Nate Robinson

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Karllost. Show Karllost's posts

    Re: Nate Robinson

    Worse thing that happened to Melo is that hot streak he had end of season to get the scoring title. Prior to that, most of the season he played much better team ball... now he looks like the old Melo, putting up 25-30 shots a game, mostly 1on1 and some really difficult shots too

     

     

     

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Karllost. Show Karllost's posts

    Re: Nate Robinson

    In response to Fierce34's comment:

    Nate Robinson had 0 points in Game 4, 0-12 FGs and 0-5 3pt FGs.

    Maybe that's why OKC replaced him with Fisher and the Warriors traded for Jack.

    Do you have any idea what youre talking about? 

     

     

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Karllost. Show Karllost's posts

    Re: Nate Robinson

    So OKC, GS, NY, Boston & Chicago all wanted Nate.. they all signed him up

    Get it?

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Karllost. Show Karllost's posts

    Re: Nate Robinson

    In response to Fierce34's comment:

    In response to Karllost's comment:

     

    So OKC, GS, NY, Boston & Chicago all wanted Nate.. they all signed him up

    Get it?

     



    You're crazy!

     

    OKC, GS, Boston, and NY all got rid of Nate when they could have kept him.

    If Nate is so good then why did OKC, Boston, and GS got rid of him when they could have kept him?

    NY traded Nate to the Celtics. So the Knicks got something in return.

    GS could've re-signed Nate last summer. But they just let him go for nothing.

    OKC is using a 38-year old Derek Fisher. If Nate is so good, how come OKC would prefer a 38-year old PG over Nate?

    You really gonna try to spin this argument?




    Nate is the starting PG for the team still in the playoffs... Thibs is the head coach of the team still in the playoffs.  Doc and Rondo must be feelin low

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Karllost. Show Karllost's posts

    Re: Nate Robinson

    In response to Fierce34's comment:

    In response to Karllost's comment:

     

     

    Nate is the starting PG for the team still in the playoffs... Thibs is the head coach of the team still in the playoffs.  Doc and Rondo must be feelin low

     

     


    Like I said, Nate and Thibs will also be feelin' low after Game 5.

    Doc took Nate to the Finals in 2010.

    Will Thibs take Nate to the Finals this season?

    Answer: NOT A CHANCE!!!



    THibs and Nate already took their team further than Doc & Rondo...ouch...thats gotta hurt

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Karllost. Show Karllost's posts

    Re: Nate Robinson

    In response to Fierce34's comment:

    In response to Karllost's comment:

     

     

    THibs and Nate already took their team further than Doc & Rondo...ouch...thats gotta hurt

     

     



    So you went from OKC, GS, Boston, and NY all wanted Nate to ouch... thats gotta hurt.

     

    How old are you?

    12 years old?

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA




    Nice comeback (sarcasm). Thanks for letting me know you were outsmarted and outclassed again.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from OneOnOne. Show OneOnOne's posts

    Re: Nate Robinson

    In response to Fierce34's comment:

    In response to Karllost's comment:

     

    So OKC, GS, NY, Boston & Chicago all wanted Nate.. they all signed him up

    Get it?

     



    You're crazy!

     

    OKC, GS, Boston, and NY all got rid of Nate when they could have kept him.

    If Nate is so good then why did OKC, Boston, and GS got rid of him when they could have kept him?

    NY traded Nate to the Celtics. So the Knicks got something in return.

    GS could've re-signed Nate last summer. But they just let him go for nothing.

    OKC is using a 38-year old Derek Fisher. If Nate is so good, how come OKC would prefer a 38-year old PG over Nate?

    You really gonna try to spin this argument?



    I bet if they knew Westbrook was going to get hurt they would have kept Nate instead of going for Fisher.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Gasthoerer. Show Gasthoerer's posts

    Re: Nate Robinson

    In response to Karllost's comment:

    So OKC, GS, NY, Boston & Chicago all wanted Nate.. they all signed him up

    Get it?




    Haha, this is great!  All this team signed Nate, and all got rid of him, but just Doc is an idiot...ah sorry, no idiot, he just has no brain, right?

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from aciemvp. Show aciemvp's posts

    Re: Nate Robinson

    In response to Karllost's comment:

    Do you have any idea what youre talking about? 

     

     



    the short answer is "no", fierceless has no idea what he's talking about.  the whole CHI team showed up and played puke-ball the other night.  i'd rather have 10 nate's than one calcified derek flopper-fisher.


    never forget that part of the reason why nate never saw time in OKC was because westbrook is as big a liliputian as rondo is.  there is no room in westbrook's ego for a capable backup PG

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from aciemvp. Show aciemvp's posts

    Re: Nate Robinson

    and no, fisher is not a capable backup PG, he's awful

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from aciemvp. Show aciemvp's posts

    Re: Nate Robinson

    In response to Gasthoerer's comment:

    In response to Karllost's comment:

     

    So OKC, GS, NY, Boston & Chicago all wanted Nate.. they all signed him up

    Get it?

     




    Haha, this is great!  All this team signed Nate, and all got rid of him, but just Doc is an idiot...ah sorry, no idiot, he just has no brain, right?

