40% Chance Nate Robinson will be Traded before deadline?

Torp

Benchwarmer
I just saw this article on ESPN here, showing a list of PG's that could be dealt before the deadline and this guy says Nate has a 40% chance of being traded before Feb 19.

What do you guys think? Do you think it will happen? And should it happen?

I guess his arguement is that he hits his restricted free agency this summer and we are not inclined to pay him. If we want to save up for 2010, Nate may be a liability.

If we can do an Eddy Curry package with Nate, would you consider it? I love Nate as a person more than anyone, but as a businessperson I don't know... As a Fan I would love to keep nate for his energy. Not sure if it will happen though.
 

Giants89FLY

Rotation player
I like nate. He is starting to grow on me. He takes some foolish shots sometimes though. If we can package him with curry, Awesome get him out. I would say as I fan I would lean to keeping him more then trading him. Just my opinion.
 

Crazy⑧s

Evacuee
Wouldn't bother me in the slightest if it were for a better defender. 40% seems a little over the top though. I can't imagine many teams would be overly interested really. If his inconsistency holds up, an affordable re-signing would be gold.

If he's the bait to trade Jeffries or Curry that would be awesome. I think he's worth trading for a decent pick too.
 

Kiyaman

Legend
Somehow I cant see myself trading Nate Robinson.....he is this Knick teams....G.S. Monta Ellis the lockerroom player all the teammates LUV for the energy he brings on a daily basis.

I really wish that $18M contract SG-Cuttino Mobley would have played a couple of games with the Knicks this season so alot of FANS could see the importance of resigning Nate Robinson with the quickness.

Duhon is decent....he is the Eric Snow to Allan Iverson.....Duhon would've been the Knicks MVP-Man this season with Nate, Marbury, and Collins in the backcourt with him....plus having Lee, Zach, Chandler, and Al Harrington in the frontcourt doing their thang.
But the above rotation was given up b/c of a coach personal hatred and a clueless President that has been buying time using a Fairy Tale Dream 2010 plan.
Every sport analyst stated the Zach Randolph trade was way to early this season.

The Knicks could've traded Curry straight up with no chaser added with it to alot of teams this offseason and during this season.
Miami Pat Riley would LUV to take Curry & Jefferies off the Knick hands by giving us Shawn Marion ending contract for this foolish 2010 plan....Miami would become one of the Top-4 best teams in the Eastern Conference adding Curry & Jefferies to their frontcourt of C-Blount, PF-Haslem, and PF-Beasley.
Miami would also sign Marbury too with those two Knick players if the Knicks would buy-out his contract. However....it just would'nt look good for the Knick organization when Miami have 3-Knick players in the 2nd round series fighting to get into the Eastern Conference Finals.....while the Knicks are in the Lottery Balls tournament.
 

KBlack25

Starter
Problem is that the Knicks and Walsh in particular have to think about one thing:

What's better for the team, losing Eddy's contract or keeping Robinson and/or Lee?

Fact is to get a team to take Curry's deal I think Lee or Robinson will have to be involved. Is it worth it? I don't know, depends on the quality of what we get back. Personally if we were to give up Lee or Robinson and Curry, I'd want draft picks, rebuilding through good draft picks (or, parlaying a couple of draft picks into a better lottery pick) is the way I think it will be done. I think the next month or so will be weighing the costs and benefits...how much does Walsh believe in Lee and/or Robinson? We'll know soon enough. If he sees them as integral parts of the team's future, it might not be worth mortgaging that future just to lose Eddy Curry. Likewise, if he thinks Lee and/or Robinson will bolt, be shoved out of playing time or will not continue to be high quality players on the team, then you'll probably see Curry packaged with one of the two going somewhere...
 

jimmymootz

Rookie
yeah 2010 is the bigger picture. he will demand/want too much money to stay. I will miss his dunks and energy but sometimes i think he can be selfish.
If the Rooster can play more minutes, and we use the Mobley roster spot to get a veteran, then Nate needs to step, especially if we could get a pick for him.
 

