PDA

View Full Version : #1 Priority this Year = Trade Nate Robinson



richtree
Sep 21, 2009, 14:42
Nate is an undersized NBA player with big heart. Nate has reached his apex and every summer he calms down to distribute the ball and once the season starts he cannot control his emotions.

Nate doesn't listen to instruction well and will not enjoy playing only 12 minutes a game. His speed & strength can only diminish from here on out and without his athethic abilities he is not a good player.

Does he have a year or 2 left in his body? Sure, but it would make more more sense to package him out to a team that wants a boost and for the Knicks to rebuild the backcourt.

2010 should bring in a 2 guard. Nate can't shoot consistently like a derek fisher, nor can he can't the ball like Tony Parker. This leaves take as the first 5 ft 8 tweener.

I really was that dissappointed with missing out with Sessions because he isn't that great. Sure our team needs good guard play, but we don't want to waste dollars right now.

Nate will be moved, if not, he won't be a Knick next season.

Sure, we would all like to trade for a big name player, or move Curry/Jefferies contract, but reasonably we need to use Nate as the bargain chip while we have a chance.

WE would all like Lee to stay and we will try to keep him but Nate we can do without, especially after we got everything we could out of Nate already.

peace.

rt

DontForgetDerekHarper
Sep 21, 2009, 15:16
Nate is an undersized NBA player with big heart. Nate has reached his apex and every summer he calms down to distribute the ball and once the season starts he cannot control his emotions.

Nate doesn't listen to instruction well and will not enjoy playing only 12 minutes a game. His speed & strength can only diminish from here on out and without his athethic abilities he is not a good player.

Does he have a year or 2 left in his body? Sure, but it would make more more sense to package him out to a team that wants a boost and for the Knicks to rebuild the backcourt.

2010 should bring in a 2 guard. Nate can't shoot consistently like a derek fisher, nor can he can't the ball like Tony Parker. This leaves take as the first 5 ft 8 tweener.

I really was that dissappointed with missing out with Sessions because he isn't that great. Sure our team needs good guard play, but we don't want to waste dollars right now.

Nate will be moved, if not, he won't be a Knick next season.

Sure, we would all like to trade for a big name player, or move Curry/Jefferies contract, but reasonably we need to use Nate as the bargain chip while we have a chance.

WE would all like Lee to stay and we will try to keep him but Nate we can do without, especially after we got everything we could out of Nate already.

peace.

rt

What the hell are you talking about

Nate robinson is an elite level athlete.
A man of his athletic ability and physical build does not begin to fade in his 5th season physically. He has no nagging injuries, and just came off a career year, where he not only jumped over dwight howards back but was up for the 6th man of the year award competing with players like jason terry who could start on any team in the league. Now while I feel that his height effects his game and yes his attitude is inconsistent, the fact that your saying he is at the peak of his game is ridiculous and you have only nonsensical opinions to stand on. Nate will continue to get better mainly because he has all the ability in the world and loves the game of basketball, and is probably top 5 in the league as far as athleticism is concerned. There were so many games last season the knicks were either out of, or on the verge of blowing that nate would take over down the stretch and hit big shot after big shot. At no point on any time in this league will he ever average 12 minutes a game not for the knicks, not even if he came off the bench for the lakers or celtics. He can put the ball in the basket, and causes havoc for any opposing defense. When he puts his mind to it, he is a sure handed defender himself who just tapped into his true potential last year, and will continue to improve being that he is only 25. If there is a legitimate player that we can trade him for I am all for it, but if he is willing ( like he seems to have hinted) that he will not ask for an incredible amount of cash to remain a knick for his career, than affordability plus productivity I am all for keeping him around for many years to come. Not many bench players put up his numbers..

in fact almost none.

StreetDreams21
Sep 21, 2009, 16:04
Trading Curry is WAY more important man...

Kiyaman
Sep 21, 2009, 19:43
Nate is an undersized NBA player with big heart. Nate has reached his apex and every summer he calms down to distribute the ball and once the season starts he cannot control his emotions.

Nate doesn't listen to instruction well and will not enjoy playing only 12 minutes a game. His speed & strength can only diminish from here on out and without his athethic abilities he is not a good player.

Does he have a year or 2 left in his body? Sure, but it would make more more sense to package him out to a team that wants a boost and for the Knicks to rebuild the backcourt.

2010 should bring in a 2 guard. Nate can't shoot consistently like a derek fisher, nor can he can't the ball like Tony Parker. This leaves take as the first 5 ft 8 tweener.

