Author Topic: Nate  (Read 7369 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Nate
« Reply #30 on: December 30, 2010, 09:19:38 PM »

Offline indeedproceed

  • In The Rafters
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 42585
  • Tommy Points: 2756
  • You ain't the boss of the freakin' bedclothes.
What about Nate+filler for Marvin Williams?

Nate next to Joe Johnson would make for a solid back court IMO - Nate is a scoring guard who needs to play with a wing that can create.


Great for us, and would be kind of a fit for them, but Marvin Williams is a very important part of their rotation. On top of that, they're grooming Jeff Teague to be basically a better Nate Robinson, and I doubt they want to bring Nate's ego and his limitations into it. The Celtics lockeroom can handle the donkey, but I don't know if Atlanta can, or that they really need him.

"You've gotta respect a 15-percent 3-point shooter. A guy
like that is always lethal." - Evan 'The God' Turner

Re: Nate
« Reply #31 on: December 30, 2010, 09:30:07 PM »

Online Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 53435
  • Tommy Points: 2578
What about Nate+filler for Marvin Williams?

Nate next to Joe Johnson would make for a solid back court IMO - Nate is a scoring guard who needs to play with a wing that can create.


Great for us, and would be kind of a fit for them, but Marvin Williams is a very important part of their rotation. On top of that, they're grooming Jeff Teague to be basically a better Nate Robinson, and I doubt they want to bring Nate's ego and his limitations into it. The Celtics lockeroom can handle the donkey, but I don't know if Atlanta can, or that they really need him.
Atlanta would have to be very desperate to dump Marvin Williams' contract ... to consider dumping him for a trade package based around Nate Robinson.

Re: Nate
« Reply #32 on: December 30, 2010, 10:41:11 PM »

Offline vinnie

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8654
  • Tommy Points: 429
Should never play another minute of point guard again. He is absolutely horrible at that position and is a huge negative on the court. Would rather take my chances with Quisy than Nate. Right now he can't shoot, play defense or pass. Other than that, however, he is doing a good job. I am starting to see why the Knicks were not too fond of him.

overreactionblog.com

Never has one word been a more vivid illustration of the absurdity of this thread.

-Our starting PG, who is playing like the best PG in the NBA, has played 2/3rds of the games so far
-We're playing a rookie center with a language barrier meaningful minutes because our centers are injured and "injured"
-Our backup PG has played 5 games
-We have an undersized PF playing most of his minutes at center

We're tied for the second best record in the NBA.

The fact that we lost the second of a back to back is a collossal reason to panic.

Take a bow, Nate.  We're 24-6 because you suck.
 

First, please point out where I am panicking. I am simply stating that in my opinion, Nate Robinson is not and never will be an adequate point guard, even in a backup role. As for your conclusion that the team is 24-6 because Nate sucks, I have no idea what that means. The guy is getting progressively worse, the more playing time he gets. The hope is, when Delonte gets back, he can return to the off guard position and hopefully get on one of his hot streaks.

As for all the other points you made, I have been constantly posting that this team is performing above and beyond given the incredible number of injuries. The only thing I addressed in this thread is Nate's play. Reading is fundamental.

While I have you, isn't it about time for another thread about how awful JO is?


Re: Nate
« Reply #33 on: December 30, 2010, 11:16:02 PM »

Offline indeedproceed

  • In The Rafters
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 42585
  • Tommy Points: 2756
  • You ain't the boss of the freakin' bedclothes.
Since I am overreacting and simplifying, someone here needs to clearly explain to me why Nate should and can be a backup point guard. What does he do that a point guard should do? How does he distribute the ball? How does he run the offense, etc. etc. etc.?  The guy can get on hot streaks and shoot the lights out, there is no question about that. However, I would much prefer to see Marquis Daniels at that position than Nate. The offense has gotten progressively worse with Nate at the point since Rondo went out, when you would expect it would get better as Nate got more comfortable in the role. When they initially re-signed Nate, I thought it was a good idea, but having watched him this year, I have lost a little of the love I had for him.

See this post is not oversimplifying. This post has a lot of valid points, and points I can't contest.

Here is what Nate is supposed to bring to our team:

1) Energy off the bench

2) A fearless scorer's mentality, and the ability to hit a shot or three when called upon

3) A rudimentary ability to bring the ball up, ala Eddie House

4) A little swagger to the second team when he's in there

Here is what we're demanding of him:

1) Run the first team offense, keep it fluid

2) Distribute the ball

3) Play defense like a starter for a defensively oriented championship team that has title aspirations

What we're demanding of Nate is not what Nate is good at. If that's your point, you're on the money. If you're saying Nate has not performed well in the role he was brought here to perform, you're way off. If Pierce went down, would you expect Marquis to step in and do his job? Could Wafer do Ray's? Did Semih perform well on a regular basis when Shaq and JO were out?

"You've gotta respect a 15-percent 3-point shooter. A guy
like that is always lethal." - Evan 'The God' Turner