Knicks will consider buying out Nate Robinson

[rondohondo]

http://realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/63576/20091222/knicks_will_consider_buying_out_nate/

I wonder if the C's would be Nate's # 1 choice if he were to be bought out ? I don't see why they wouldn't be if he wanted to get traded here in the 1st place. I wouldn't give up anything for him in a trade , but would take a gamble on him if he was bought out.

[Tai]

No doubt you have to consider Nate if you can get him to agree to a reasonable price for the C's.

[xmuscularghandix]

If they just buy him out we HAVE to get him. See you later JR.

[Roy Hobbs]

If we signed Nate, it would basically be the end of House.  I wouldn't like that trade off.  Nate is a punk.  I mean, the Knicks, of all teams, are benching him because they're more successful with him off the floor.

[youcanthandlethetruth113]

I don't think Nate Robinson is a punk at all. I think he's just not part of the Knicks' long-term plans (hence his 1-year deal), and I think he's a tremendous talent. I certainly don't think bringing in Nate would spell the end of House as Eddie is better off playing SG anyways and Nate is an aggressive PG that loves to penetrate and dish (or finish). He's obviously undersized, but his hustle and insane athleticism more than make up for being undersized (IMO). I think he'd be a fantastic insurance policy if Rondo/Maquis/Eddie were to get injured.

Also, KG eliminates anyone's perceived "punk" factor. Marbury was held in check last season and wasn't a "distraction" in the locker room by any means. KG's contagious attitude is seriously being taken for granted on this team.

[Evantime34]

If we signed Nate, it would basically be the end of House.  I wouldn't like that trade off.  Nate is a punk.  I mean, the Knicks, of all teams, are benching him because they're more successful with him off the floor.

Why would it be the end of House. If he outplays house I have no problem with it being the end of house. If he doesn't outplay House he will see some time but not as much as Eddy and he stays. I thought Cassell would be the end of House, then I thought Marbury would be the end of House. Neither was the end.

 I am picturing Nate in a Marbury role, in that we cut him if he's a problem. If he plays well and accepts his role (scorer off the bench) then we have a good value pick up. If not he's gone. Win win if he gets cut.

[BballTim]

  On the plus side, people would stop complaining about Sheed's behavior...

[ssspence]

nate is going to sign with a team where he can play. And the Cs aren't going to make him that guarantee. Not a likely fit -- Doc probably wants nothing to do with him anyway.

[Evantime34]

nate is going to sign with a team where he can play. And the Cs aren't going to make him that guarantee. Not a likely fit -- Doc probably wants nothing to do with him anyway.

I wouldn't be shocked to see him sign with Phoenix.

[jackson_34]

I don't think Nate Robinson is a punk at all. I think he's just not part of the Knicks' long-term plans (hence his 1-year deal), and I think he's a tremendous talent. I certainly don't think bringing in Nate would spell the end of House as Eddie is better off playing SG anyways and Nate is an aggressive PG that loves to penetrate and dish (or finish). He's obviously undersized, but his hustle and insane athleticism more than make up for being undersized (IMO). I think he'd be a fantastic insurance policy if Rondo/Maquis/Eddie were to get injured.

Also, KG eliminates anyone's perceived "punk" factor. Marbury was held in check last season and wasn't a "distraction" in the locker room by any means. KG's contagious attitude is seriously being taken for granted on this team.

He very much is a Punk; team fights, that fight between the Knicks and Nuggets, selfish attitude (look at his assist numbers), Non-stop trash talking to teammates... but if there were a team that could muzzle him, it would be the Celtics. One false move and KG would bite his head off.

[ssspence]

nate is going to sign with a team where he can play. And the Cs aren't going to make him that guarantee. Not a likely fit -- Doc probably wants nothing to do with him anyway.

I wouldn't be shocked to see him sign with Phoenix.

You don't think D'Antoni has advised his boy Gentry NOT to do that?

[Roy Hobbs]

If we signed Nate, it would basically be the end of House.  I wouldn't like that trade off.  Nate is a punk.  I mean, the Knicks, of all teams, are benching him because they're more successful with him off the floor.

Why would it be the end of House. If he outplays house I have no problem with it being the end of house. If he doesn't outplay House he will see some time but not as much as Eddy and he stays. I thought Cassell would be the end of House, then I thought Marbury would be the end of House. Neither was the end.

 I am picturing Nate in a Marbury role, in that we cut him if he's a problem. If he plays well and accepts his role (scorer off the bench) then we have a good value pick up. If not he's gone. Win win if he gets cut.

Because if Nate is the backup PG, you can't play Eddie beside him defensively.  If, on the other hand, Eddie beats out Nate, then Robinson would do what he does best:  disrupting chemistry.

[Who]

Lakers? Weren't they interested in Nate in the past?

[Roy Hobbs]

I don't think Nate Robinson is a punk at all.

The guy has gotten into multiple fights with teammates, including going after one of them with a broom (or a mop, or whatever it was).  His own teammates call him a "jerk".  Both Larry Brown and Mike D'Antoni didn't like him, and now the Knicks are more successful without him than with him.  Plus, he's one of the biggest showboats in the league, despite never winning games to back it up.

Nate is the very definition of "punk", and he'd probably make the top ten list of "player least likely to buy into ubuntu".  It continually shocks me that so many Celtics fans favor taking chances on talented jerks, rather than sticking with the system that won us a championship.

[JHTruth]

If he's bought out, the C's need to take a hard look at him. He's too dynamic a player not too. How many times do we complain that we need a back-up PG to push the ball and put pressure on the D when Rondo goes to the bench? I think it becomes a House, Nate backcourt with Daniels at SF. I think that unit can score and create offense..