Nate Benching Saves Money

[Brendan]

That bonus wouldn't have been counted in salaries when he was traded - so its not like the C's saved any money versus the talent they had.

[Chris]

I don't think this is a big deal.  Nate didn't earn that playing time and money, and he certainly wouldn't have gotten it if he wasn't traded.

[the_Bird]

Wouldn't surprise me if this doesn't end up in arbitration.  Nate won't make a big deal of it right now because he's hoping the C's will resign him, but if and when they let him walk, I would be shocked if his agent doesn't raise a fuss about this.  Hell, his agent won't be doing his job if he doesn't do that.

Seems kinda odd to have such a large incentive that you leave completely in the hands of the team that's going to have to pay you that money.  Basically talking a quarter of his current contract, effectively to be paid at the discretion of his employer. 

[bballee]

didn't one local scribe indicate that the C's were surprised by his immaturity? (first of all, how could they have been surprised, did they never WATCH the guy?)

I give him credit though, he hasn't complained once - and the guy is on twitter 24/7

I haven't heard that no but I wonder what kind of immaturity.

The guy seems competitive and hyper energetic. Maybe it is too much. Kind of like how a puppy can be really cute but as soon as he starts chewing up the couch and peeing all over the place he becomes a chore to take care of.

Is it just his personality? Or does he not take coaching well and do whatever he wants on the court.

To me all indications are that Nate wasn't really playing his game when he was in there, just trying to blend in a la Marbury.

He showed flashes at times but was inconsistent. This is why he is not in the rotation.

From the outside he has looked like a great team guy but I guess you never know what goes on in practices or day to day stuff.

Nate moved into the afterthought category following a 24' 3-point shot at the end of a quarter (3rd?) against several defenders without a teammate in the frontcourt and with some 15 seconds left in the quarter.  The other team went on to score in the "gift" time and the resulting 5 (or 4 if a 2-pointer had been achieved in the last C's shot) seemed to stamp Nate's union card with a warning notice.  Doc never played Robinson another meaningful minute.

[Chris]

didn't one local scribe indicate that the C's were surprised by his immaturity? (first of all, how could they have been surprised, did they never WATCH the guy?)

I give him credit though, he hasn't complained once - and the guy is on twitter 24/7

I think he deserves major credit for the way he has acted (at least publically).  He lost a million dollars, and with each game he sits, he is probably losing more as a free agent this summer, and he is still the biggest cheerleader on the sideline.  There are a lot of players who would not respond so positively to a situation like that.

[wdleehi]

Wouldn't surprise me if this doesn't end up in arbitration.  Nate won't make a big deal of it right now because he's hoping the C's will resign him, but if and when they let him walk, I would be shocked if his agent doesn't raise a fuss about this.  Hell, his agent won't be doing his job if he doesn't do that.

Seems kinda odd to have such a large incentive that you leave completely in the hands of the team that's going to have to pay you that money.  Basically talking a quarter of his current contract, effectively to be paid at the discretion of his employer. 

If they were using him in the playoffs, I could see him having a case.


But he is completely out of the rotation.  That kills his case.

[Moranis]

If it was just about money then they would have played him in 1 of the 2 games, afterall he needed both to get the bonus.  The fact that he didn't play in either of hte last 2, seems to indicate money wasn't the driving motivation.

[Greenbean]

didn't one local scribe indicate that the C's were surprised by his immaturity? (first of all, how could they have been surprised, did they never WATCH the guy?)

I give him credit though, he hasn't complained once - and the guy is on twitter 24/7

I haven't heard that no but I wonder what kind of immaturity.

The guy seems competitive and hyper energetic. Maybe it is too much. Kind of like how a puppy can be really cute but as soon as he starts chewing up the couch and peeing all over the place he becomes a chore to take care of.

Is it just his personality? Or does he not take coaching well and do whatever he wants on the court.

To me all indications are that Nate wasn't really playing his game when he was in there, just trying to blend in a la Marbury.

He showed flashes at times but was inconsistent. This is why he is not in the rotation.

From the outside he has looked like a great team guy but I guess you never know what goes on in practices or day to day stuff.

