Nate out of rotation with Celtics

LJ4ptplay

Starter
Tony Is In, Nate and Marquis Are Out

According to Doc, the playoff rotation is set. Tony Allen is in. Marquis Daniels and Nate Robinson are out. Interesting. Very interesting.

"I told the guys that was the rotation that we'll use, that's pretty much our playoff rotation, and, minute-wise, the only concern there was conditioning, and I don't know if that played a factor in it or not."

Notably absent was Marquis Daniels and Nate Robinson, who never shed their warm-ups Sunday. To their credit, both players were active in supporting their teammates throughout the game, but Boston utilized a five-man bench of Allen, Glen Davis, Shelden Williams, Rasheed Wallace, and Michael Finley. Williams logged a little more than two minutes as the Celtics let Wallace cool off on the pine after a second-half technical foul, but it appears his role will be limited to situations of foul trouble with the bigs.

Allen logged 18:43 and, in a very short time, has made himself the sixth man that neither Daniels or Robinson could cement themselves as recently.

If you had told me at the beginning of the season that TA would beat out Marquis, I never would have believed you. If you had told me a month ago that TA would be Rondo's backup instead of Nate, I would have had a good laugh at your expense.

This is Tony Allen right? The same Tony Allen that played himself out of the rotation heading into each of the last two playoffs? The guy that Danny Ainge tried to give away for nothing this offseason (to which the Pacers ...the PACERS... said, "no thanks")?



Yet there he is. He's an energizer bunny. He defends (it helps that he knows the system down pat). He attacks the basket. He even handles the ball. Basically, he's doing everything Marquis was brought here to do. He's even having fewer and fewer "Bad Tony" moments. What more can you ask for?

"[Allen] just plays hard," said Rivers. "He's our best defensive player. He's just bought in completely to the team and the way the team plays. He's no longer trying to score; scoring just happens. He's trying to be the best defensive player on our team, and I think he's figured out --‘That's how I'm going to play.' He gives our team energy. He really does."

Credit his health as well. He's been largely without injury for the last several months and perhaps that has led to his increased confidence.

With that said, if Daniels and Robinson are both out of the rotation, that doesn't speak well to those personnel moves. Daniels was supposed to be our swiss army knife but instead he's been cut from the rotation (couldn't resist, sorry). Nate cost us Eddie House and two young (if unproven) players. If they don't play, what good are they?

http://www.celticsblog.com/2010/4/5/1405996/tony-is-in-nate-and-marquis-are-out

Where are all the people that crucified D'Antoni for benching Nate? He might not even play at all in the playoffs.

That deal is looking better by the minute.
 

KBlack25

Starter
But but but...

OGKnickFan said:
IMO, Nate makes the Celtics contenders, when before the trade they were not, because of his ability to, on any given night, in the clutch, light a team up. They already win games, Nate gets them a few that they would otherwise fall short of winning.

Kiyaman said:
Say it right.....Head Coach Doc Rivers will teach Nate like he taught KG, Pierce, and Ray Allen, how to leave the "individual-performance" on the shelve when he come to the game.

And then some people that got it right:

Starks said:
I tell you one thing. Nate is going get ugly lesson real quick if he tries chucking up Js with Allen and Paul open. His FGA are going to down by like 70%

skisloper said:
Do you not understand that ZERO TEAMS offered Nate any kind of deal when he was a restricted free agent. Not a single team wanted him. Now its D'Antonio's fault ?

I love Nate and his whole persona but here we go again with people on this board being more intelligent then every coach and GM in thinking Nate is better then D'Antonio allows him to be.


I told you this guy was, at the very least, extremely overrated. Nate Robinson NEEDS to dominate the ball to truly be effective, otherwise he's got really nothing. He can't dominate the ball on the Celts.
 
Last edited:

TR1LL10N

Hannibal Lecter
Vindication. I am confident that we will all be vindicated on Lee, Gallo and Dant too. We will knockem back one at a time.
 

TR1LL10N

Hannibal Lecter
Am I the only one that notices a pattern? I am not saying everyone falls under the pattern but it seems like the same people who hate Walsh, Dant, Gallo and Lee are the same people who defend players like Nate and Marbury. I could be wrong but that is my general impression.
 

KBlack25

Starter
Am I the only one that notices a pattern? I am not saying everyone falls under the pattern but it seems like the same people who hate Walsh, Dant, Gallo and Lee are the same people who defend players like Nate and Marbury. I could be wrong but that is my general impression.

