Nate Robinson?

turk3d · Post #41 » by **turk3d** » Wed Feb 23, 2011 7:26 pm

FireNellieQuick wrote:biedrins for nate+exp filler would be fine with me.. Wed save 4.5m and the murphy trade/buyout would allow us the roster spots.

I'm sure it would.

Hopefully not with Lacob.

St.Nick · Post #42 » by **St.Nick** » Wed Feb 23, 2011 7:35 pm

FireNellieQuick wrote:biedrins for nate+exp filler would be fine with me.. Wed save 4.5m and the murphy trade/buyout would allow us the roster spots.

Boston doesn't touch that with a 100 foot pole.

Post #43 » by **FNQ** » Wed Feb 23, 2011 7:37 pm

Boston's backup big as is, is Erden.

Perkins has a history of knee issues.

Celtics arent worried about the tax.

St.Nick · Post #44 » by **St.Nick** » Wed Feb 23, 2011 7:40 pm

Biedrins sucks, though. The Celtics saw it first hand last night. And while they might not be worried about the tax, they can spend their money better than on Biedrins....and you know it

Mylie10 · Post #45 » by **Mylie10** » Wed Feb 23, 2011 7:45 pm

St.Nick wrote:Biedrins sucks, though. The Celtics saw it first hand last night. And while they might not be worried about the tax, they can spend their money better than on Biedrins....and you know it

Deleted

He had a good game. He played the front line tough and kept KG on the perimeter. Battled on the boards and blocked a Perkins point blank shot. Started the break with a big rebound.

Based on the play of all of our bigs, he and Udoh were the best. Udoh got scored on by Big Baby repeatedly, but they were tough shots for the most part.

While Beans was in there we were right in the mix. He came out in the first half with us down 3. He came out of the game in the third quarter down 1 I think. Never came back in...Smart went small and Celts took the lead. By the time everyone came back in, game was basically over.

Not sure why Smart didn't get back to Andris, because he was matching up well with the Celtic big men.

delsol650 · Post #46 » by **delsol650** » Wed Feb 23, 2011 8:52 pm

He played the front line tough and kept KG on the perimeter.

last time I checked KG was killing em both Inside and Out. :lol:

Post #47 » by **Sleepy51** » Wed Feb 23, 2011 9:01 pm

Mylie10 wrote:Not sure why Smart didn't get back to Andris, because he was matching up well with the Celtic big men.

Andris got himself yanked for not running with Monta on a fast break. We had a 3 on 2 where Dre was in the middle of the floor and was even with the ball. Monta was handling on his right. Obviously you don't want your big running the middle lane, but instead of getting himself over to a wing or even gettin ginto trail position, he just loafed it and stopped and watched. Monta missed the layup and our 7 foot "uptempo" Center was no where to be found for what would have been a pretty easy uncontested follow opportunity. In a game where our ability to get out and run was crucial, Biedrins chose not to run on a fastbreak opportunity. Smart was rightfully pissed at him and he was pulled for a long stretch. Hopefully Monta punches him in the face in practice today.

Then later in the game he got elbowed in the vagina.

Coxy · Post #48 » by **Coxy** » Wed Feb 23, 2011 9:08 pm

Oh for **** sake please let this dumb ass rumor die and quickly. Nate fuggin Robinson, really Riley and Lacob??? Really????

This better be bull ****

Post #49 » by **gswhoops** » Wed Feb 23, 2011 9:09 pm

Glad we're not getting him. Wouldn't really want him unless all we're giving up is Bell.

Coxy · Post #50 » by **Coxy** » Wed Feb 23, 2011 9:18 pm

gswhoops wrote:Glad we're not getting him. Wouldn't really want him unless all we're giving up is Bell.

I'd rather keep Bell quite frankly.

Souvlaki · Post #51 » by **Souvlaki** » Wed Feb 23, 2011 9:31 pm

BooRadley wrote:Sad to say, we need Vlad.

For what exactly? Comic relief?