I really was that dissappointed with missing out with Sessions because he isn't that great. Sure our team needs good guard play, but we don't want to waste dollars right now.

Nate will be moved, if not, he won't be a Knick next season.

Sure, we would all like to trade for a big name player, or move Curry/Jefferies contract, but reasonably we need to use Nate as the bargain chip while we have a chance.

WE would all like Lee to stay and we will try to keep him but Nate we can do without, especially after we got everything we could out of Nate already.

peace.

rt


Are u serious.....

DontForgetDerekHarper
Sep 21, 2009, 19:49
haha i cant believe trading nate comes before

hughes
curry
jefferies
lee

i say lee because lee wants so much more money than nate.

these guys are cash clowns that must be dealt with accordingly.

JayJ44
Sep 21, 2009, 19:52
Honestly, trading Nate is probably our last priority. He's cheap and he's a great scorer. Don't get me wrong, if were able to package him with Curry in a trade for expiring contracts for example, I would do it in a heartbeat. But I don't see any reason to actively try to trade Nate.

DaTPRiNCE
Sep 21, 2009, 20:26
i love nate and i want him to remain a knick but i feel Douglass will be a better NBA player and i could see douglass potentially win 6th man he has alot of game and watching him in summer league i saw it .

Crazy⑧s
Sep 21, 2009, 21:34
Losing Nate is not inevitable once he hits free agency. I agree that he's our best bargaining chip to trade Curry & or Jeffries, and it would be safer to try and trade him before a potential walk.

But he's definitely not a trade priority.

LJ4ptplay
Sep 21, 2009, 21:43
Umm. We have to sign Nate and Lee before we can trade them.

Seriously though, trading Lee and Nate should be considered. If we sign them, they're 1 year rentals. We can't afford to retain their Bird Rights so we might as well try and get rid of Curry and Jeffries or at least get some young talent for the future.

Giants89FLY
Sep 21, 2009, 21:58
If we could trade him along with either Curry and or Jeffries... I'm all ears.. If not, Keep him. In terms of marketing and fan interest Nate is our guy

CoolClyde
Sep 22, 2009, 08:15
Dis-:agreed:

N8 is Gr8

Scipio
Sep 22, 2009, 09:15
Umm. We have to sign Nate and Lee before we can trade them.

Seriously though, trading Lee and Nate should be considered. If we sign them, they're 1 year rentals. We can't afford to retain their Bird Rights so we might as well try and get rid of Curry and Jeffries or at least get some young talent for the future.

Sorry to be a pain, I`m new to loving basketball so please forgive my ignorance but what are "bird rights"?

richtree
Sep 22, 2009, 11:48
What the hell are you talking about

Nate robinson is an elite level athlete.
A man of his athletic ability and physical build does not begin to fade in his 5th season physically. He has no nagging injuries, and just came off a career year, where he not only jumped over dwight howards back but was up for the 6th man of the year award competing with players like jason terry who could start on any team in the league. Now while I feel that his height effects his game and yes his attitude is inconsistent, the fact that your saying he is at the peak of his game is ridiculous and you have only nonsensical opinions to stand on. Nate will continue to get better mainly because he has all the ability in the world and loves the game of basketball, and is probably top 5 in the league as far as athleticism is concerned. There were so many games last season the knicks were either out of, or on the verge of blowing that nate would take over down the stretch and hit big shot after big shot. At no point on any time in this league will he ever average 12 minutes a game not for the knicks, not even if he came off the bench for the lakers or celtics. He can put the ball in the basket, and causes havoc for any opposing defense. When he puts his mind to it, he is a sure handed defender himself who just tapped into his true potential last year, and will continue to improve being that he is only 25. If there is a legitimate player that we can trade him for I am all for it, but if he is willing ( like he seems to have hinted) that he will not ask for an incredible amount of cash to remain a knick for his career, than affordability plus productivity I am all for keeping him around for many years to come. Not many bench players put up his numbers..

in fact almost none.


You talk so adamantly about numbers. Are these the same numbers that made Chris Duhon assist total on par with some of the top point guards in the league? In this system the numbers are inflated and you speak of the many games Nate came off the bench (when we are losing) to help inflate his numbers even more. Our lack of another scoring guard also contributed to Nate's infated numbers. Granted this system is good for him and he will get some steals in transition but that doesn't equal wins. Marbury's numbers were better but he got ran out of town for playing a better version of what Nate Robinson is doing now. Nate won't be cheap after this season and that is the major problem. Comparing him to Jason Terry is a joke. Terry is older and still a much better player. He shoots 32% from 3pt range and for a man with all this atheltic ability he doesn't create shots for others, (only for himself). If we could keep him for cheap, great, but that isn't going to happen. Trade him and try to package a contract ASAP, because if we wait to far into the season no team will give us anything of value back.

