Agent: Let my Nate Robinson go!
by Seth on Dec 19, 2009 9:56 PM EST
in News
32 comments
Nate Robinson's stay in the doghouse has been a troublesome issue for a few weeks now. The Knicks' 5-3 record in his absence is worth something, but some of us have questioned Mike D'Antoni's intentions during stretches when Nate's presence was clearly missed. The benching has some wondering if D'Antoni might have some personal beef with Robinson, and if the benching will ever be lifted. One of those people is Nate's agent, Aaron Goodwin. From Howard Beck of the New York Times:
"I want to do what I can to get Nate out of New York," Goodwin said in a telephone interview Saturday afternoon. "There’s no reason to allow this kid’s career to get rotted by what’s going on here in New York."
If you click through and read the rest of Goodwin's words, I think you'll find that he's being pretty reasonable. Robinson is in a crucial contract year, and if he's willing and able, it's best for the Knicks to either make use of his services or facilitate his departure. Donnie Walsh, for his part, seems to get it:
"I understand the situation that Nate is in the last year and he has to play," Walsh said in a telephone interview, "so if that’s the option that he wants to pursue, I told him I’ll talk about it."
Walsh said he wanted to see "if this can be straightened out" before deciding whether to pursue a trade. But it appears that D’Antoni has no intention of playing Robinson again. He left him on the bench Thursday and Friday, despite the absence of Larry Hughes, who was resting a strained groin muscle.
I'm a Robinson fan and would love to see D'Antoni give him another shot after this extended absence. So does my mom, who just read the news somewhere, then scurried upstairs and yelled "but he's my favorite!". If the various parties can't align themselves, though, Nate Robinson should be dealt. Then again, Goodwin's making these feelings so public doesn't exactly help the Knicks' chances of trading Robinson at a fair price. Oh well. Any takers?
0 recs |
32 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Nate and a Players Rights
I completely agree with Nates’ agents perspective. the way D’Antoni and the Knicks handled Marbury last Year was both vindictive AND unprofessional. whatever issues or baggage Marbury supposedly carried was suffered under the previous regime and other teams. But yet again it seems that when D’Antoni is done with a player the orginization acts as though the player should just keep depositing his checks and shut up. well its one thing when its a 10 year vet playing out the last year of a contract that makes him the leagues highest paid player, and another when its a talented young guy heading to free agency coming off his rookie contract. the Knicks need to do the right thing and either play or trade him. they should keep in mind that potential free agents and their Reps are aware of these things. . . . . . . etc. . .. .
by The Bronx-178st on Dec 19, 2009 11:22 PM EST reply actions
not that i wanna talk about marbury
but he was guilty of being vindictive and unprofessional also. the knicks tried to make a deal with his expiring contract and when they couldn’t do it, they released him in time to allow him the chance to sign with a playoff team. it sucks for marbury that he got put in a corner, but he refused to help the team. so the team elected not to help him. they both exhausted each other.
nate is being treated fairly and will be treated fairly. it’s a shame though, i want every minute duhon gets, to be nate’s.
twitter.com/aighttho
http://howmuchyouthink.tumblr.com/
The Knicks did do a few things right with Bizarrbury
Giving him a shot at signing with a contender was a classy move.
They also did try to work with him, but Marbury made his own decision to sulk and be offended. That’s on him. I personally think D’Antoni handled Marbury poorly, but the way Steph acted in response was equally as poor. I was rooting for Steph to return to glory in a Knicks uniform. Too bad it turned out the way it has.
"you're the Rod Thorn in my Chris Bosh side."
by Chris Child's Fist on Dec 21, 2009 1:48 PM EST up reply actions
Reaalllly.....
yeah blame the coach and the organization because these players are so innocent; To the knicks its time to cut the dead weight
might as well trade him at this point
if D’Antoni would rather play a 6 man rotation to avoid giving Nate minutes, it’s over.
the problem is now Nate has minimal trade value, but minimal value is still better than the zero value we get from Nate glued to the bench. i’d take whatever we can get for him, with the caveat that Walsh should wait until the trade deadline to make his move unless there’s a really great offer.
by latrell chokewell on Dec 19, 2009 11:42 PM EST reply actions
Right Move?
I’m sort of iffy on this one.