Nate moved into the afterthought category following a 24' 3-point shot at the end of a quarter (3rd?) against several defenders without a teammate in the frontcourt and with some 15 seconds left in the quarter.  The other team went on to score in the "gift" time and the resulting 5 (or 4 if a 2-pointer had been achieved in the last C's shot) seemed to stamp Nate's union card with a warning notice.  Doc never played Robinson another meaningful minute.

Everything I heard from Doc seems like he would encourage Nate to do something like this. Maybe not to that extreme, but Doc criticized Nate of not being aggressive enough. Nate's game is jacking up shots. Everyone knew that going in. Why would he bench him for taking that shot? By the way what game are talkign about?

He is probably benched because he couldnt understand the defensive schemes in time and Tony Allen stepped up to play great defense this season.

[incoherent]

Nate wasn't making it to 58 games or whatever in NY or here.  

Certainly we aren't going to dish out 2 mil for someone who cant get a minute in the playoffs.

I don't think he cares, I don't think he ever expected to get it.

[LB3533]

This type of action my management is the kind of thing players talk to among themselves.

No on will want to play here.

[Eja117]

I'd like to think they didn't just discover this last week and talked to him about it a very long time ago, possibly as a condition for coming here

[Chris]

I'd like to think they didn't just discover this last week and talked to him about it a very long time ago, possibly as a condition for coming here

I doubt it was a condition, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was addressed when Doc talked to him about his playing time down the stretch.

[Tai]

I'm just going to re-post what I said in the ESPN Article's comment box for this article.

"Celtics fan, here. I'm sorry, apparently I missed something significant, but I'll let you guys tell me.

So here's what I'm getting from you guys: Nate didn't play enough regular season games per his contract clause to earn this $1M bonus, and people think the Celtics intentionally sat him out of games so they didn't have to pay him said bonus, right? OK.

Thing is...does anyone NOT notice that Nate isn't getting playing time in the playoffs? It doesn't matter how many games Nate plays now. Heck, it was even said before the regular season ended that the Celtics' playoffs rotation would include Tony Allen and Michael Finley, leaving Nate and Marquis Daniels on the outside looking in.

Where are people coming up with the notion that the Celtics sat Nate just to save money? They sat him because he wasn't contributing to the Celtics at all. As we all know, he's short, which makes him a liability on the defensive end by itself, and he wasn't doing enough on offense.

How did you guys come up with the idea that the Celtics just wanted to be stingy with money when Nate, who was supposed to AT WORST be our 8th man isn't even on the playoff rotation?!"

Quite honestly, I feel ESPN has done nothing but slam the Celtics lately with these articles.

[Birdbrain]

I'm just going to re-post what I said in the ESPN Article's comment box for this article.

"Celtics fan, here. I'm sorry, apparently I missed something significant, but I'll let you guys tell me.

So here's what I'm getting from you guys: Nate didn't play enough regular season games per his contract clause to earn this $1M bonus, and people think the Celtics intentionally sat him out of games so they didn't have to pay him said bonus, right? OK.

Thing is...does anyone NOT notice that Nate isn't getting playing time in the playoffs? It doesn't matter how many games Nate plays now. Heck, it was even said before the regular season ended that the Celtics' playoffs rotation would include Tony Allen and Michael Finley, leaving Nate and Marquis Daniels on the outside looking in.

Where are people coming up with the notion that the Celtics sat Nate just to save money? They sat him because he wasn't contributing to the Celtics at all. As we all know, he's short, which makes him a liability on the defensive end by itself, and he wasn't doing enough on offense.

How did you guys come up with the idea that the Celtics just wanted to be stingy with money when Nate, who was supposed to AT WORST be our 8th man isn't even on the playoff rotation?!"

Quite honestly, I feel ESPN has done nothing but slam the Celtics lately with these articles.

No one really believes that if they use logic to determine their opinions but, it's a cool story (not even).

[Birdbrain]

This type of action my management is the kind of thing players talk to among themselves.

No on will want to play here.

-1 TP.  There is absolutely no realistic way you could come to this conclusion.