Paul1355

All Star
It's a hard choice

Thing is....that we can always get a good PG in a draft...there are so many VERY athletic PG's every year....Nate is super atheletic which makes him more valuable.....His athleticism makes him a good defender and rebounder at 5'9...

Nate ius finally out of his slump and is a B+ three point shooter.

We should keep him...reasons

1) Fan favorite
2) One of the fastest and most athletic guys on a basketball court...perfect for this system
3) Great three point shooter especially in the clutch
4) Having Nate and Duhon as a PG combo is a great mix of awareness and speed
5) Nate can steal, rebound, block guys like Yao Ming!
6) If we resign him, we could probably get him cheap at around 3 or 4 mil a year.....If he wants a lot higher then he has to go. We don;t have time for greedy players that belong in the Isiah era.
 

Red

TYPE-A
Thing is....that we can always get a good PG in a draft...there are so many VERY athletic PG's every year....Nate is super atheletic which makes him more valuable.....His athleticism makes him a good defender and rebounder at 5'9...

Nate ius finally out of his slump and is a B+ three point shooter.

We should keep him...reasons

1) Fan favorite
2) One of the fastest and most athletic guys on a basketball court...perfect for this system
3) Great three point shooter especially in the clutch
4) Having Nate and Duhon as a PG combo is a great mix of awareness and speed
5) Nate can steal, rebound, block guys like Yao Ming!
6) If we resign him, we could probably get him cheap at around 3 or 4 mil a year.....If he wants a lot higher then he has to go. We don;t have time for greedy players that belong in the Isiah era.

Looking at N8's "athleticism" to me is a short sighted view. And all of the reasons you mentioned above are exactly y we should trade him now. Unless he's willing to give us the home team discount he must be traded while his value is high. If he is offered a starting role and more $ he def. will take it. I like N8, hard not to being a Knicks fan but rationally I know what we can get back & what we need is > what he offers off the bench. I know the energy and 3's are great but he has peeked on this team and we still have a losing record b/c we cannot consistantly play d and don't have a go to guy down the stretch or in the post. Bottom line we need an "Athletic Big Man" who can play d and do the dirty work on the boards w/ D Lee more than N8 to not just be entertaining to fans but to be feared by other teams. No one fears us or anyone in this regime b/c we are small and inconsistant. The biggest worry teams have is to not lose to a sub 500 team. Donnie don't let ur bargaining chip go for nothing.
 
Last edited:

Red

TYPE-A
Wouldn't bother me in the slightest if it were for a better defender. 40% seems a little over the top though. I can't imagine many teams would be overly interested really. If his inconsistency holds up, an affordable re-signing would be gold.

If he's the bait to trade Jeffries or Curry that would be awesome. I think he's worth trading for a decent pick too.

Big Pat who's pic is that in ur sig next to Walsh? Mad funny!!!!!!
 

paris401

Starter
if ringling bros gives us a pair of dancing dogs... i'd trade his ass in a heartbeat...

he's a chucker.. send his ass back to the circus...
 

____I♥NY____

Benchwarmer
<!-- / icon and title --> <!-- message --> if ringling bros gives us a pair of dancing dogs... i'd trade his ass in a heartbeat...

he's a chucker.. send his ass back to the circus...

We would have lost the last game if we didn't have him and plenty of other games past and future
 

TunerAddict

Starter
____I♥NY____;81728 said:
We would have lost the last game if we didn't have him and plenty of other games past and future


How many games did we lose because of him?

Also you can't say we woulda lost games because you don't know who would have taken up those minutes, who we would have replaced him with, and what they would have done.

The only game he has ever "won" was that Philly game a few years back where he hit the 3 in Iverson's face. Besides that he has been a streaky shooter who can't seem to understand defense. He is an awful defensive player. I can't stand when people claim he is good. Gambling on passes on the arch is not good defense. Good defense is forcing the opponent into a bad shot and actually being able to get over screens without becoming lost and wondering where the guy he was guarding is while he hits an open shot.
 

Kiyaman

Legend
How many games did we lose because of him?