I've noticed the same, posted on another thread that ever since the Marbury thing it feels like D'Antoni could do no right in some people's eyes...
 

nyk_nyk

All Star
The benching by Dantoni and this situation are totally unrelated. Rivers called TA the teams's best defensive player, so why would Rivers put him behind Nate or Daniels in the depth chart??

Dantoni simply did not like Nate. I admit that Nate did some things in NY to warrant a benching here and there BUT this situation has nothing to do with his play on the court. It does however have everything to do with TA and his rapid improvement.

Don't be so quick to try and throw dirt on Nate. This is just a a classic case of a player proving his worth and climbing up the depth chart.
 

XH20X

Rookie
The benching by Dantoni and this situation are totally unrelated. Rivers called TA the teams's best defensive player, so why would Rivers put him behind Nate or Daniels in the depth chart??

Dantoni simply did not like Nate. I admit that Nate did some things in NY to warrant a benching here and there BUT this situation has nothing to do with his play on the court. It does however have everything to do with TA and his rapid improvement.

Don't be so quick to try and throw dirt on Nate. This is just a a classic case of a player proving his worth and climbing up the depth chart.

I beg to differ, I believe it has everything to do with nate. If it wasn't for nate they would still have eddie house (walker and giddens might still be on the bench). I'm sure they could use eddie house more effectively than the knicks have. Nate is still showing his immaturity on the court, thats why he's being benched. He had his opportunities but he did no make anything out of it and TA siezed it instead.
 

KBlack25

Starter
The benching by Dantoni and this situation are totally unrelated. Rivers called TA the teams's best defensive player, so why would Rivers put him behind Nate or Daniels in the depth chart??

Dantoni simply did not like Nate. I admit that Nate did some things in NY to warrant a benching here and there BUT this situation has nothing to do with his play on the court. It does however have everything to do with TA and his rapid improvement.

Don't be so quick to try and throw dirt on Nate. This is just a a classic case of a player proving his worth and climbing up the depth chart.

Wait, wait, wait...are you really trying to say that Nate losing his spot in the rotation in Boston has nothing to do with Nate's play?

Now, it's one thing to say "D'Antoni plays favorites, etc..." but now Rivers has benched Nate also. Even if you don't believe D'Antoni had a reason to bench Nate, Rivers went out TRADED for Nate and after playing him decided he wasn't worth being in the rotation. If he had played well (as some Nostradamus-like people on this board aptly predicted), he would keep his spot, he was certainly given a chance to earn it...especially because the Celtics made a trade to go out and get him!
 

TR1LL10N

Hannibal Lecter
Wait, wait, wait...are you really trying to say that Nate losing his spot in the rotation in Boston has nothing to do with Nate's play?

Now, it's one thing to say "D'Antoni plays favorites, etc..." but now Rivers has benched Nate also. Even if you don't believe D'Antoni had a reason to bench Nate, Rivers went out TRADED for Nate and after playing him decided he wasn't worth being in the rotation. If he had played well (as some Nostradamus-like people on this board aptly predicted), he would keep his spot, he was certainly given a chance to earn it...especially because the Celtics made a trade to go out and get him!

Lets also remember that House was always part of the Celtics rotation so losing him should have opened up a spot.
 

abcd

KnicksonLIN.com
Where are all the people that crucified D'Antoni for benching Nate? He might not even play at all in the playoffs.

That deal is looking better by the minute.

The funny thing about the article was that Doc Rivers clearly stated that he told Nate Robinson and Marquis Daniels about the lineup change, unlike D'Antoni who likes to do things behind people backs and likes to say insults aboout players to the media. Ex: When he said "I don't play bad rookies" when referring to Jordan Hill and "Id play satan, if I could win" when referring to Nate Robinson.

Is the purpose of this thread to say that D'Antoni was right for benching Robinson for 14 games and starting the 35% from the field Chris Duhon?
If so, lol in advance.

Nate Robinson only got 14.9 minutes per game, in Boston. How many NBA players do you know that can average big numbers in 14.9 minutes per game?
 

nyk_nyk

All Star
Lets also remember that House was always part of the Celtics rotation so losing him should have opened up a spot.

Yeah it opened up a spot for Tony Allen. Nothing your saying is making sense. Rivers CLEARLY stated why he made the rotation change yet you are trying so hard to throw Nate under the bus.
 

TR1LL10N

Hannibal Lecter
Yeah it opened up a spot for Tony Allen. Nothing your saying is making sense. Rivers CLEARLY stated why he made the rotation change yet you are trying so hard to throw Nate under the bus.