LJ4ptplay
Sep 22, 2009, 14:23
Sorry to be a pain, I`m new to loving basketball so please forgive my ignorance but what are "bird rights"?


From wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_Salary_Cap

Larry Bird exception

Perhaps the most well-known of the NBA's salary cap exceptions, it is so named because the Boston Celtics were the first team permitted to exceed the salary cap to re-sign one of their own players (in that case, Larry Bird). Free agents who qualify for this exception are called "qualifying veteran free agents" or "Bird Free Agents" in the CBA, and this exception falls under the auspices of the Veteran Free Agent exception. In essence, the Larry Bird exception allows teams to exceed the salary cap to re-sign their own free agents, at an amount up to the maximum salary. To qualify as a Bird free agent, a player must have played three seasons without being waived or changing teams as a free agent. This means a player can obtain "Bird rights" by playing under three one-year contracts, a single contract of at least three years, or any combination thereof. It also means that when a player is traded, his Bird rights are traded with him, and his new team can use the Bird exception to re-sign him. Bird-exception contracts can be up to six years in length.


Essentially it allows a team to resign their players regardless of their cap situation. But it costs money to retain the Bird Rights and eats into our available cap in 2010. If we retain their Bird Rights we won't have enough to go after a max-contract free agent in 2010. So therefore we will forego retaining Lee's and Nate's Bird Rights an let them be unrestricted free agents next year.

It's possible we will sign Lee as an unrestricted free-agent next year but definitely not both Lee and Nate. We will not have enough cap space to do it. But that then leaves us with only 8 players on our roster.

Am I the only one worried about only having 6 players on the roster next year and not enough cap space to build a team? At the start of free agency in 2010, we will only have Curry, Jeffries, Chandler, Gallo, Douglas and Hill on the roster (+ some remaining scrubs = Joe Crawford + our 2010 draft pick).

Best case projections have us having $11 mil remaining after a max-contract. So we sign Lee at $8 mil. That leaves us with $3 mil to sign 1 more free agent (possibly Nate??). So....Curry, Jeffries, Chandler, Gallo, Douglas, Hill, max-contract, Lee and one other free-agent. That's 9 players (with no starting PG). You have to have a minimum of 13 to fill a roster. Any money spent (e.g. mid-level) eats in 2011 cap space.

Am I the only one that sees this as a potential problem or am I wrong?

hometheaterguy
Sep 22, 2009, 14:42
I like Nate but he is irrelevant!! Nate will NOT control if this team wins or losses. He has energy off the bench and makes a nice change of pace player but he does make poor decisions and he is a selfish player; as well as being a 5' 8" SG!! Nate can help the Knicks by bringing in his energy when the Knicks are just lumbering around. As said in one of the posts, he is an elite athlete in this league... and he is. He is a gifted athlete but I wouldn't say a gifted NBA player! Also, you can see that his game (antics) get's to Mike D some times as it did with Isiah and with Brown... I think Nate is his own worst enemy because every time he walks on the court it's like he has something to prove and it becomes him against the other team and even showing to the viewers that he is some super star. Like Riley used to say "There's no I in Team".

portega1968
Sep 22, 2009, 17:31
how the hell getting rid of Nate is a priority?

priority #1 is getting rid of Curry/Jeffries for expiring deals... plain and simple.

New New York
Sep 22, 2009, 20:10
haha i cant believe trading nate comes before

hughes
curry
jefferies
lee

i say lee because lee wants so much more money than nate.

these guys are cash clowns that must be dealt with accordingly.

Why is Hughes a priority? His contract has no 2010 implications, he is our best SG -in the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king-, and he is probably our best perimeter defender.

Mike Dantoni's system has made worst players than Hughes look solid -Q Richardson (w/ The Suns), Jimmy Jackson (passed his prime), Tim Thomas.- so there is plenty of reason to think that there is hope for Hughes to play well for us.

Three clutch FT's to help us beat Detroit at home and 39 pts just a game before that. He came to us after sitting 16 straight games (4 weeks worth of action) he played hurt for a couple of games too!