I think Nate is a bit of a detriment to D’Antoni’s style, but not giving him any minutes isn’t helping a bench that is sooo weak at point guard (since he won’t give TD to many minutes).
I think benching him if the Knicks have been set on trading him was the right move, because him getting no minutes is better than him taking shots at the wrong basket and covorting with opposing players before games, THAT would lower his trade value because no one wants an on the court trouble maker. But last season Nate off the Bench was a goldmine, I imagine that having Harrington off the bench hurts using Nate off the Bench, because you can only have one volume scorer off the bench, the rest need to be cleanup and hustle guys.
I think the Knicks should move Nate, if for no other reason than because any point guard injury after he leaves forces D’Antoni’s hand in playing Toney Douglas more, and he needs as much time as possible, especially since Next years “Free Agent Bonanza” isn’t chock full of top-tier point guards (Felton, Duhon, Blake and Fisher are the only starting PGs who are UFAs), so he’s either going to be handed the keys, or they are going to have to make a trade (or of course resign Duhon).
can we
get rid of D’Antoni instead of Nate?
by thenihcman on Dec 19, 2009 11:58 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
firing D'Antoni
would ruin any credibility this organization has.
you can kiss goodbye signing any top FA’s this summer, along with any worthy coach wanting to come coach here.
dream scenario
just did some math. nate and Jared for JJ reddick works with orlando’s two trade exemptions(hedo and forget the second one). nate will get to play with his good buddy dwight howard. orlando will get a solid scoring guard off the bench and a defensive presence off the bench both would help orlando win now by giving them two things they dont have. jj has an expiring and can give the knicks some value with his shot. its a win/win for both teams. get it done donnie!!!!!(after the 22nd of course)
by casual observer on Dec 20, 2009 12:23 AM EST reply actions
I'm sad to seee him go, but I want to see him play.
Here’s the Knickerblogger article about the logistics of trading him. Nate Trade Logistics
Basically, he makes $4M but we can only take back $2M for him. This means that any trades with teams over the cap is unlikely. That also means that any trade would likely need to include additional players.
Good article over there
I’ve been waiting for someone to explain exactly what the BYC situation is with Nate. It seems very unlikely they’d be able to find a trade partner.
If they really didn’t want him anymore, they could offer to buy him out for 2 million. But I doubt Dolan would approve that. This is an interesting situation, that, knowing Dolan, has to piss him off. Walsh gave N8 2 million more than he needed to, and now he’s being paid to sit. Walsh might be pissed at D’antoni too, for banishing him.
Whether or not he is an effective/result producing player, N8 is talented and exciting for this league. I am not necessarily sure whether I want him on MY team, but it is like 178 said – vindictive and unprofessional of the Knicks to do what they’ve done to him. He has a joy (if not unbridled) for the game. I like MDA a lot, but I am mad at him and the organization about the way this has been handled.
I dont get it
The Knicks win a couple of games and now every commentator and sports writer points to the 0-9 start like it was all Nate’s fault they were losing. Ive watched almost every Knick game this year and im puzzled how anyone could believe this crap. The real reason they’ve been winning as of late is that guys like Duhon, Jeffries and Hughes have starting producing. Not because Nate has’nt been playing. If they could have Nate coming off the bench again it would definitley lead to more winning. Mike D is wrong on this one and he seems so set on his decision that he’ll stick to it no matter what. D Walsh needs to step in and either get him some PT or trade him. Nate’s a popular player around the league and giving him the shaft in a contract year is not the example you want to set especially when your trying to lure a top FA here.
by mightykingcrayon on Dec 20, 2009 4:42 AM EST reply actions 2 recs
it's weird
Nate is kind of like the old Vortex football. you like it. it looks cool. you can throw it really far.
but there’s really no functional use for a Vortex football. you can’t play a pickup game with it instead of a real football, and the long arrow on the end of it is kind of annoying.
the Knicks have to keep their own interests at heart, but i’m not sure as to why they brought him back in the first place if he wasn’t going to play. i can’t imagine that Nate’s “shooting-at-your-own-basket-Gate” controversy is cause for an extending benching. the kid is clearly talented, but i’m not sure how to use him, and i think NBA teams share that sentiment.
