunyc wrote:what are you basing lopez' impact on fish? wins/losses? b/c that's a trivial stance...

Ok, dj.. it is a trival stance.. but let me ask you this.. if the nets were 18-2 with the same team.. would you dismiss lopez impact? just wondering... I am not saying he is completly responsible for their record.. that would be silly, but somehow, as the focal point of that offense, what does that say about his impact?

record has nothing to do with it. the argument isn't who's better...i'm arguing against the thought that lopez has reached his peak while gallo is nowhere near it. any player in the league can be part of a winning team so correlating one guy to wins/losses is just flawed reasoning.

fishmike wrote:

djsunyc wrote:what are you basing lopez' impact on fish? wins/losses? b/c that's a trivial stance...

what I see. The Nets dont have enough talent on the floor to win games. Thats not a fair knock on Lopez (Wins/loss). The 19/9 on less than 50% shooting isnt that impressive either. Its good, but not impressive. Nowhere in my posts do I knock the Lopez pick. In fact I have said I wish we had a guy like that next to Lee. He's got great value and will make a lot of money in this league because 7 foot centers are rare. My god, Dampier makes $12mm or more!

However Lopez does plod, he's an average rebounder and his offense is mechanical and predictable. The problem is those were his exact knocks in college.

Lopez is already a good player, but the ceiling comment is that he will never be the main guy on a bigtime team. Ilgauskas, Brad Miller, Kendrick Perkins... its hard to compare because there are so few true centers in the league, but that "caliber" player rather than that type of player.

As for Gallo the "hopes" in him are that he's answered the big questions about himself.
Can he defend? Block shots? check
Is he tough enough to fight for tough rebounds and bang in the paint? check
When teams put smaller athletic guy on him and he beat them off the dribble? Shoot over them? check
Is he athletic enough to create his own shot? check
Is he one of the best shooters in the game? check

Gallo has a looooong way to go before he's a stud, but he's already good and has the tools to be all star year after year. He can definatly be a 25 point 7 rebound 5 assist 1.5 steal 1.5 block type player

He's not yet, and Lopez is ahead of him overall... right now.

good post fish.. you know lopez is a very good player. this situation reminds me when Alonzo mourning was drafted... Now I am not saying lopez is as good as Zo, but when zo came in the league, he averaged 21/10 on 51% shooting.. better numbers than lopez.. now most thought Alonzo was a fantastic player, but pretty much was close to his ceiling.. His rookie year, was pretty much his best season statistically! He had a season or two better, but most were similar to his rookie year or even less. My point is, after his first year,at the age of 22, many could have said, look at these numbers, He certainly will get much better.. but if you knew zo, watched his game, you knew you were looking at a guy who was pretty much peaked... what you looked for from zo now was him polishing his skills and refining his game.. not some huge upswing in numbers..

i expect lopez will be a more polished player, but it wont lead to huge numbers or even star status...

All fans are biased. Otherwise they wouldnt be fans would they?

So if you are admitting to be being biased we should take anything you say about Gallo seriously

bitty41 wrote:

All fans are biased. Otherwise they wouldnt be fans would they?

So if you are admitting to be being biased we should take anything you say about Gallo seriously

orangeblobman wrote:

Dunking is cool

orangeblobman wrote:that ended when dj started irrationally bashing gallo for no good reason.

it's been going in circles since.