I don't expect a return to the All Star game for him, but he should look pretty good for us

DontForgetDerekHarper
Sep 22, 2009, 21:13
I bring up his numbers for that reason alone, that he creates his own shots. Until we get a leader in here a legit star, I dont mind nate doing what he does right now, I find it valuable because he shows guts to make things happen when no one else wants to. If we get a lebron, or wade in here, Nates role will be diminished and he will accept the fact that his role is energy player off the bench not go to guy.

Paul1355
Sep 22, 2009, 22:34
The only thing I agree with is that Nate can't control with his emotions, that he won't be satisfied playing 12 min a game, and that he will onyl play one more year....

Fact is that he willl play more than 12 min a game, Mike D and the staff is tired of Nate being a baby so they won't tolerate his rants, and Nate having only two years left?? or something of that nature as if saying he is a washed up player...this guys can jump over 4 feet...he will be around for a while.

His shot has developed tremendously...he should just drive to the hoop and draw as many fouls as possible to be a level up. He has to play like Dwayne Wade..little guys get the foul calls, especially with A+ athletic effort of always driving towards the basket.

Nate can be a starter on most teams, as long as he is consistent which is his main flaw.

Scipio
Sep 23, 2009, 06:58
From wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_Salary_Cap

Larry Bird exception

Perhaps the most well-known of the NBA's salary cap exceptions, it is so named because the Boston Celtics were the first team permitted to exceed the salary cap to re-sign one of their own players (in that case, Larry Bird). Free agents who qualify for this exception are called "qualifying veteran free agents" or "Bird Free Agents" in the CBA, and this exception falls under the auspices of the Veteran Free Agent exception. In essence, the Larry Bird exception allows teams to exceed the salary cap to re-sign their own free agents, at an amount up to the maximum salary. To qualify as a Bird free agent, a player must have played three seasons without being waived or changing teams as a free agent. This means a player can obtain "Bird rights" by playing under three one-year contracts, a single contract of at least three years, or any combination thereof. It also means that when a player is traded, his Bird rights are traded with him, and his new team can use the Bird exception to re-sign him. Bird-exception contracts can be up to six years in length.


Essentially it allows a team to resign their players regardless of their cap situation. But it costs money to retain the Bird Rights and eats into our available cap in 2010. If we retain their Bird Rights we won't have enough to go after a max-contract free agent in 2010. So therefore we will forego retaining Lee's and Nate's Bird Rights an let them be unrestricted free agents next year.

It's possible we will sign Lee as an unrestricted free-agent next year but definitely not both Lee and Nate. We will not have enough cap space to do it. But that then leaves us with only 8 players on our roster.

Am I the only one worried about only having 6 players on the roster next year and not enough cap space to build a team? At the start of free agency in 2010, we will only have Curry, Jeffries, Chandler, Gallo, Douglas and Hill on the roster (+ some remaining scrubs = Joe Crawford + our 2010 draft pick).

Best case projections have us having $11 mil remaining after a max-contract. So we sign Lee at $8 mil. That leaves us with $3 mil to sign 1 more free agent (possibly Nate??). So....Curry, Jeffries, Chandler, Gallo, Douglas, Hill, max-contract, Lee and one other free-agent. That's 9 players (with no starting PG). You have to have a minimum of 13 to fill a roster. Any money spent (e.g. mid-level) eats in 2011 cap space.

Am I the only one that sees this as a potential problem or am I wrong?


Thanks, much appreciated.

KING~POETIQ
Sep 23, 2009, 09:56
The only thing I agree with is that Nate can't control with his emotions, that he won't be satisfied playing 12 min a game, and that he will onyl play one more year....

Fact is that he willl play more than 12 min a game, Mike D and the staff is tired of Nate being a baby so they won't tolerate his rants, and Nate having only two years left?? or something of that nature as if saying he is a washed up player...this guys can jump over 4 feet...he will be around for a while.

His shot has developed tremendously...he should just drive to the hoop and draw as many fouls as possible to be a level up. He has to play like Dwayne Wade..little guys get the foul calls, especially with A+ athletic effort of always driving towards the basket.

Nate can be a starter on most teams, as long as he is consistent which is his main flaw.

You're on point with this one.


Only a hater would talk **** about an up and coming star like nate. He played well for our knicks!!! Support the lil' mofo :lol:

richtree
Sep 23, 2009, 12:06
I am not questioning Nate's effort. He plays hard.

Nate is the only way we are going to ship out a big contract. Lee would have to be a sign and trade for the next team.

Nate is going to come down to 3 issues:

1 -- he will leave via free agency

2 -- he will want too much money to stay a Knick and probably Longterm

3 -- if we don't trade him early we risk losing our bargaining power.

