trade nate?

[Bankshot]

Brilliant! Almost as funny as the Nates better than Rondo post. Let's trade Nate who we haven't really even seen in top form in order to get Jared Dudley? Wow just wow. Hopefully that Lakers fan who was on yesterday giving us props for being more intelligent than lakers fans doesn't see this post and some if the responses. Unreal.

Give this kid one season guys. He's never even had a full training camp here yet. The people who are calling for this trade clearly haven't seen enough of Nate Robinson to judge his skills. Ya he's had ups and downs but his potential is a lot better than Jared Dudley and Delonte West. Seriously we want a guy who can have a setback at any time as our primary backup one?

I have the utmost respect for Nick Agneta and his first hand accounts and descriptions of this disease as was discussed yesterday. What I really took away among other things yesterday from the post on bipolar disorder is that it's not a question of if a setback will happen. But more a question of when and how severe. That's why to me he can't really be counted on. I love his hard nosed play and what he brings to the table but bottom line is Nates better and not as much of a liability. Fair or unfair that's the bottom line.

Man don't call us stupid. It is logical choice to trade Nate. Why? First Nate has potential can score... yeah but until Rondo is here Nate will not play more than 15minutes. And definitively Rondo and Nate will not be on the court at the same time this year because we have more options and we will not play with 6'1 and 5'9 backcourt. So i don't like Delonte but for 12-15min Delonte is just fine and we can't trade Delonte because he has not trade value but Nate has. Celtics has a hole in SF position and this is the best way to fill it. doesn't matter how good Nate will be he will never be a starter here

In your opinion it is logical.  In my opinion and some others, it is not.

I know we have a hole a SF, that's why I don't like the Delonte signing.  Should have signed someone for the backup 3 instead of signing Delonte.

[vgulab]

Brilliant! Almost as funny as the Nates better than Rondo post. Let's trade Nate who we haven't really even seen in top form in order to get Jared Dudley? Wow just wow. Hopefully that Lakers fan who was on yesterday giving us props for being more intelligent than lakers fans doesn't see this post and some if the responses. Unreal.

Give this kid one season guys. He's never even had a full training camp here yet. The people who are calling for this trade clearly haven't seen enough of Nate Robinson to judge his skills. Ya he's had ups and downs but his potential is a lot better than Jared Dudley and Delonte West. Seriously we want a guy who can have a setback at any time as our primary backup one?

I have the utmost respect for Nick Agneta and his first hand accounts and descriptions of this disease as was discussed yesterday. What I really took away among other things yesterday from the post on bipolar disorder is that it's not a question of if a setback will happen. But more a question of when and how severe. That's why to me he can't really be counted on. I love his hard nosed play and what he brings to the table but bottom line is Nates better and not as much of a liability. Fair or unfair that's the bottom line.

Man don't call us stupid. It is logical choice to trade Nate. Why? First Nate has potential can score... yeah but until Rondo is here Nate will not play more than 15minutes. And definitively Rondo and Nate will not be on the court at the same time this year because we have more options and we will not play with 6'1 and 5'9 backcourt. So i don't like Delonte but for 12-15min Delonte is just fine and we can't trade Delonte because he has not trade value but Nate has. Celtics has a hole in SF position and this is the best way to fill it. doesn't matter how good Nate will be he will never be a starter here

In your opinion it is logical.  In my opinion and some others, it is not.

I know we have a hole a SF, that's why I don't like the Delonte signing.  Should have signed someone for the backup 3 instead of signing Delonte.

I sad that i don't like Delonte but for a 12-15min he will do the job. And you know that we can't trade Delonte we will not get anything for return, and for Nate we could get something. Plus you guys are forgetting Avery he will be very good.

[radiohead]

Now when we have Delonte and Avery to backup Rondo why not trade Nate for backup SF? i Think we can get a good deal for Nate. For example Xavier Henry from Memphis or Jared Dudley. Do you think it's possible to happen? i mean if we trade Nate for SF we will have players on all postions

I'd be open to do this but would first want to see how the team does during the first part of the season. If Delonte proves to be a stable and reliable back up, then we could look into trading Nate, depending on what the market gives us in return. Remember, Delonte is suspended for the first 10 games of the season, and this is reason enough to hold on to Nate. Also, Nate has already won us a big playoff game and who knows what a full season of training camp can do to him.   

[vgulab]

Now when we have Delonte and Avery to backup Rondo why not trade Nate for backup SF? i Think we can get a good deal for Nate. For example Xavier Henry from Memphis or Jared Dudley. Do you think it's possible to happen? i mean if we trade Nate for SF we will have players on all postions

I'd be open to do this but would first want to see how the team does during the first part of the season. If Delonte proves to be a stable and reliable back up, then we could look into trading Nate, depending on what the market gives us in return. Remember, Delonte is suspended for the first 10 games of the season, and this is reason enough to hold on to Nate. Also, Nate has already won us a big playoff game and who knows what a full season of training camp can do to him.   