Ewing with the step...YES! and the foul!
by Anthony Masons Haircut on Dec 20, 2009 11:12 AM EST reply actions
If the vortex football scored points the way robinson can...
I’m pretty sure the NY Jets would find a functional use for it
What did the 5 fingers say to the face?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7CBwX1891A
HaHaHaHa!
by Lord Smackington on Dec 21, 2009 11:02 AM EST up reply actions
haha
true and everyone keeps on bringing up points anyone can give you points what else does he have to offer. Remember Jamal Crawford, he gave the knicks points too and just like nate inconsistency and they both have to jack up a bunch shots to get those points
really?
everyone and anyone can score points? really??? Because I doubt we’ll ever see Jared Jefferies lead the league, conference, division or team in scoring. Not that he doesn’t have his own skill set, but it isn’t scoring and any and everyone is not a scorer nor do they all have that ability.
Second, isn’t Crawford doing pretty well over ther in ATL right now?
What did the 5 fingers say to the face?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7CBwX1891A
HaHaHaHa!
by Lord Smackington on Dec 21, 2009 12:19 PM EST up reply actions
Gotta disagre
Fact is the Knicks are winning now because they are playing better defense. Nate scores well, but he can’t play defense, he’s just too small. The point is to win games and thats what D’Antoni is trying to do with this team. Fans aren’t going to cheer him because he plays Nate. They only want victories. He’s gotta do whats best for the team.
For years
The league has been full of guys that can put up 20 points in a game but who don’t necessarily help their team win. I’m not sure if Nate is a guy like that – I think the jury’s still out, but several coaches have now been frustrated with him and, whether it’s deserved or not, his value is not high right now, and probably lower than the 4 million he’s making this year.
I do think D’antoni was noticing that he seemed to prioritize celebrating over defending and otherwise showing dedication to trying to win the game. If I were D’antoni I’d probably try to work him in again, particularly if I wasn’t ready to play Toney big minutes.
Nate’s still a young guy and has never played for a winning NBA team. I think you still have to try to teach him rather than giving up on him. But I think Bill is right in that, because of his size, he’s a liability on D unless he’s giving 100% effort on that end, which he wasn’t.
Winning is the whole deal.
Its easy for us fans to say he deserves to play no matter what and its unprofessional of MD to bench nate like this… but in his eyes, it would be unprofessional to play him.
First off: No way is this like the Steph situation. Steph was a cancer to this team for a long time, and was banished. Take that however you want, but Nate is still hanging around and participating with the team. Also, (as Mike D has said) Nate is a great guy and this is nothing about personality. This is about defense (something SOOOOOOOOOOOO many people have been screaming for Coach to put more emphasis on).
The team has been playing some great D as of late. I dont know much about basketball strategy and formations, but it seems that they have been playing more zone, and switching alot more. Part of the reason for that is the players on the floor are all players that can play/guard multiple positions. Guys like Chandler, Gallo and Jeffries can guard practically any position on the floor.
The issue with nate is that he can only play the 2 spot while guarding the 1. Thats it. And he cant even do either of them really great (he is very good at scoring, but 1 dimensional and not so good that it covers his deficiencies). On a team with a more traditional makeup, I can see him being a very good 6th man… but I dont think he fits with the way our team is made up. Putting guys like Chandler and Hughes in the 2 spot allows the team to defend the way they have been while winning.
Does this mean that nate should be 100% benched? Im not so sure about that but in the end it really doesnt bother me to much. He is getting paid bank. He is not hurting is value (which he was doing while playing VERY poorly to start the season, along with on-court attitude issues). He will get another shot. DW threw him a bone by giving him a nice 1 year deal. He was a last priority and they gave him way more then he would have made elsewhere. All a team had to do to sign him was offer 2 years. NO way the knicks match.
Our coach wants to win every game. It seems he will only play players that help the team, and not just play players because they are on the bench. Good for him.
Plus...
No truck parties for Nate. As far as I know.
