# Rumor: Nate Robinson On The Trading Block?



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

*



Isiah Thomas put a damper yesterday on expectations the Knicks could make a deal by the Feb. 22 trade deadline, indicating he's not willing to add payroll. 

"Right now we're in a place where we're good enough and don't have to spend a lot more money," the Knicks president/coach Thomas said. 

Though he denies it, indications are very strong Thomas is not allowed to add significantly to the league's highest payroll ($125 million). There's also an organizational plan not to part with any of the young core players, barring getting back a superstar. -- New York Post 

For the record, Thomas shot down speculation that Jim Dolan has snipped his authority to make another trade this season that will add significant salary to the Knicks' bloated $121-million payroll. "That is very inaccurate," Thomas said. It is just as inaccurate to say that Thomas wouldn't trade anyone but Curry if the right deal came along. He would, and he should. But the conversations probably will end quickly once Thomas gets past who is available and what the Knicks have to offer. -- Newsday 


The Knicks would love to move unwanted guard Steve Francis as well as center Jerome James, which may explain why he has started the past two games. Nate Robinson is also a candidate to be traded.

Click to expand...

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/features/rumors*


----------



## Ruff Draft (Nov 21, 2004)

Someone somewhere could use Francis & Robinson. Jerome however...


----------



## Mr. Hobbes (Jul 1, 2005)

Earl Watson for Nate?


----------



## WildByNature (Jul 13, 2005)

I thought Jerome James was bought out. And who would take him?


----------



## knicksfan (Jan 4, 2003)

Chan said:


> Earl Watson for Nate?


We'll throw in Jerome James and Jared Jeffries, and you guys throw in Ray Allen or Rashard Lewis and maybe we'll think about it.


----------



## Kiyaman (Aug 14, 2006)

What really SUCKS is Nate Robinson is/has been a TEAM-PLAYER his entire career playing B-Ball (he even had a partner "Spud Webb" in the Dunking Contest). Yet this Knick concept and coaching style system of One on One B-Ball by CAREER Nut-Marbury, Nut-Crawford, and Nut-Francis, has everyone ONLY looking and pointing at Nate Robinson as the Nut-Player on the team looking for High Light Plays rather than WINS. Now that is the Biggest Joke of the Knicks (Who have Franchise-NUT-SELFISH-PLAYERS all over the place starting with Curry, Marbury, Francis, Crawford, and Q.Rich), when Nate Robinson showed to be the best pusher of the ball leading to 3 to 4-passes through teammates for an assist player on this Knick team in just one in a half seasons: Frye to Nate to Lee to Frye. Lee to Nate to Ariza to Lee. Balkman to Nate to Lee to Balkman. Early this season Bench Players fastbreak usually was Lee to Nate to Crawford, or Balkman to Nate to Lee to Balkman. *Knick-Fans can watch an entire season of Marbury & Crawford and never see such passing from those two on the court but one or two times out of 82 games...*


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*K.....*

You are just flat out wrong on this one. For all his talent and good qualities, Nate has been lazy on defense, selfish on offense (as evidenced by his incredible low assists/minute), turnover prone, and not dedicated to his career. He is getting what he has earned. As I posted before......million dollar talent, ten dollar head.


----------



## Mr. Hobbes (Jul 1, 2005)

knicksfan said:


> We'll throw in Jerome James and Jared Jeffries, and you guys throw in Ray Allen or Rashard Lewis and maybe we'll think about it.


You really think Robinson is that much better than Watson?


----------



## kconn61686 (Jul 29, 2005)

earl watson is easily better.


----------



## Truknicksfan (Mar 25, 2005)

> earl watson is easily better.


Yeah hes better then Nate, id prob take him over Jkidd too.:cheers:


----------



## kconn61686 (Jul 29, 2005)

you probably would, and you're also probably isiah thomas himself


----------



## Kiyaman (Aug 14, 2006)

All I can say is if Nate Robinson do get traded for the sake of Knick-Fans hope it is not to a well rounded Coach that will utilize all of Nate Robinson talents in his system. 
Because teams like the Indiana Pacers with a Nate Robinson in their backcourt will improve that team tremendously.


----------



## Zuca (Dec 4, 2003)

More rumors involving Nate:

http://www.realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/44771/20070219/robinson_to_seattle_discussed/

Thoughts? I don't know, will Rashard opt-out in order to sign with a competitive team?


To work salary wise, it would have to be something like:

Seattle send to NY: Rashard Lewis+Mike Wilks and Peter Fehse draft rights;

NY send to Seattle Frye+Jeffries+Nate Robinson and Frederic Weis draft rights.


----------



## Ruff Draft (Nov 21, 2004)

Zuca said:


> More rumors involving Nate:
> 
> http://www.realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/44771/20070219/robinson_to_seattle_discussed/
> 
> ...


I'd do that trade in a heart-beat. Then ship out Francis for some depth!


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

XMATTHEWX said:


> I'd do that trade in a heart-beat. Then ship out Francis for some depth!


Call me crazy but here's an idea...