Also you can't say we woulda lost games because you don't know who would have taken up those minutes, who we would have replaced him with, and what they would have done.

The only game he has ever "won" was that Philly game a few years back where he hit the 3 in Iverson's face. Besides that he has been a streaky shooter who can't seem to understand defense. He is an awful defensive player. I can't stand when people claim he is good. Gambling on passes on the arch is not good defense. Good defense is forcing the opponent into a bad shot and actually being able to get over screens without becoming lost and wondering where the guy he was guarding is while he hits an open shot.


This Post is about Nate Robinson.....and you are writing about Crawful performance.

Nate happen to be one of the top 5 pesty guards on defense in the league....his physical body strength, speed, and athletic-hops makes him that durable-pesty-guard a team can count on for all 82 games in a season.

In the last 3 Knick seasons everytime you seen the Knicks go on a 10-0 run nine out of ten Nate Robinson is on the court pressuring the ball comming up court as that pesty defender...
 

Paul1355

All Star
Looking at N8's "athleticism" to me is a short sighted view. And all of the reasons you mentioned above are exactly y we should trade him now. Unless he's willing to give us the home team discount he must be traded while his value is high. If he is offered a starting role and more $ he def. will take it. I like N8, hard not to being a Knicks fan but rationally I know what we can get back & what we need is > what he offers off the bench. I know the energy and 3's are great but he has peeked on this team and we still have a losing record b/c we cannot consistantly play d and don't have a go to guy down the stretch or in the post. Bottom line we need an "Athletic Big Man" who can play d and do the dirty work on the boards w/ D Lee more than N8 to not just be entertaining to fans but to be feared by other teams. No one fears us or anyone in this regime b/c we are small and inconsistant. The biggest worry teams have is to not lose to a sub 500 team. Donnie don't let ur bargaining chip go for nothing.

That's why I said its a hard choice because on one hand I say yes to keep him for those reasons I listed, and on the other hand I completely agree with you that if we trade him for a Big man that blocks shots...then we are a set team.

We should not trade Nate for some bum center. Nate is worth more than that and if thats the case then we should just keep him and do a sign/trade scenerio.
 

Kiyaman

Legend
Detroit been a 2nd round playoff team because of their Guards performance the last 7 years....it did not matter if it was Billups & Stackhouse or Billups & RIP....drafting a defensive Point-Foward "Prince" insured the Pistons of a 7 game series to the conference Finals. Having Ben Wallace Defense and Rasheed all around performance added trips to the FINALS.

Do the Knicks have Guards? how many?
Do the Knicks have a Point-Foward? Chandler....Gallo is a 2 year project.
Do the Knicks have Bigmen? how many?

Or will the Knicks fill all these positions in the 2010 offseason plan?

The Knicks started this season as the 4th best team in the Eastern conference when they traded Crawful for Harrington.

If the Knicks want to trade Curry before 2010 then they should've hired Patrick Ewing to train him so he could've been a pawn in a sign and trade in the 2010 offseason.

The Knicks President and Coach are IDIOTS...
 

____I♥NY____

Benchwarmer
That's why I said its a hard choice because on one hand I say yes to keep him for those reasons I listed, and on the other hand I completely agree with you that if we trade him for a Big man that blocks shots...then we are a set team.

We should not trade Nate for some bum center. Nate is worth more than that and if thats the case then we should just keep him and do a sign/trade scenerio.

You're making it hard for yourself. Nate is one of the best energy players and will continue to grow and be better you're hating on him just because you think he won't winn games for us in the future. Kobe Bryant has respect for him and most importantly LeBron does too. He will be a valuable commodity to lure LeBron in 2010
 

DaTPRiNCE

The Knicks are Back
____I♥NY____;81867 said:
You're making it hard for yourself. Nate is one of the best energy players and will continue to grow and be better you're hating on him just because you think he won't winn games for us in the future. Kobe Bryant has respect for him and most importantly LeBron does too. He will be a valuable commodity to lure LeBron in 2010

word i agree, and Nate has 6th man of the year awards in his future, he will be an important part of our future we should keep him
 
Top