     



    nate is playing for a hair over a million bucks.  do the math on all the players in the league.  you can count on ONE FINGER all the players who average over 12 points a game and are being paid less than 2 million USD.  that's called a bargain.

    so he had a bad game.  rondo's had a hundred or more of them in the last 6 years.  big deal. 


    and yes, to throw nate in on the OKC deal, just as other players were thoughtlessly discarded like trash who had something to give, is STUPID and it was done at doc's behest.  the driving of glen davis out of town on a rail- you KNOW that goes back to doc rivers' daddy dearest freak show obsession with crapping on davis.  doc also hated nate because he was a clown.  however, shak, the biggest clown of all by far, was just fine.

    see how hypocrisy works?  it makes no sense.  just like getting rid of nate.  go back through all of time- he was THE FAR AND AWAY BEST backup to rondo we ever had.  for such a cheap salary.  why do you get rid of that?!?!?!?!?!  for keyon drooling?  please don't tell me you think drooling is better than nate

     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Karllost. Show Karllost's posts

    Re: Nate Robinson

    In response to Fierce34's comment:

    In response to aciemvp's comment:

     

     

    In response to Karllost's comment:

     

    Do you have any idea what youre talking about? 

     

     

     



    the short answer is "no", fierceless has no idea what he's talking about.  the whole CHI team showed up and played puke-ball the other night.  i'd rather have 10 nate's than one calcified derek flopper-fisher.

     


    never forget that part of the reason why nate never saw time in OKC was because westbrook is as big a liliputian as rondo is.  there is no room in westbrook's ego for a capable backup PG

     

     



    Unfortunately you're not a GM. So it doesn't matter how many Nates you want because you'll not even get half a Nate.

     

     

    It's a fact that Boston is not the only team that got rid of Nate. 

    OKC replaced Nate with a 38-year old Derek Fisher.

    GS could've signed Nate for a hair over a million bucks. But we all know GS just let Nate go for nothing, right?

    And once Rose returns, don't be surprised if the Bulls let Nate go to give Marquis Teague more playing time.




    Boy your dumb

     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from aciemvp. Show aciemvp's posts

    Re: Nate Robinson

    In response to Fierce34's comment:

    Unfortunately you're not a GM. So it doesn't matter how many Nates you want because you'll not even get half a Nate.

     

     

    It's a fact that Boston is not the only team that got rid of Nate. 

    OKC replaced Nate with a 38-year old Derek Fisher.

    GS could've signed Nate for a hair over a million bucks. But we all know GS just let Nate go for nothing, right?

    And once Rose returns, don't be surprised if the Bulls let Nate go to give Marquis Teague more playing time.



    boy you are dumb.  GS has stephen curry and nate would want to play more than the 8 minutes a game that curry does not. 

    BAFFUSSTON on the other hand, has a rondo, a self-laming-duck of a player who goes lame in key situations- late in games when you need ball handling and heady play- rondo will dry up and blow away as often as he shows up and gets the job done- all because of the FT shooting duh-lemma and the outside shooting vacuum that rivers and ainge have grown into an insufferable roar

    so, for us to evacuate nate like he was a threat to team chemistry WAS SOOOOOO STUPID it's incalculable.  rondo needs to sit when he sucks in the clutch, late in a close game or when he hits the end of his happy birthday string of lucky shooting playoff games. 


    but doc and danny did not want a THREAT to rondo around, something that may challenge him out of his aloofness, becuase then rajon may become SAD.  i mean seriously, this is how these walking on pins and needles discussions must go in celtics management.  i have NEVER in the history of the franchise seen a bigger team wrecker than rondo fostered along lovingly in his growth into a head case.

    and what kills me the most- i see rondo's potential that unfortunately has now metasticized into head case.  he COULD HAVE HAVE BEEN a perennial MVP candidate, top 10 player in the league if he just learned tho shoot a J as well as rory sparrow did.  rory sparrow- the perennial "yesterday's newspaper" of point guards.  all rondo needed was just basic all around competency to be great, and he deftly avoided it.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from aciemvp. Show aciemvp's posts

    Re: Nate Robinson

    In response to Fierce34's comment:

    Really?

     

    What part about my post is dumb?

    Didn't OKC waive Nate on Dec. 24, 2011?

    GS could have re-signed Nate last summer. But they opted to let Nate go for nothing. They instead traded for Jarrett Jack.

    You don't believe Nate will be gone after Rose returns?

    The Bulls invested a 1st round pick on Marquis Teague. You really think the Bulls will just make Teague a 3rd string PG?

    Everything I said is true. So again, what part about my post is dumb?



    your dumbness is assuming that GS (curry) and CHI (rose) and their minute dominating point guards are NOT the reason why nate was not and may not be re-signed in those cities. 

     

    your sheer IDIOCY comes from the lack of ability to recognize that while rose and curry have comparatively COMPLETE skill sets to those of rondo, WE DO NEED a substantial backup PG presence like nate, where as GS with healthy curry and CHI with healthy rose do not need nate for 8 mins a game that those guys do not play. they ARE better off developing some practice dummy draft pick than pitting nate against their star PG's in scrimmages, etc.

    and for his own part, nate probably wants a bigger role than that for playing underpaid nicely skilled ball.


    basically, your'e no stupider than ainge or rivers.  rivers should have been in ainge's office before the OKC trade saying "trade ANYONE but this robinson kid, he gives us an escape parachute when rondo poops the sheets".  instead, once again, we made another move to appease doc rivers' idiocy rather than what was best to the team.  he deemed nate immature.  yet shak leg sweeping KG to the ground in the locker room and all the stupid stuff shak did was okay.  give me a break.

     
  25. This post has been removed.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share