Nate the Closer

[BballTim]

Everyone pretty much agrees that Nate will add value as a backup point guard - he is capable of bringing the ball up, defending the position and knocking down open shots.

I think he might be a major asset in end-game scenarios, when we have a lead and the offense is sputtering. He scores with solid efficiency (55% True Shooting) and knocks down his free throws (78%). Plus, his ability to space the floor will help open things up for Pierce.

I he cappable of playing defense? 

He has never shown the effort.

And name the last time a 5'8 guy was a good defender in the NBA.  (and remember, there is a difference between a high steal rate and good defense)

Well, name the last time there wasa 5'8" player in the NBA. There are so few of them, that even if only one or two are good at defense then the percentage of them who are good at defense is probably similar to players of any other height, or the league average.

To answer your question though, Calvin Murphy (who also had a good steal rate), was known as a lockdown defender (he's in th HOF).

Exactly.  You had to go all the way back to the 70s to find one. 


There is a limitation when defending when so much shorter then the guys you are defending.


Nate is here to play offense.   He was not brought here to be a defender.

  He had to go back to the 70s to find one, but he's only had like 6 or so players to choose from that played regularly. Nate wasn't brought here for his defense but I think they're expecting to see him play better defense than Eddie did. That probably had a lot to do with this change.

[wdleehi]

Everyone pretty much agrees that Nate will add value as a backup point guard - he is capable of bringing the ball up, defending the position and knocking down open shots.

I think he might be a major asset in end-game scenarios, when we have a lead and the offense is sputtering. He scores with solid efficiency (55% True Shooting) and knocks down his free throws (78%). Plus, his ability to space the floor will help open things up for Pierce.

I he cappable of playing defense? 

He has never shown the effort.

And name the last time a 5'8 guy was a good defender in the NBA.  (and remember, there is a difference between a high steal rate and good defense)

Well, name the last time there wasa 5'8" player in the NBA. There are so few of them, that even if only one or two are good at defense then the percentage of them who are good at defense is probably similar to players of any other height, or the league average.

To answer your question though, Calvin Murphy (who also had a good steal rate), was known as a lockdown defender (he's in th HOF).

Exactly.  You had to go all the way back to the 70s to find one. 


There is a limitation when defending when so much shorter then the guys you are defending.


Nate is here to play offense.   He was not brought here to be a defender.

  He had to go back to the 70s to find one, but he's only had like 6 or so players to choose from that played regularly. Nate wasn't brought here for his defense but I think they're expecting to see him play better defense than Eddie did. That probably had a lot to do with this change.

If they were looking for defense, they would have looked somewhere else.


Let's be honest, the Celtics grabbed Nate in a hope of an offensive spark off the bench, not defensive.

And there is nothing wrong with that.

[BballTim]

Everyone pretty much agrees that Nate will add value as a backup point guard - he is capable of bringing the ball up, defending the position and knocking down open shots.

I think he might be a major asset in end-game scenarios, when we have a lead and the offense is sputtering. He scores with solid efficiency (55% True Shooting) and knocks down his free throws (78%). Plus, his ability to space the floor will help open things up for Pierce.

I he cappable of playing defense? 

He has never shown the effort.

And name the last time a 5'8 guy was a good defender in the NBA.  (and remember, there is a difference between a high steal rate and good defense)

Well, name the last time there wasa 5'8" player in the NBA. There are so few of them, that even if only one or two are good at defense then the percentage of them who are good at defense is probably similar to players of any other height, or the league average.

To answer your question though, Calvin Murphy (who also had a good steal rate), was known as a lockdown defender (he's in th HOF).

Exactly.  You had to go all the way back to the 70s to find one. 


There is a limitation when defending when so much shorter then the guys you are defending.


Nate is here to play offense.   He was not brought here to be a defender.

  He had to go back to the 70s to find one, but he's only had like 6 or so players to choose from that played regularly. Nate wasn't brought here for his defense but I think they're expecting to see him play better defense than Eddie did. That probably had a lot to do with this change.

If they were looking for defense, they would have looked somewhere else.


Let's be honest, the Celtics grabbed Nate in a hope of an offensive spark off the bench, not defensive.

And there is nothing wrong with that.

  If they were looking for only defense or mainly defense then I agree they'd have looked somewhere else. I don't see why it''s so hard to believe that Nate might be a better defender than Eddie, or that if he was it might have factored into their decision to trade for him.