I don't know why you people forget Avery Bradley he was the 19th pick remember? He will be very very good player. I know he is rookie and young but he will be very good. I'm just saying to explore the market to see what can we get for Nate and we will be suprised of how good deal we can make

[CelticHooligan3]

Totally agree Bankshot. It's too bad we weren't able to address that backup 3 spot. But to be fair I think Danny tried a few different options but ultimately couldn't find anything that's made sense moving forward. So he did the next logical thing and resigned Delonte who was the best free agent still available but obviously had huge yellow CAUTION tape wrapped around him.

As for me calling people stupid I was unaware I made that statement. Sorry. And my personal opinion of Nate is that I completely agree he will see anywhere between 12-15 mins of gametime each night. But if you look at his skillset and what he brings to the table you'd understand that in reality that's ideal for this kid. I might be a huge Nate fan but I'm not delusional. I don't want to see him starting over Rondo or playing massive amounts of mins. He's actually best utilized in that backup role where he can come in light it up pester backup ones and generally run around and create havoc. I'm just saying if you knew anything about his game you'd know that.

Then we can also address the fact that he hasn't even had an entire training camp here yet. To me he only scratched the surface of what he's capable of. Give the man a chance. Just like we need to give Delonte a chance. They're both Celtics with a little baggae but their Celtics none the less and for that I'll root for them. But in Nates case at least give the kid till the All-Star break before calling for his head.

[fairweatherfan]

Personally I'd trade Nate for Dudley straight up, but what gets lost in the debate is that there's pretty much no way Phoenix does that deal - they are pretty high on both Dudley and Dragic, so why cut into Dragic's minutes and leave a big hole at SF?

[radiohead]

As much as we all would want to think that we have a gem in Avery Bradley, he still hasn't proven anything yet. Nate is a proven NBA player. It would be too risky to start the season with a rookie as a back up PG. What I'm saying is, yes, we could trade Nate if the right deal comes along. However, we must first be sure that our PG rotation would be reliable before pulling the trigger. As of now, we don't know how good Bradley is against NBA competition and Delonte is out for the first ten games.

[Jon]

Well, first do we have to wait until mid-December since we just re-signed him?  Or does the fact that he's our own player mitigate that?

Second, I wouldn't do anything quite yet.  Nate might be the second most reliable player on the bench given Daniel's injury history, West's head, Wafer's generally unproven game, and Shaq's age.  If West, Wafer, and Daniels all prove to be great, then we can think about trading him.  But then again, if all three of those guys prove themselves, do we really need to? 

For the first time, given the team's age and the strength of the bench, I think we can have a full second unit.  I don't see any reason why we can play Nate at the 1 and West at the 2. 

[vgulab]

Personally I'd trade Nate for Dudley straight up, but what gets lost in the debate is that there's pretty much no way Phoenix does that deal - they are pretty high on both Dudley and Dragic, so why cut into Dragic's minutes and leave a big hole at SF?

Big hole? They have to many SF. Turkoglu,Childress,Hill,Dudley. And Nash is getting really old but i didn't say straight. Nate plus something for Dudley. Nate will be perfect for Suns, run and shoot

[CelticHooligan3]

Brilliant! Almost as funny as the Nates better than Rondo post. Let's trade Nate who we haven't really even seen in top form in order to get Jared Dudley? Wow just wow. Hopefully that Lakers fan who was on yesterday giving us props for being more intelligent than lakers fans doesn't see this post and some if the responses. Unreal.

Give this kid one season guys. He's never even had a full training camp here yet. The people who are calling for this trade clearly haven't seen enough of Nate Robinson to judge his skills. Ya he's had ups and downs but his potential is a lot better than Jared Dudley and Delonte West. Seriously we want a guy who can have a setback at any time as our primary backup one?

I have the utmost respect for Nick Agneta and his first hand accounts and descriptions of this disease as was discussed yesterday. What I really took away among other things yesterday from the post on
bipolar disorder is that it's not a question of if a setback will happen. But more a question of when and how severe. That's why to me he can't really be counted on. I love his hard nosed play and what he brings to the table but bottom line is Nates better and not as much of a liability. Fair or unfair that's the bottom line.

Man don't call us stupid. It is logical choice to trade Nate. Why? First Nate has potential can score... yeah but until Rondo is here Nate will not play more than 15minutes. And definitively Rondo and Nate will not be on the court at the same time this year because we have more options and we will not play with 6'1 and 5'9 backcourt. So i don't like Delonte but for 12-15min Delonte is just fine and we can't trade Delonte because he has not trade value but Nate has. Celtics has a hole in SF position and this is the best way to fill it. doesn't matter how good Nate will be he will never be a starter here

In your opinion it is logical.  In my opinion and some others, it is not.

