C's considering bringing Eddie House back

[Who]

What's the point? Already have Rondo, Bradley and TA to cover the point guard position.

Danny is interested in bringing back Nate Robinson too.

The C's don't need a fifth point guard (E.House) on their roster.

[Greenbean]

No No No... We dont need undersized players that cant play a set position! What the crap. Much rather sign Nate. Then all thats left is to fill that backup three slot which has been a major need since Posey left.

Haha I get your point about Eddie but check out the irony.

We dont need undersized players...
Much rather sign Nate...

I agree though that Nate slots in as a pg better than House and can actually defend the position as well.

[Kuberski33]

I'll still take Nate over Eddie.  House can't guard anyone at this point so he's just going to be a middle of game specialist coming in when they need to stretch the defense in their half court sets.

[wiley]

What's the point? Already have Rondo, Bradley and TA to cover the point guard position.

Danny is interested in bringing back Nate Robinson too.

The C's don't need a fifth point guard (E.House) on their roster.

Yeah....it would seem he's setting himself up to trade one of them....if he brought back House and Nate too, my guess is Nate would be traded.....unless he doesn't think Bradley will contribute this year.....Bradley could be the other possible trade bait.  He wouldn't sign Eddie and then trade him.  But Nate or Bradley could get swapped.

[mahonedog88]

I would take Nate over Eddie as well...

Safe to say Eddie will proooobably go to Miami

[jpd985]

I would rather they focus on another big and a tall wing.

[Mr October]

I'm down with bringing back House.

However if the C's bring back Robinson and Allen, House will have to be cool with being a 5th guard. In that case I dont see why he wouldn't join Miami instead.

[RAcker]

I would rather they focus on another big and a tall wing.

Co-sign.

[pearljammer10]

No No No... We dont need undersized players that cant play a set position! What the crap. Much rather sign Nate. Then all thats left is to fill that backup three slot which has been a major need since Posey left.

Haha I get your point about Eddie but check out the irony.

We dont need undersized players...
Much rather sign Nate...

I agree though that Nate slots in as a pg better than House and can actually defend the position as well.

I know what you mean but here's my extra emphasis on the point... 

Yes Nate is undersized but his SET position is point guard and he can play it well...

Eddie is what? 5 10? And he is a shooting guard. He cant dribble, he cant run the offense, he cant defend... See my drift?

And when i say anymore undersized players Im also talking about our two 6'7 power forwards who are undersized for their position. TA being undersized when he plays the 3. And now Bradley being undersized at the 2 when it still is his set position and he'll be playing PG most likely... Why cant we just go out and pick up normal set position guys rather than these tweeners and undersized men.

[Andy Jick]

We don't need him. We have Avery to fill that role essentially.

Avery is gonna ride the pine all season...  the role he will fill is "clapper" and "towel waver."

[Jeff]

if he takes the minimum, why not?  can always use shooting

I just find it hard to believe he'd accept the min when teams can use a shooter like him

[jpd985]

if he takes the minimum, why not?  can always use shooting

I just find it hard to believe he'd accept the min when teams can use a shooter like him

We need more height and rebounding more than another guard.

[WeMadeIt17]

I am past Eddie. Nate showed he could do the exact same thing if not better and is a better passer then Eddie.

[ssspence]

if he takes the minimum, why not?  can always use shooting

I just find it hard to believe he'd accept the min when teams can use a shooter like him

We need more height and rebounding more than another guard.

negative. this team needs shooting, particularly if TA resigns.

[Jon Niednagel]

if he takes the minimum, why not?  can always use shooting

I just find it hard to believe he'd accept the min when teams can use a shooter like him

Agreed. For the vet minimum I'd take him back and Mike Finley too.