WT- Nate unlikely to be back (WAIT! + instagram pic pg 81!)

[kingkirk]

I do agree with this, but I will add one thing. This is essentially an extension of Ben Gordon vs Kirk Hinrich. Nate Robinson has become Ben Gordon. Behind these debates is a greater basketball philosophical question of offense vs defense, which is strange because championship teams tend to rank in the top 10 in both categories. You need to be great at both to win. That said, over the years, I've found it quite irritating that on this board defensive players are automatically attributed as being smart and selfless while offensive players are usually reduced to being selfish and a liability. Being able to score points isn't about having random skill. It takes intelligence to know how to score.

Anyone with half a brain about basketball knows you need both. You can't win with only one, be it offense or defense. A balance is required.

Nate and Kirk, for me, reflect this beautifully, as did the Kirk and Gordon discussions.

You need both, and because of that, both have their roles on the team.

Im happy for people to attribute me as the biggest Kirk homer on this board. I would happily accept it if people labelled me as such, but at the same time, Kirk's weaknesses are recovered with the addition of Nate, and vice versa.

[Hangtime84]

I do agree with this, but I will add one thing. This is essentially an extension of Ben Gordon vs Kirk Hinrich. Nate Robinson has become Ben Gordon. Behind these debates is a greater basketball philosophical question of offense vs defense, which is strange because championship teams tend to rank in the top 10 in both categories. You need to be great at both to win. That said, over the years, I've found it quite irritating that on this board defensive players are automatically attributed as being smart and selfless while offensive players are usually reduced to being selfish and a liability. Being able to score points isn't about having random skill. It takes intelligence to know how to score.

Anyone with half a brain about basketball knows you need both. You can't win with only one, be it offense or defense. A balance is required.

Nate and Kirk, for me, reflect this beautifully, as did the Kirk and Gordon discussions.

You need both, and because of that, both have their roles on the team.

Im happy for people to attribute me as the biggest Kirk homer on this board. I would happily accept it if people labelled me as such, but at the same time, Kirk's weaknesses are recovered with the addition of Nate, and vice versa.

I don't think Nate will be here next year

[HomoSapien]

Chicago Bulls Rumors ‏@chicagobullsbot 7m

Chicago Bulls Nate Robinson receiving a big offer he'll likely have to wait for until other free agents have signed. (Source: Aggrey Sam)

I can't find a record of this on Aggrey Sam's twitter account or columns, but I'm fearful.

Unless this is a new development that just came over the last few hours, it seems unlikely based on what Nate tweeted.

I wonder if this is the quote from Aggrey that he's referencing:

Meanhwile, the website Hoopsworld.com reported that the Bulls offered fan favorite and playoff hero Nate Robinson a one-year deal at the veteran’s minimum, but the diminutive scorer is seeking out a more lucrative offer with more security, something he’ll likely have to wait for, as other free-agent guards around the league agree to deals.

http://www.csnchicago.com/bulls-talk/bu ... y-approach

[HomoSapien]

I tweeted at that guy and he linked the same article. Nothing is in the works, I think he just misinterpreted what Aggrey said or phrased his tweet awkwardly.

[Jvaughn]

Hinrich helped the team on defense and could run the pick and roll. Robinson could score but ball movement suffered and the offense bogged down so if he wasn't scoring it wasn't just his offense that suffered.

And then there is the issue of him being the worst defensive player in the league even though he tries.

How did Hinrich help the defense so much that we can ignore the rest of his pitiful repertoire? PG defense is the least important. And even so, would it surprise you to know that there was a thread on this board showing that PGs actually played better against our PGs offensively ?

Regarding the worst defender in the league, no matter how many times you say it, it won't make it true. There's no statistical proof of it whatsoever. If a team wants to go ISO with their PG because Nate's guarding him, that is actually a bad thing for them, since the PG would no longer be involving his teammates. Doesn't help the O.

[pylb]

How did opposing bigs perform when Nate was on the floor rather than Kirk however ? Because my eye test tells me that Nate's inability to slow down penetration as much as Kirk led to Noah needing to overhelp, in turn leading to him being out of position on rebounds or an opposing big getting an open look.