[Chre]

Everyone pretty much agrees that Nate will add value as a backup point guard - he is capable of bringing the ball up, defending the position and knocking down open shots.

I think he might be a major asset in end-game scenarios, when we have a lead and the offense is sputtering. He scores with solid efficiency (55% True Shooting) and knocks down his free throws (78%). Plus, his ability to space the floor will help open things up for Pierce.

I he cappable of playing defense? 

He has never shown the effort.

And name the last time a 5'8 guy was a good defender in the NBA.  (and remember, there is a difference between a high steal rate and good defense)

Well, name the last time there wasa 5'8" player in the NBA. There are so few of them, that even if only one or two are good at defense then the percentage of them who are good at defense is probably similar to players of any other height, or the league average.

To answer your question though, Calvin Murphy (who also had a good steal rate), was known as a lockdown defender (he's in th HOF).

Exactly.  You had to go all the way back to the 70s to find one. 


There is a limitation when defending when so much shorter then the guys you are defending.


Nate is here to play offense.   He was not brought here to be a defender.

  He had to go back to the 70s to find one, but he's only had like 6 or so players to choose from that played regularly. Nate wasn't brought here for his defense but I think they're expecting to see him play better defense than Eddie did. That probably had a lot to do with this change.

If they were looking for defense, they would have looked somewhere else.


Let's be honest, the Celtics grabbed Nate in a hope of an offensive spark off the bench, not defensive.

And there is nothing wrong with that.

Regardless of how you feel about Robinson's aptitude for defense, can we at least agree he is an upgrade over Eddie House when it comes to pressuring opposing ball handlers? I think that is the biggest reason they traded Eddie specifically, he has become quite the liability at the defensive end (watching Collison destroy him was sad).

[billysan]

One thing is for sure, Nate is an offensive force. If he ever 'figures out' that he needs to play defense and puts forth the effort that most agree he has, it will make a huge difference in his future paycheck. He will be a mid level exception guy at most if he plays no defense IMO.

I dont think he will even approach Ben Gordon salary numbers. He is the closest comparison in recent players I can find from a scorer, at the same size and position standpoint.

No reason Nate can't be an on the ball absolute pest with his physical abilities. He needs to be in a system that maximizes his use on the perimeter as a pressure guy. He is gonna get posted up once in a while, that is where help has to be available as much as possible.

[Rondo_is_better]

This is a new start and a contract year for Nate.
Nate will put on a show.

Mark my words.
You will forget about Eddie soon.

Your poem format
makes things seems dramatic
I hope
you are right.

[Chre]

This is a new start and a contract year for Nate.
Nate will put on a show.

Mark my words.
You will forget about Eddie soon.

Your poem format
makes things seems dramatic
I hope
you are right.

Ha. Well done. TP.

[rav123]

Everyone pretty much agrees that Nate will add value as a backup point guard - he is capable of bringing the ball up, defending the position and knocking down open shots.

I think he might be a major asset in end-game scenarios, when we have a lead and the offense is sputtering. He scores with solid efficiency (55% True Shooting) and knocks down his free throws (78%). Plus, his ability to space the floor will help open things up for Pierce.

I he cappable of playing defense? 

He has never shown the effort.

And name the last time a 5'8 guy was a good defender in the NBA.  (and remember, there is a difference between a high steal rate and good defense)

Well, name the last time there wasa 5'8" player in the NBA. There are so few of them, that even if only one or two are good at defense then the percentage of them who are good at defense is probably similar to players of any other height, or the league average.

To answer your question though, Calvin Murphy (who also had a good steal rate), was known as a lockdown defender (he's in th HOF).

Exactly.  You had to go all the way back to the 70s to find one. 


There is a limitation when defending when so much shorter then the guys you are defending.


Nate is here to play offense.   He was not brought here to be a defender.

  He had to go back to the 70s to find one, but he's only had like 6 or so players to choose from that played regularly. Nate wasn't brought here for his defense but I think they're expecting to see him play better defense than Eddie did. That probably had a lot to do with this change.

If they were looking for defense, they would have looked somewhere else.


Let's be honest, the Celtics grabbed Nate in a hope of an offensive spark off the bench, not defensive.

And there is nothing wrong with that.

I'm not saying Nate is a lockdown defender. I'm just saying he can be average, while you seem to think he is a liability. And thanks Bball Tim, that's what I meant. There are so few 5'8" players. And since offense is more important than defense in this league (in terms of how likely you are to stick/get paid, not the actual game), 5'8" guys who are only good at defense won't be in the NBA.