Visigoth · Post #52 » by **Visigoth** » Wed Feb 23, 2011 9:31 pm

Coxy wrote:
gswhoops wrote:Glad we're not getting him. Wouldn't really want him unless all we're giving up is Bell.

I'd rather keep Bell quite frankly.

Agreed. Bell's a team player, who despite speaking out about Smart is always putting in work an ready to play. I don't want a dumbass that'l shoot at his own net.

GSWhoopfan · Post #53 » by **GSWhoopfan** » Wed Feb 23, 2011 10:48 pm

our bench is about 3 good bench players away from being a good bench.

id take him. hes a true scorer. something our bench lacks. right now our bench can consistently count on Udohs defense. nothing else. we still get Reggie scoring inconsistently, and Vlad (im a fan of his) making boneheaded plays.

Nate is a step in the right direction in terms of building the bench. I like Reggie, but hes a 8/9th man.

BROWN · Post #54 » by **BROWN** » Wed Feb 23, 2011 11:03 pm

Nate for Bell? Why would Boston do it?

and1GS · Post #55 » by **and1GS** » Wed Feb 23, 2011 11:03 pm

re: true bench scorer

I think Reggie could be that but we rely on him to run the point when he comes in, definitely not his strength.

turk3d · Post #56 » by **turk3d** » Wed Feb 23, 2011 11:06 pm

BROWN wrote:Nate for Bell? Why would Boston do it?

Defense and he's a vet. He's probably a decent fit there, maybe better than Nate with Delonte back. That might be a realistic trade. Smart should have showcased him last night.

toffee1 · Post #57 » by **toffee1** » Thu Feb 24, 2011 1:51 am

turk3d wrote:Lacob may be involved in deciding if any of these deals go through fortunately.

Please do not insult Mr Lacob. This is his team and he alone makes all decisions, Larry Riley gets to execute Lacob decisions with admiration. Fans must remember our Lacob single handedly rebuilt the Celtics.

Riley and Smart are constantly in awe of Lacob's wisdom and knowledge.s

old rem · Post #58 » by **old rem** » Thu Feb 24, 2011 1:52 am

FireNellieQuick wrote:If we're doing this, lets go all out... acquire Boykins and Thabeet too, and hire PT Barnum as HC.. bring Darvin Ham out of retirement, sign Harold Miner and Gerald Green. First 10,000 at the gates a giant pair of floppy red shoes..

if this is a bid for Rowell's job, you made a strong case. :lol:

GSW's probable offer is TPE (nothingness) and the technicality that's the ultra protected #2 from NJ...in short...GSW gets Robinson for Morrow.

Nate won't play much with Curry or Ellis unless smart wants to go with a lot of full court press. He probably can do well alongside Reggie W but that's something that's good for 10-15 min.

I doubt this deal happens. In the right context,Nate can make some impact. This...is not the right place.

old rem · Post #59 » by **old rem** » Thu Feb 24, 2011 2:11 am

turk3d wrote:Mylie's right. We had nothing to do with it. Nets made the deal without ours going through. Right now it's more or less luck working in our favor (for a change). Let's not hope Riley doesn't blow it (you know we do have a tendency to do that, we get a break and then we do something stupid to nullify it, see Maggette for example).

I fear the worst whenever GSW is in a trade rumor,and typically...it's far beyond the threshold of too stupid to worry about. Riley scored well on D Wright...was a TOOL in letting go of Morrow+Tolliver for nothing. The Lee deal? Lee's contract maxes at $15 mill and I suspect that before long his limitations and those $ will mean he is yet another guy swapped for junk.

Coxy · Post #60 » by **Coxy** » Thu Feb 24, 2011 2:55 am

toffee1 wrote:
turk3d wrote:Lacob may be involved in deciding if any of these deals go through fortunately.

Please do not insult Mr Lacob. This is his team and he alone makes all decisions, Larry Riley gets to execute Lacob decisions with admiration. Fans must remember our Lacob single handedly rebuilt the Celtics.

Riley and Smart are constantly in awe of Lacob's wisdom and knowledge.s

This is the ultimate joke account for shizzle.