[Markusrayburns]

[quote="Rerisen"]Replacing his tools, on ball shot creation, additional playmaking, flat out aggression, and efficient scoring, will be of extreme importance. Especially with the Bulls now drafting two more limited shooter types.


How can you say Snell and Murphy are limited shooters. Snell took 434 3-pointers in his three years with the Lobos, hitting 38 percent,
And Murphy was
45.3 percent on 3-pointers. He was a first-team All-SEC selection.

To me you don't follow basketball close enough or read any post draft columns even if you didn't know who they were. Sorry it just irritates me when people talk nonsense because they don't know the facts. Please try more before talking. Please. It's not hard dude.

[Markusrayburns]

I don't get how that dude said Snell and Murphy are limited shooters. They both were fantastic long ball shooters and Snell is fantastic at catch and shoot scenarios. I love the edition of them. Gives us MORE shooters. It can't hurt.

[IvgenyIAS]

Okay, so Nate can create his own shot
That don't impress me much
So Nate's got the moves but Hinrich got the thrust
Now don't get me wrong yeah I think Nate's alright
But Kirk just keeps our defense airtight

[Ben]

I tweeted at that guy and he linked the same article. Nothing is in the works, I think he just misinterpreted what Aggrey said or phrased his tweet awkwardly.

Well done. Thanks for figuring that out.

[mhsiao]

The debate between Nate Robinson and Kirk Hinrich is just like the debate between Carlos Boozer and Taj Gibson. It will just be agree and disagree situation as some people weight offense more than defense and some weight defense more than offense.

I have to say that Nate Robison get hot faster than Boozer and Nate isn't back off from anything.

[Magilla_Gorilla]

Weren't we 5th in offense in Derricks last season?

[Ralphb07]

Weren't we 5th in offense in Derricks last season?

We were 11th in year one of the Thibs era with Rose and went 5th in year two. Our offense is quite good with Rose. Also keep in mind we had one shooter in Korver(well two Deng).

I think Kirk was just as important for us as Nate, the difference is Nate is a scorer and Kirk is a defender. I'd rather have both.

With Butler, Dunleavy, Kirk (yes Kirk can shoot threes) and if Snell cracks the lineup, the Bulls will be good again on offense. With that said if we can get one of Nate, Foye or Mo for the veteran, it greatly improves our team..

Don't laugh but if we can't get those three, one guy I'd take a chance on over JL3 is Nolan Smith. He hasn't done much, but he can score (well did in college) and on the minimum, might be worth taking a flyer on. What's the worse that can happen.

People need to remember the Gary Neal and Danny Green of the worlds, didn't set the world on fire early, they had to work for where they are now and needed a team (Spurs) to take a chance on them. We are now in a Spurs place with culture, that taking a chance of some young NBA players that didn't make it their first stint may be worth it. Elliot Williams is another player, Xavier Henry, Wesley Johnson, etc.

[-Illmatic-]

I don't get how that dude said Snell and Murphy are limited shooters. They both were fantastic long ball shooters and Snell is fantastic at catch and shoot scenarios. I love the edition of them. Gives us MORE shooters. It can't hurt.

He meant limited shooters as in that's all they do not that they do it poorly....

[Magilla_Gorilla]

Fwiw one of the twitter scribes has us in pursuit of Wayne Ellington.

[weneeda2guard]

Nate is a dynamic scorer we need that 6th man type off the bench

Kirk and Nate in the back is basically our best back court coming off the bench

[othawhitemeat]

Weren't we 5th in offense in Derricks last season?

We were 11th in year one of the Thibs era with Rose and went 5th in year two. Our offense is quite good with Rose. Also keep in mind we had one shooter in Korver(well two Deng).

I think Kirk was just as important for us as Nate, the difference is Nate is a scorer and Kirk is a defender. I'd rather have both.