So Tony Allen is better then Nate? Does that not prove our point? Nate was being being touted by some on this board as an Allstar PG...only if Dant had not had a personal grudge against Nate we would all see his true potential. Well that line of thinking has so far been proven wrong. I would say that nothing you havce said made sense but you haven't said anything...

EDIT***Go look at my post history on Nate including the thread I started when he was traded. Tell me how I threw him under the bus. You can't. Why? Because I didn't. I have always been measured in my critique of Nate. This thread has less to do with Nate and more to do with the inaccurate rants of some that Dant was holding him back and responsible for his shortcomings.
 

nyk_nyk

All Star
So Tony Allen is better then Nate? Does that not prove our point? Nate was being being touted by some on this board as an Allstar PG...only if Dant had not had a personal grudge against Nate we would all see his true potential. Well that line of thinking has so far been proven wrong. I would say that nothing you havce said made sense but you haven't said anything...

EDIT***Go look at my post history on Nate including the thread I started when he was traded. Tell me how I threw him under the bus. You can't. Why? Because I didn't. I have always been measured in my critique of Nate. This thread has less to do with Nate and more to do with the inaccurate rants of some that Dant was holding him back and responsible for his shortcomings.

In your earlier post you stated "Vindication". For what??? Are you happy to see Nate benched by Rivers because it makes your precious Dantoni look good? Well it doesn't because the reasons (once again) are totally different.

Tony Allen is 6 inches taller and plays better defense. A well rounded coach like Rivers knows the value of a good defender over offense. Your acting like Nate isn't capable of playing great basketball. He'll never be an all-star but he can be of use on any NBA team.

Your unconditional love for Dantoni is troublesome. Hard to believe your a diehard knicks fan. If you knew the team's history prior to all the losing then you would understand why people are uncomfortable with Dantoni leading this team.
 

Slit

Rookie
Am I the only one that notices a pattern? I am not saying everyone falls under the pattern but it seems like the same people who hate Walsh, Dant, Gallo and Lee are the same people who defend players like Nate and Marbury. I could be wrong but that is my general impression.

You got it arsewards aka wrong way around. People who love Dant blame his conflicts with the players on the players and hate N8, which is natural (how a love object and a personal fetish not be a peoples person?). But since you take internets too seriously you separete people here on "us" and "them". And "them" (evil orcs, Dant hating Boston fans in disguise) must love Nate in your head, since you dislike him.

In fact Knicks fans I know very rarely dislike Gallo _and_ Lee.
 

KBlack25

Starter
In your earlier post you stated "Vindication". For what??? Are you happy to see Nate benched by Rivers because it makes your precious Dantoni look good? Well it doesn't because the reasons (once again) are totally different.

Tony Allen is 6 inches taller and plays better defense. A well rounded coach like Rivers knows the value of a good defender over offense. Your acting like Nate isn't capable of playing great basketball. He'll never be an all-star but he can be of use on any NBA team.

Your unconditional love for Dantoni is troublesome. Hard to believe your a diehard knicks fan. If you knew the team's history prior to all the losing then you would understand why people are uncomfortable with Dantoni leading this team.

The fact of the matter is, though, the Celtics TRADED for him. They must have seen something they wanted, they would not have just sent us Walker, Giddens, House AND a pick to get a guy that they felt that they had no use for...

But now it is apparent they have little to no use for him. The question is, "Why?" Because he's just not that good? Because Doc Rivers has a grudge against a guy he just traded for? Because of something Nate did in practice? Whatever the reason, at the trade deadline they were willing to move young pieces to get this guy who they now are stashing on their bench. They had Tony Allen the whole time, if they felt he was the answer, the Celts wouldn't have made the move at all.

The question is not how this makes D'Antoni look...the question is why would a team trade for a guy, give up young pieces, and throw that guy on the bench while giving a guy they had all along inflated minutes? Maybe, just maybe, they got Nate and were not impressed.
 

TR1LL10N

Hannibal Lecter
In your earlier post you stated "Vindication". For what??? Are you happy to see Nate benched by Rivers because it makes your precious Dantoni look good? Well it doesn't because the reasons (once again) are totally different.

Tony Allen is 6 inches taller and plays better defense. A well rounded coach like Rivers knows the value of a good defender over offense. Your acting like Nate isn't capable of playing great basketball. He'll never be an all-star but he can be of use on any NBA team.

Your unconditional love for Dantoni is troublesome. Hard to believe your a diehard knicks fan. If you knew the team's history prior to all the losing then you would understand why people are uncomfortable with Dantoni leading this team.

A complete distortion. I have never had unconditional love for anything. I am not guided by emotion and irrational thoughts but rather objective critical thinking.

