Is Gallinari too passive to be a scorer?
Knicks forward doesn't shoot enough despite good stroke
By Michael Salfino / SNY.tv
Buzz up! Post on facebook Fan Comments print email
Danilo Gallinari is averaging over 13 points per game but hasn't been shooting the ball very much this season. (AP)
Danilo Gallinari still seems to me to be a shooter, but is he too conscionable to be a scorer?
I want my shooters to more reckless when it comes to taking their shots. Downright selfish is fine, too. Gallinari, though, is averaging only a shot every three minutes after sitting at one every 3.2 minutes last year. Progress, I guess. But not radical enough for him to emerge as a threat commensurate to his undeniable stroke.
Look at these usage percentages courtesy of our friends at basketball-reference.com: Gallinari is 14th right now in the percentage of plays where he's used at just 18.7 percent. Al Harington is 27.3 percent. Eddy Curry actually leads the team at 30.2 percent. Jordan Hill, for crying out loud, was at 30.2 percent.
Here's my view of shooters: When you are hot, shoot until you are cold. When you are cold, shoot until you are hot.
Gallinari is a young developing player and thus reasonably gun-shy. But we must get more trigger happiness if he's every going to be a major perimeter weapon. Next year, if all goes according to the plan, there will be one megastar and whoever said megastar chooses as his running mate. Then, everyone else fades into the background a bit. Gallinari, though, seems like a risk to disappear right through the Garden walls.
If Gallinari does not develop some scorer selfishness, what good is he? His other skills are too marginal at the NBA level for him to deserve major minutes on a decent team. He looks too slow to be a shooting forward and lacks the physicality to be a power forward. Maybe that's unfair and maybe this view will change once he elevates his game. But when is that going to be if not now with a team with no superstars going nowhere?
Is it unfair to expect a young shooter to show more aggressiveness early in his career, even if we stipulate that after last year's injury-shortened season, Gallinari is essentially a rookie? Glen Rice was one shot every 2.15 minutes his rookie year. Toni Kukoc was one every 2.5 minutes. Dell Curry had one every 1.95 minutes, and Curry played just 636 minutes in 67 games on a team with Hall of Famers John Stockton and Karl Malone.
Usage percentage for those guys their rookie years: Rice (21.6 percent), Kukoc (24.1) and Curry (24.1).
Another shooter often compared to Gallinari is Detlef Schrempf, who averaged a usage percentage of 20.3 for his career. But Schrempf had a great run as a third-wheel scorer because he was so efficient, not because he was a 3-point threat (just 1.3 attempts per game for his career). Thus, I think Schrempf is a bad comp. Dirk Nowitzki is a better one, averaging 3.3 3-pointers per game for his career, and hit the ground running his rookie year at 25.3 percent (not far off of his career average of 26.2).
My big worry is that Gallinari has too much Hubert Davis in him. Davis averaged 16.7 percent usage for his career and peaked his second year at 20.6. If Davis had Curry's ego, he'd have had Curry's career, I guarantee you.
I do not deny there was a stretch in earlier this year summarized quite nicely by Tommy Dee of TheKnicksBlog.com where Gallinari seemed to turn the corner on the road to becoming a scorer. But he was going well then. The test is always how the scorer responds to a slump. If he doesn't resolve to shoot his way out of it, he's done.
http://web.sny.tv/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100226&content_id=8171894&oid=36320&vkey=18
