I am not sure about this Gallup signing. I look at a lot of moves under these types of lenses:
- Did this move help the team? Some will misunderstand and think that any "addition" helps but this just is not true. There are some additions that take playing time away from better players. There are some additions that are totally redundant to players already signed.
--- For this move, I think the answer is yes, with the caveat on the "players already signed."
- Is this move better than other moves the team could have made? If not, to further critique, is there a potential bias involved?
--- This is where things get a little strange for me. I feel like Jamison Crowder and Michael Gallup may be in similar places here. Gallup is 2 years younger, but Crowder played for this team pretty well last year in the role he was given, and I think it has the same look as this Gallup signing. Did Gallup get signed over similar and potentially less risky players because he knows DQ well?
--- There are concerns here, I think, especially about biases. That said, there is enough here (age; they did have him tryout) to suggest that Gallup could be as good or better than other options. As long as that is the case, I think we have to go on with the "trust the guys until they prove us wrong." They earned it. This position isn't as critical, but that excuse for me doesn't hold water. The best teams want every position filled by the best options who can fit the plan (which includes contracts as a consideration; you can't just put all the players you want on a team), full stop.
Crowder has been getting injured, and he is getting older, but Gallup was ALSO getting injured in his career even though he is younger. This move and the Kinlaw contract amount are the only blemishes I see so far. That is an excellent track record across the number of moves they have had to make. For those who wanted particular players, I am just assuming that the plan they have, again including contract, but also including usage, these players fit. You can kind of see how it could all work - so now the proof will be in the pudding.
 }})