I know we have a hole a SF, that's why I don't like the Delonte signing.  Should have signed someone for the backup 3 instead of signing Delonte.

I sad that i don't like Delonte but for a 12-15min he will do the job. And you know that we can't trade Delonte we will not get anything for return, and for Nate we could get something. Plus you guys are
forgetting Avery he will be very good.

As has been stated by Mr. Hobbs yesterday, last year Nates trade value was Bill Walker and Eddie House. That can be attributed to numerous things. But where your getting the idea that he has a high trade value is a little baffling to me. I don't see it just miraculously rising from nowhere.

And no I didn't forget Avery Bradley. From what I've read and heard it sounds like he can come in and immediatley play some spot D. Asking him to run an offense with three future HOF'ers is another thing completely. Even if it is for a few mins. And Doc is notorious with not playing rookies. So he's a big question mark at this point. In all honesty I don't know what we have with him so I can't rush to judgement. But I do know what we have with Nate. And 10-20 mins off the bench is his ideal role as far as I'm concerned.

[fairweatherfan]

Personally I'd trade Nate for Dudley straight up, but what gets lost in the debate is that there's pretty much no way Phoenix does that deal - they are pretty high on both Dudley and Dragic, so why cut into Dragic's minutes and leave a big hole at SF?

Big hole? They have to many SF. Turkoglu,Childress,Hill,Dudley. And Nash is getting really old but i didn't say straight. Nate plus something for Dudley. Nate will be perfect for Suns, run and shoot

Childress is a 2 guard though he can play some 3, and while Turk is more of a natural 3 the Suns have indicated they're gonna try him at the 4.  And Hill is even older than Nash.  And that's without going into what "something" would be.  Deal won't happen, except in CB threads, where anything is possible.

[vgulab]

My opinion is that Nate has good trade value because he is good player. People don't forget how much he was scoring in New York and how good minutes he played in the playoff. But let's not guest how big his trade value is is he is on the trade block we will know. there are teams who will want him

[CelticHooligan3]

Well, first do we have to wait until mid-December since we just re-signed him?  Or does the fact that he's our own player mitigate that?

Second, I wouldn't do anything quite yet.  Nate might be the second most reliable player on the bench given Daniel's injury history, West's head, Wafer's generally unproven game, and Shaq's age.  If West, Wafer, and Daniels all prove to be great, then we can think about trading him.  But then again, if all three of those guys prove themselves, do we really need to? 

For the first time, given the team's age and the strength of the bench, I think we can have a full second unit.  I don't see any reason why we can play Nate at the 1 and West at the 2. 

Jon the last part here I totally agree with. I've been saying this same thing for a while now. Play these two together! Nate at one Delonte at two. To me this would help to balloon leads out of reach while also giving much needed rest to our core starters. These two are perfect to play together because they are both scrappy on D and are equally capable of hitting big shots. They both have great experience and a never back down mentality. This combo has blowout written all over it to me.

[bucknersrevenge]

Because Nash is getting old and we will give Nate + something for Dudley and they have to many SF on the team and they want a guy like Nate who can run and score

Not sure if you're suggesting that Nate would be the heir apparent in Phoenix or not but if he's as good as you're suggesting wouldn't it make more sense to keep him? Seeing as Nate's contract is guaranteed and Delonte has to actually ya know...MAKE the team?

[guava_wrench]

Brilliant! Almost as funny as the Nates better than Rondo post. Let's trade Nate who we haven't really even seen in top form in order to get Jared Dudley? Wow just wow. Hopefully that Lakers fan who was on yesterday giving us props for being more intelligent than lakers fans doesn't see this post and some if the responses. Unreal.

Give this kid one season guys. He's never even had a full training camp here yet. The people who are calling for this trade clearly haven't seen enough of Nate Robinson to judge his skills. Ya he's had ups and downs but his potential is a lot better than Jared Dudley and Delonte West. Seriously we want a guy who can have a setback at any time as our primary backup one?

I have the utmost respect for Nick Agneta and his first hand accounts and descriptions of this disease as was discussed yesterday. What I really took away among other things yesterday from the post on bipolar disorder is that it's not a question of if a setback will happen. But more a question of when and how severe. That's why to me he can't really be counted on. I love his hard nosed play and what he brings to the table but bottom line is Nates better and not as much of a liability. Fair or unfair that's the bottom line.

I'm not sure I see Nate's potential being that high.

He is a very good scorer, and that tends to be overrated when evaluating players. Nate is also not reliable on the floor. He may not have emotional issues, but he lacks composure and basketball IQ.

I like having Nate on the team, but I would trade him for a legit backup 3 if Delonte looked good and the opportunity arose.