Rangers, Royals, Raiders, Knicks...the man loves a winner.
by self loather on Dec 21, 2009 10:50 AM EST up reply actions
people bring up worthy points
but it seems pretty clear that D’Antoni DOES have something against Nate. Say what you want about his defense, but you know, a lot of teams have smaller guards, and Nate makes up for his height with his quickness and athleticism. He isn’t the liability people make him out to be. Sure, I won’t be voting him for Defensive POY anytime soon, but Nate does a lot of things for this team. The biggest thing is his energy off the bench. This little 5’9" kid can change the momentum of a whole game. And last year, he did. Many times. He WANTED to come back too. NY wanted him back. He WANTS to be here when the teams becomes legit.
He is too good of a player to be getting 8 straight DNP-CDs for a team with low expectations. He is too good to be sitting on nights when we are short on guards and employ a 6 man rotation only to watch our guys tire and fade at the end of the game.
I agreed with D’Antoni benching him to gt his attitude straight, but this is ridiculous. If you listen to D’Antoni’s post games and how he answers the inevitable Nate questions, check his tone. He may say he likes Nate an that he’s a “great guy” but he has zero intention of even considering playing him. I’m growing convinced this too, and he knows that it won;t matter how good his behavior becomes, he’s riding the pine this year. And you know what? IT HURTS OUR TEAM MORE THAN IT HELPS. I’d like to have someone speak out in his favor, or say “D’Antoni, you were right to send a message to Nate, but seriously, GET OVER IT.” He doesn’t have to play 30+ minutes right off, but at least work him in!!
Honestly….this little 5-3 stretch should be 7-1 if we had utilized Nate even just a little bit. But it won’t change and the kicker is everyone else on this team is playing for a contract so they want their own minutes too. You think Chris Duhon is gonna stand up and be a leader? He’s too busy staring down the Chicago bench and missing open teammates.
"you're the Rod Thorn in my Chris Bosh side."
by Chris Child's Fist on Dec 20, 2009 12:06 PM EST reply actions 2 recs
AGREED UPON 100%
It’s easy to see Nate is being scapegoated for Dantoni’s deficiencies as a coach. Not that he is the worst coach…just one of the most stubborn. It takes him weeks to make adjustments most coaches would make after one game and some of his strategies defy common basketball sense. It’s great when they work but even if it’s something that doesn’t work he’ll force feed it to the team and we’ll either win with it or go down in glorious flames.
Nate is not the reason our record looks the way it does now. He may not have won us games, but I sure as hell don’t think he’s been losing them. Throw all the stats you want at me, so what we won a few games and he wasn’t in the line up. We’ve also won games with Harrington not starting. We’ve also won while clyde was away and I remember once we went on a win streak while I was dating some weird haitian chick who liked to be chocked during sex.
What did the 5 fingers say to the face?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7CBwX1891A
HaHaHaHa!
by Lord Smackington on Dec 21, 2009 11:36 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
yeah, there is nothing quick about the adjustments
I think a lot of our frustrations come out of this slow reaction time.
Good call, Lord Chokington
"you're the Rod Thorn in my Chris Bosh side."
by Chris Child's Fist on Dec 21, 2009 1:40 PM EST up reply actions
IF he were serious...
No one held a gun to his head when he signed the contract. He has acted very immaturely this year…like a spoiled little brat. I doubt he can even SPELL defense.
IF he were serious, he would remounce the contract…settle on a half years pay….for a half year’s “work”. And leave. But I am sure the lure of easy money will leave him pouting at the end of the bench.
The fact that he is the slam dunk chump tells volumns. the “hey, hey look at ME” mind set makes most of these players very one dimensional and shallow. Truly not a team player.
If he were serious?!
He should say “hey NY, I’m sorry I didn’t take things serious enough for you. I don’t deserve the money you offered me. In fact, here, I am giving it back.”
Is there an “avoid” button i can click for this? Something thats the opposite of “rec”?
-3
"you're the Rod Thorn in my Chris Bosh side."
by Chris Child's Fist on Dec 21, 2009 1:30 AM EST up reply actions
Nate Robinson for Anthony Randolph
Hey, why not?
"I’m tired of hearing about money, money, money, money, money. I just want to play the game, drink Pepsi, wear Reebok." ~Shaq
by Max_in_Missouri on Dec 21, 2009 4:45 AM EST reply actions
now THAT would be something to jump on.
and it would definitely get some people fired in GS
"you're the Rod Thorn in my Chris Bosh side."
by Chris Child's Fist on Dec 21, 2009 10:12 AM EST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