Knicks Trade (to Bobcats):
Nate Robinson
Mardy Collins

Knicks Recieve (from Bobcats):
Brevin Knight
2nd round draft pick

Knicks Trade (to Warriors):
Jared Jefferies
Jerome James

Knicks Recieve (from Warriors):
Adonal Foyle

*Knicks trade $3 million and a 2nd round pick to Suns for their later 2 first round picks.*

Knicks Trade (3 way deal involving the Hawks and Sonics):
Brevin Knight (to Sonics)
Channing Frye (to Sonics
2 first round picks (via the Suns to Sonics))

Hawks Trade:
Josh Childress (to Knicks)
Josh Smith (to Knicks)
Royal Ivey (to Knicks)

Sonics Trade:
Rashard Lewis (to Hawks)
Earl Watson (to Hawks)

Sonics do it because they get rid of Watson's contract who was a molcontent earlier in the year. Watson is still a hell of a player and would help the Hawks emmensely. In return, the Sonics get Knight whose contract expires (cap flexibility) and shed a few millions in the deal. They also bring in Channing Frye whose young and could serve as the center they have craved for such a long time and add two first round picks to accelerate their rebuilding process. 

I doubt they care much about losing Lewis despite him being a great player. They have Mikeal Galebale sitting on the bench alongside of Damien Wilkins both of whom they've signed to long term deals and have had great interest and confidence in. Lewis does however help the Hawks emmensely by giving them a legit no.2 scoring option next to Joe Johnson. They become a playoff caliber team almost instanteously.

The Knicks add two guys who can play both sides of the ball and can start for them. Our roster would look something like:

Starters:
Stephon Marbury...PG
Quentin Richardson...SG
Josh Childress...SF
Josh Smith...PF
Eddy Curry...C

Bench:
Steve Francis...PG
Royal Ivey...PG
Jamal Crawford...G
Ronaldo Balkman...SF
David Lee...PF
Adonal Foyle...C

...We'd be young, athletic and tougher defensively and better in the near future. I'd like to add Randy Foye but it would seem as though it is out of the cards.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Lee> J Smith at PF...*

I know you have real desire to obtain the Josh brothers but you are not really improving the team. Smith is an offensive step down from Frye and a step down from Lee in multiple categories. Childress is a HUGE offensive step down from Qrich, not to mention no better on defense. Ivey is garbage and we are still left with aging injury susceptible guards. Knight is nothing to brag about and is also 31. Childress would be decent off the bench. Smith is still better at SF.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

*Re: Lee> J Smith at PF...*



alphaorange said:


> I know you have real desire to obtain the Josh brothers but you are not really improving the team. Smith is an offensive step down from Frye and a step down from Lee in multiple categories. Childress is a HUGE offensive step down from Qrich, not to mention no better on defense. Ivey is garbage and we are still left with aging injury susceptible guards. Knight is nothing to brag about and is also 31. Childress would be decent off the bench. Smith is still better at SF.


*Thing is though that our issue isn't on the offensive end as much as it is on the defensive end. By that standard Smith is obviously the better fit. As far as Josh being a step down from David Lee, I have to wonder by what stretch of the imagination? Josh Smith is the better jump shooter, the better defender, the better shot blocker, better at playing the lanes, and the better scorer in general. The only thing that Lee can honestly best him at is on rebounds and possibly moving the ball. 

As far as Childress being a step down offensively for Quentin Richardson, so what? Childress would play one of the swingman positions alongside Richardson so it's not as though he'd be taking minutes away from him. If anything Childress is better than either Jared Jefferies or Ronald Balkman who would play next to Richardson. Childress is exactly the guy we need in our starting lineup because he's a ball mover and an all-around player. You saw just how effective Jalen Rose was when he first started for us and a guy like Childress who can play both ends of the court could have a pretty solid impact.

Dude, this is the same stuff that you've mentioned earlier before and both DaGrinch and myself covered all the bases. Why would you start the same exact conversation again and have it lead to the same result?*


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*All I ask of you guys*

Is to try to stay grounded in fact. Both of you make broad statements that are not based in the real world. I think you should check out 82games.com and go to each players page (the one that comes up when you click on the players name). You will find that Lee exceeds Josh Smith in all but a couple of categories, one of which is blocked shots (no surprise). Look at how many pluses Lee has and the size of the number and compare it to Josh Smith's. Tell me again how Smith is superior and please back it up with facts or numbers, not gut feelings. I will not get on this wagon again but if you are going to debate, then by all means debate with real comparisons, not what you wish they could be.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

*Re: All I ask of you guys*



alphaorange said:


> Is to try to stay grounded in fact. Both of you make broad statements that are not based in the real world. I think you should check out 82games.com and go to each players page (the one that comes up when you click on the players name). You will find that Lee exceeds Josh Smith in all but a couple of categories, one of which is blocked shots (no surprise). Look at how many pluses Lee has and the size of the number and compare it to Josh Smith's. Tell me again how Smith is superior and please back it up with facts or numbers, not gut feelings. I will not get on this wagon again but if you are going to debate, then by all means debate with real comparisons, not what you wish they could be.


As I pointed out to you before, that site has Slava Medevenko as a more efficient player than Joe Johnson. Nuff, said about the integrity of those numbers. They may very well be right but obviously don't tell the entire story knowing Joe Johnson is vastly a better player than Medevenko.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*More insane logic*

How about trying similar sample sizes? 29 minutes against about 1000 is not much of a comparison, is it? That is exactly what I am talking about....meaningless drivel. I chose players that have played significant minutes. Come up with one that works where the minutes are similar, then get back to me.


----------



## Gotham2krazy (Nov 22, 2005)

*Re: More insane logic*

Stephon Marbury + Channing Frye = Vince Carter + Filler + First Rounder?


----------



## VCFORTHREE15 (Jul 19, 2005)

*Re: More insane logic*



Gotham2krazy said:


> Stephon Marbury + Channing Frye = Vince Carter + Filler + First Rounder?


even though the deadline is over, the nets would never consider bringing back marbury. He is unwanted and unneeded at Jersey. If a third team was involved, say Orlando or Memphis, Jersey would consider it.


----------

