BRIGGS wrote:The line up that played the best tonight

C-Harrington
F Gallo
F Chandler
G Hughes
G Duhon

We took too many 3's again but I think Harrington showed why we need to get closer to the basket. While the 3 point shot helped us come back--it was AH Bernard King like post play that put pressure on Philly--they simply couldnt stop him.

That is our best lineup. I'm glad Hughes is out of the doghouse.

Ira wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:The line up that played the best tonight

C-Harrington
F Gallo
F Chandler
G Hughes
G Duhon

We took too many 3's again but I think Harrington showed why we need to get closer to the basket. While the 3 point shot helped us come back--it was AH Bernard King like post play that put pressure on Philly--they simply couldnt stop him.

That is our best lineup. I'm glad Hughes is out of the doghouse.

Interesting, and I agree, but I doubt that it will work in all situations.

Harrington did look good going to the basket and it really seems that his left hand is as good as his right.

Hughes was really solid, and as someone pointed out, he could have pulled a Marbury, but instead, made a great case for increased playing time.

Gallo was running on fumes the last few minutes- his legs were shot. Should be interesting to see how he bounces back on Monday after two overtime games and a 40 M stretch on Saturday.

Philly's shooting was out of this world good at times- 60%. Yeah, they got some easy shots, but they were also deadly from the outside. I doubt if they can do it on a regular basis- if they shot like they did on Friday, we win this game. We just happened to get them on one of those nights, and also contributed to it with some less than adequate D at times.

JamaicanJetFan wrote:At least the gallo-haters will stfu for a little while

He's not a bad player. Its just where we drafted him and who we drafted him above that is a problem. Dude looked good tonight though. He had a go to guy look for the first time since I've watched him. AND, the thing that will help us is that if he can do this with any consistency, the other team was sending a second defender out to him. If teams have to send a second defender out to the top of the key, there's going to be opportunities every possession for Gallo to hit cutters to the basket.

Watching that game last night, I actually think that Joe Johnson might be a good pairing with Gallo. He can post and kick it to Gallo if there's a double team, and they play on different parts of the floor, Johnson is always on the wings when he's playing on the perimeter, where Gallo plays from the top of the key and on the right elbow. If you had the two of them playing off of eachother in a two man game, then the defense would have some interesting decisions to make, and they both can pass well enough to take advantage and reverse the ball for easy scores.

He looked like more than a role player last night for the first time as far as I'm concerned, and that's a huge step.

Now MikeD has to build a rotation off of that so we don't come into the next game looking like we don't know where to go with the ball and get down by 20 before we figure it out. Hopefully Gallo is ready to assert himself consistently.

blueNorange wrote:cosmic did you like gallinari tonight??

i've read how you thought he was injured or something like that

gallinari needs to add 15 more pounds to work on the elbow and tonight he showed he can attack the rim, he needs to do that a lot more.

he's also a solid defender.

What's up, Buddy!

Yeah, I'm pleasantly surprised by Gallo.

As to how I viewed him over time?

When picked I didn't know who he was, had concerns about nepotism (hiring ones family over qualified individuals), and concerns about his "mix tapes" being of course like any player, just their good moves - and not knowing exactly what we had here.

When he had that great 3rd Q of his only SL game? He showed enough for me to think we had a potentially good player here.

When the injury dragged on? With questionable treatment? As in waiting 9+ months for inevitable surgery? With the usual Knicks snow job of "Will re-evaluate in 2-4 weeks" only after 2-4 weeks for them to say the same? Time an again for dozens of time? Yeah, I got pretty angry as a fan.

I didn't doubt his ability at that point just the whole "was he damaged goods and did we get screwed" side of things.

I still do wonder about his health. As for one who suffer from a bad lower back I know his walk well - the stiff one he does once play has stopped - and I know he still hurts. I also know he had the same surgery as Duhon to a degree - a player who still goes down with a bad back for stretches of time. So I do worry about that.

As to what he has shown the past few games? Wow. Never expected that - RIGHT NOW - but I wondered if we would see that down the road, again, given even what he had showed in that little sliver of SL action. There was just something about his demeanor and basketball smarts that pointed to a player who could be good.

I've said several times that Gallo has no ceiling (in comparison I do hint at Chandler probably already reaching his.).

We'll see how it goes but I think it's literally down to his health and how he is coached. The rest is there.

Now, as far as someone on the Knicks to hate? You know, the Shandone Contracterson of the day? Jordan Hill and Jared Jeffries annoy my to levels of Scott Layden hatred.

TMS wrote:why does Jordan Hill annoy u so much, the guy's played less than 2 total minutes so far this year... cuz he was laughing during a blowout loss?

Because he sucks. And it's more than just that it's his demeanor that is unsettling. He's lazy and disinterested and that's inexcusable to me. Worse off we didn't need to pick a big in the draft unless he was going to be a sure fire future asset.

At this point it would seem Jordan Hill is a project player. This franchise can't afford a 3-4 year long project big that won't really amount to much anyway can we? No, we can't.

Now I don't want to play the hindsight game because I feel it's a bit weak but we did need guards and well you see a couple of the guards we passed on doing well for themselves already. So that factors into it a little.

Toney Douglas isn't amazing either but he get after it, he's smart, intense, and yearning to improve. So I don't have a problem with Toney being a project player.

I guess overall it boils down to Hill's demeanor which as said is very poor.

TMS wrote:i think we need to get this kid involved in the games by letting him see action... i agree he looks a little disinterested sitting on the bench & i think we need to make sure that doesn't become a habit for this kid, because i've watched him play in several games in college & when he's into a game he can make a huge impact... the kid has talent, i bet u if we gave him a good 15 mpg as a regular part of the rotation now he'd be an upgrade over Jared Fishlips & probably better than Darko right now as a raw rookie as long as he could stay out of foul trouble, no doubt in my mind whatsoever.

I agree (woah, is that possible? LOL!!!)

But, yeah, I agree, throw this guy on the fire and see what happens. Also don't knee-jerk and the moment he makes a mistake you yank him.

I said it in the one game, we were down 30 with 7:30 to go and neither Hill, Douglas, or Landry were in the game.

I found that INEXCUSABLE!!!! I would have had all 3 in and played them right to the wire!!!

Why doesn't Mike? Why not? I don't know. It doesn't make sense.