So, Nate must go or else we have to find a way to do something in a 3 way deal to dump contracts.

pat
Sep 23, 2009, 16:19
I am not questioning Nate's effort. He plays hard.

Nate is the only way we are going to ship out a big contract. Lee would have to be a sign and trade for the next team.

Nate is going to come down to 3 issues:

1 -- he will leave via free agency

2 -- he will want too much money to stay a Knick and probably Longterm

3 -- if we don't trade him early we risk losing our bargaining power.

So, Nate must go or else we have to find a way to do something in a 3 way deal to dump contracts.

You completely changed your train of thought here. First it was "N8" is going to slow down. Now it is "He is our only chance to get rid of our big worthless contracts." What is it then? If your last statement is true, our priority isn't shipping N8. It is only a bitter pill we'll have to swallow if we want to move ahead as far our real No. 1 priority is concerned: moving Eddy Curry's contract.

DontForgetDerekHarper
Sep 23, 2009, 16:33
Its funny to me, how if nate puts up the same numbers he does now and the knicks have a real center, and a legit pg win 45 games, we all say he is vital to our winning ways. I believe half of our wins last year came due to nate taking over games. I dont believe he is selfish or has a me versus the other team mentality, I feel he does what it takes when no one else will to win basketball games. He takes the shots duhon air balls, lee passes up. he is our second best volume rebounder as per his height minutes played and time in the paint. led our team in steals, and was our number one fourth quarter scorer, and you guys cast him off as a flaw filled cancer. Typical new york fans, take our best and knock them down because we suck as a team. Get over it, Nate is probably our most talented, most efficient scoring, most energetic, enthusiastic, intense, consistent player on the team.

LJ4ptplay
Sep 23, 2009, 16:48
By Alan Hahn

Nate Robinson will be signed to a one-year contract today and, according to a person with knowledge of the situation, Robinson, who was a restricted free agent who earlier this summer told the Knicks he had no interest in playing anywhere else, will get more than his $2.9M qualifying offer. There are also performance bonuses included in the deal.

David Lee, the team's other restricted free agent, is still unsigned, though his agent, Mark Bartelstein, and Donnie Walsh are in the midst of negotiatins on a one-year deal.

************************************************** *******

Was told the Nate Robinson signing won't be officially announced today. Details? Not sure. An agreement is in place, however.

As for the trade-veto question, I was told Nate would have to consent to any trades.

http://www.newsday.com/sports/basketball/knicks/the-knicks-fix-1.812055

Yikes! It looks like Nate may have a trade-veto in his new deal. So much for trading him this year to get rid of Eddy or Jeffries. Oh well, he's a 1 year rental I guess.

Crazy⑧s
Sep 24, 2009, 05:21
Let's hope not. Regardless, he's gonna be what he is wherever he goes and I can't see much of a style change occurring in him. So he must love NY.

I won't miss him too much as long as he's used to bait some moronic GM into taking on Curry.

King Ewing
Sep 28, 2009, 23:17
I agree. Trade him...

TunerAddict
Sep 28, 2009, 23:42
Its funny to me, how if nate puts up the same numbers he does now and the knicks have a real center, and a legit pg win 45 games, we all say he is vital to our winning ways. I believe half of our wins last year came due to nate taking over games. I dont believe he is selfish or has a me versus the other team mentality, I feel he does what it takes when no one else will to win basketball games. He takes the shots duhon air balls, lee passes up. he is our second best volume rebounder as per his height minutes played and time in the paint. led our team in steals, and was our number one fourth quarter scorer, and you guys cast him off as a flaw filled cancer. Typical new york fans, take our best and knock them down because we suck as a team. Get over it, Nate is probably our most talented, most efficient scoring, most energetic, enthusiastic, intense, consistent player on the team.

Yeah, and I can name you a bunch of games he he took us out of. How many games did he go into the 4th quarter and decide to drive 4 or 5 plays in the row, and then we're suddenly down 4 instead of up. He blew a lot of games as well, don't ignore that fact.

KBlack25
Sep 29, 2009, 11:13
Nate is what he is...

Sometimes it appears the offense runs better with him on the floor, they are definitely faster. At the same time, his ball handling leaves something to be desired, and sometimes it looks like he is just out of control. I can remember several times where he just lost control of the ball running down court.

He's a high energy guy off the bench, but is he a particularly good POINT GUARD? No, not really, he doesn't have the ball handling or passing ability for that. But he IS a good basketball player.

He's fine for what he is, but what he isn't is a point guard.