All the things you listed about Allen in contrast to Nate are the same measured criticisms I and others have had from the beginning. The vindication comes with several debates where people blamed Dant each step of the way for N8. I even posted a link to a previous debate where you gad posters claiming N8 should be an all-star PG had it not been for Dant.
 

TR1LL10N

Hannibal Lecter
You got it arsewards aka wrong way around. People who love Dant blame his conflicts with the players on the players and hate N8, which is natural (how a love object and a personal fetish not be a peoples person?). But since you take internets too seriously you separete people here on "us" and "them". And "them" (evil orcs, Dant hating Boston fans in disguise) must love Nate in your head, since you dislike him.

In fact Knicks fans I know very rarely dislike Gallo _and_ Lee.

Funny that someone with 7 posts thinks they can tell anyone about the debates that have been going on for months on these boards or the motivations of posters. I don't dislike N8 and proves you are speaking out of turn. I am pragmatic and have always assessed his pros and cons fairly. Again this has less to do with Nate and more to do with the Dant haters who insisted N8 should be our starting PG if it were not for Dant's unproven hatred. Having him out of the rotation in Boston is very telling because it shows a pattern that goes beyond Dant. I will post some previous statements I have made and then maybe you will think next time before making assumptions based on limited info.

Lets not hate on Nate. He won us some games and put on a show. He is a likable guy and if used right is very effective. Boston is a perfect fit for him...he walks into an established contender with strong veteran leadership and an opportunity to win some games for them off the bench.
<!-- / message --> <!-- sig -->

He is a combo guard or undersized SG... spark plug off the bench and nothing more. He will never be a starting PG in this league...not the right skill set or mentality to be a floor general on a nightly basis. I like Nate but thems the facts.

Nate is a better overall player, better athlete, better shooter and is more clutch...Duhon is a better PG...sadly. I like N8, I am not a hater, never been one...I am pragmatic and know basketball. The dude is simply not a PG that can run an offense nightly let alone one as complex as Dant's.
 

TR1LL10N

Hannibal Lecter
The fact of the matter is, though, the Celtics TRADED for him. They must have seen something they wanted, they would not have just sent us Walker, Giddens, House AND a pick to get a guy that they felt that they had no use for...

But now it is apparent they have little to no use for him. The question is, "Why?" Because he's just not that good? Because Doc Rivers has a grudge against a guy he just traded for? Because of something Nate did in practice? Whatever the reason, at the trade deadline they were willing to move young pieces to get this guy who they now are stashing on their bench. They had Tony Allen the whole time, if they felt he was the answer, the Celts wouldn't have made the move at all.

The question is not how this makes D'Antoni look...the question is why would a team trade for a guy, give up young pieces, and throw that guy on the bench while giving a guy they had all along inflated minutes? Maybe, just maybe, they got Nate and were not impressed.

Nyk_nyk please read the bold quote. Thanks. :thumbsup:
 

abcd

KnicksonLIN.com
In your earlier post you stated "Vindication". For what??? Are you happy to see Nate benched by Rivers because it makes your precious Dantoni look good? Well it doesn't because the reasons (once again) are totally different.

Tony Allen is 6 inches taller and plays better defense. A well rounded coach like Rivers knows the value of a good defender over offense. Your acting like Nate isn't capable of playing great basketball. He'll never be an all-star but he can be of use on any NBA team.

Your unconditional love for Dantoni is troublesome. Hard to believe your a diehard knicks fan. If you knew the team's history prior to all the losing then you would understand why people are uncomfortable with Dantoni leading this team.

Good post. I agree.

It's sad how the D'Antonisexuals are trying to defend D'Antoni's decision for benching Nate Robinson and starting Chris Duhon.

If D'Antoni is so smart and great, why hasn't he been able to match Isiah Thomas' 33-49 season?

Thomas won 33 games with Eddy Curry as the best player.

D'Antoni has Lee and Harrington, and he can't even break 30 wins.

What did the Knicks get out of the Nate Robinson trade? Did they get a draft pick? No. Did they get an upgrade? No.

As good as Bill Walker has played, he's not outplaying Robinson from when he was on the Knicks, and even if he was, what makes you think D'Antoni is going to keep him in the rotation?

D'Antoni has a reputation for playing players on one night and then removing them out of the rotation the next night, so there's no saying Walker is staying in the starting lineup, or even in the rotation.

P.S.-It's funny how the haters mention Nate Robinson being out of the rotation yet mention nothing about Eddie House's crappy play. What happened to all of the House supporters?
 
Last edited:
Top