With Butler, Dunleavy, Kirk (yes Kirk can shoot threes) and if Snell cracks the lineup, the Bulls will be good again on offense. With that said if we can get one of Nate, Foye or Mo for the veteran, it greatly improves our team..

Don't laugh but if we can't get those three, one guy I'd take a chance on over JL3 is Nolan Smith. He hasn't done much, but he can score (well did in college) and on the minimum, might be worth taking a flyer on. What's the worse that can happen.


People need to remember the Gary Neal and Danny Green of the worlds, didn't set the world on fire early, they had to work for where they are now and needed a team (Spurs) to take a chance on them. We are now in a Spurs place with culture, that taking a chance of some young NBA players that didn't make it their first stint may be worth it. Elliot Williams is another player, Xavier Henry, Wesley Johnson, etc.

Would love to give Nolan Smith a 1 year contract for minimum with 2nd year option. To me if Smith develops, he is a taller version of Mario Chalmers. The only issue with Smith is that he is a Dukie and I can't stand Duke (we would have 4 Dukies on squad). Anyway, Smith seems like one of those players that does better with better teams and coaching. Meaning he knows his role, can shoot, can handle the ball a little, but is not someone you can regularly ask to create for others or make a name for self. If Derrick Fisher started off for some other team that did not need a 3 point shooter/defender, he probably would have been limited. I feel the same way with Mario Chalmers or Danny Green. The issue with Smith is can he become a good enough 3 point shooter to stay in the league and he does turnover the ball some.

I think I would take Smith after we exhausted other options and for the 14th man type.

[RedBulls23]

I love this board way too much, but we need to get better at appreciating all our players, not just several.

We need to get over turning these threads into Nate vs Kirk, like we have done for years with other players.

Both guys can fit on this team and both bring something of value that the other seemingly can't.

Both have their role, and more importantly, when both are on the floor for the Bulls, they both do everything they can for this franchise. Not sure why that leads to this board or thread getting into each other about it, but both guys have a role and are worth something to this franchise.

/end hippie rant

Nope King. next battle is Buckets vs snelly.

[mostek]

The debate between Nate Robinson and Kirk Hinrich is just like the debate between Carlos Boozer and Taj Gibson. It will just be agree and disagree situation as some people weight offense more than defense and some weight defense more than offense.

I have to say that Nate Robison get hot faster than Boozer and Nate isn't back off from anything.

It is not giving up defense, for offense, when the stats show that the team is better, both offensively, and defensively, with both Hinrich, and Gibson, over Nate, and Boozer. If you care about how the team plays, and not individual stats, there is no reason to play Nate over Hinrich.

Hinrich
Stat ON Court OFF Court Net
Minutes 1764 2201 44%
Offense: Pts per 100 Poss. 106.2 103.3 +2.9
Defense: Pts per 100 Poss. 102.8 105.1 -2.3
Net Points per 100 Possessions +3.4 -1.8 +5.2

Nate
Stat ON Court OFF Court Net
Minutes 2086 1879 52%
Offense: Pts per 100 Poss. 105.9 103.2 +2.7
Defense: Pts per 100 Poss. 105.9 102.1 +3.8
Net Points per 100 Possessions +0.0 +1.1 -1.0

If you think that does not pass the eye test, you have to try to see why. If you play with players with higher numbers, it could raise yours, and vica versa. That can only happen when those other players have higher numbers. I quick look would be the starters versus the reserves, but the offense is most effective with Hinrich, for any of the starters, and with Gibson, for any of the reserves, so that can not explain why. You can also have better on/off court numbers, if the person that substitutes for your position is awful.

The numbers show that either Hinrich made the offense much better, or that Robinson was bad enough to make it look that way. Either way it looks like it does not make any sense to bring back Nate. I personally think that Nate did an admirable job, especially on a minimum salary contract, but there is no reason for either side to consider Nate's return to the Bulls, when there is no role, except to sit on the bench, in case injuries really mount up.

[Steve Brule]

Fwiw one of the twitter scribes has us in pursuit of Wayne Ellington.

I wanted to draft Wayne Ellington. Minus generally everything, I thought he had a very Kobe-esque style.