Why are we adding Nate Robinson?

[PLamb]

With Robinson we got about 6% better at best

So?

If the only option you have to get better is a small improvement, you still take it.

Yeah, but I don't like Robinson so I would rather have kept House

Personally I think it's a sideway move

I was being generous with the 6 %

He's a selfish jerk, but he's also a better player than House. I don't know if he'll fit with this team, but the ability to move Daniels/Tony Allen to the 2/3 should help.

Offensively yes

As bad as House is defensively, Robinson is just as bad and doesn't even try often

House at least always gave the effort and knows the system, which Robinson doesn't

[Fafnir]

With Robinson we got about 6% better at best

So?

If the only option you have to get better is a small improvement, you still take it.

Yeah, but I don't like Robinson so I would rather have kept House

Personally I think it's a sideway move

I was being generous with the 6 %

He's a selfish jerk, but he's also a better player than House. I don't know if he'll fit with this team, but the ability to move Daniels/Tony Allen to the 2/3 should help.

Offensively yes

As bad as House is defensively, Robinson is just as bad and doesn't even try often

House at least always gave the effort and knows the system, which Robinson doesn't

Knowing the system doesn't matter when people attack you like your Mike Bibby.

Besides Nate might make a lot of dumb defensive mistakes, but his defensive on/off and adjust +/- are actually amazingly good for such a small PG.

[Redz]

Just a suspicion, and perhaps one seen threw rose tinted glasses, but I think we're going to love Nate Robinson here. 

Of course, I found a way to be cheery about Stephon Marbury too...

[Brickowski]

We got him so that we could watch him dunk and forget about all the losing.

[Edgar]

Why not we got him to pack him with Ray and got something better
 

[Reyquila]

We cannot get anybody better. Thats why.

[Reyquila]

Nobody wants Ray; Not even us. Why should anybody else?

[Zorro02120]

I think adding Nate is good for us, we get someone who can actually bring the ball up and free up Marquis to roam. He can also take over if need be. Plus anyone one who has come to the c's in the past and has been a "selfish" in the past has done well ala Sam Cassell (Marbury had rust but played hard and never complained)...

[Edgar]

I think adding Nate is good for us, we get someone who can actually bring the ball up and free up Marquis to roam. He can also take over if need be. Plus anyone one who has come to the c's in the past and has been a "selfish" in the past has done well ala Sam Cassell (Marbury had rust but played hard and never complained)...

welcome to celticsblog Nate.

 


kidding...welcome..nate fan.



 



   nice first post
have a tommy point

[BballTim]

With Robinson we got about 6% better at best

So?

If the only option you have to get better is a small improvement, you still take it.

Yeah, but I don't like Robinson so I would rather have kept House

Personally I think it's a sideway move

I was being generous with the 6 %

He's a selfish jerk, but he's also a better player than House. I don't know if he'll fit with this team, but the ability to move Daniels/Tony Allen to the 2/3 should help.

Offensively yes

As bad as House is defensively, Robinson is just as bad and doesn't even try often

House at least always gave the effort and knows the system, which Robinson doesn't

  I'd have to see Nate play for us before I make the statement that he's no better than Eddie on defense. And even if he did make us 6% better that could be another 4-5 wins. His offense off the bench, selfish as it is, could come in handy when the team goes into scoring droughts.

[Zorro02120]

I think adding Nate is good for us, we get someone who can actually bring the ball up and free up Marquis to roam. He can also take over if need be. Plus anyone one who has come to the c's in the past and has been a "selfish" in the past has done well ala Sam Cassell (Marbury had rust but played hard and never complained)...

welcome to celticsblog Nate.

 


kidding...welcome..nate fan.



 



   nice first post
have a tommy point

You mean welcome Celtics fan...I like Eddie, I don't blame Eddie either, we need energy from somewhere...IT, IS, the starters, we all know it. We happened to be able to get energy without giving up too much. Hopefully it translates throughout the whole team.

[Edgar]

I think adding Nate is good for us, we get someone who can actually bring the ball up and free up Marquis to roam. He can also take over if need be. Plus anyone one who has come to the c's in the past and has been a "selfish" in the past has done well ala Sam Cassell (Marbury had rust but played hard and never complained)...

welcome to celticsblog Nate.

 


kidding...welcome..nate fan.



 



   nice first post
have a tommy point

You mean welcome Celtics fan...I like Eddie, I don't blame Eddie either, we need energy from somewhere...IT, IS, the starters, we all know it. We happened to be able to get energy without giving up too much. Hopefully it translates throughout the whole team.

hopefully

and yes welcome Celtic Fan
is great to see there will be a couple of
Nate supporters here
It will give us some balance if things dont work well
from the start..

Saludos
and extra tp

[Scribbles]

Why are we adding Nate Robinson?  Because almost everyone, including Danny feels we need to make a change.  It isn't going to make us any better, as some of you have pointed out, the 2nd unit isn't our problem this year.  

Also the 40 points he threw up I don't get why people are making such a big deal about.  Tons of mediocre players have put up huge scoring games.  Tony Delk scored 53 in a game once, Jim Jackson put up 50, Bryant Reeves scored 41.  Its no big deal he scored 40.

If this is the only move we're going to make while the Cavs are getting Jamison and getting Big Z back in a month or however long he has to wait before he can resign after being released, this team isn't going to finish any better than if we did nothing at all.  

[jr_3421]

Maybe I'm just an optimist, but I believe Danny still has something up his sleeve. There's just something suspicious about how long it's taking to complete this trade. People say that it's complicated because of Nate's contract but Danny has been talking with NY for months about acquiring him. I see no reason why this trade was not wrapped up today. I have a feeling that there is a 3 way trade in the making. Since NY is not getting McGrady, might they covet Allen? Seems plausible. And if this where the case the another team would definitely be involved because NY is not going give us what we want for Allen. But then again maybe I'm just an optimist...

[byennie]

Also the 40 points he threw up I don't get why people are making such a big deal about.  Tons of mediocre players have put up huge scoring games.  Tony Delk scored 53 in a game once, Jim Jackson put up 50, Bryant Reeves scored 41.  Its no big deal he scored 40.

Robinson can legitimately put up 20 PPG over long stretches -- not something the Tony Delks and Bryant Reeves of the world could ever do.

Of course Jimmy Jackson actually averaged over 20PPG for a several year stretch, so I'm not sure he fits the mold you were going for.

I'm certainly not saying this makes Nate the answer, but Tony Delk isn't a realistic comparison.