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

[Ben]

yes, the entire league is punking you by not offering nate robinson as much or more money than kirk hinrich

That's not what I asked.

i'm merely noting that your befuddlement at someone considering kirk to be better than nate is odd considering that just about everybody involved in the sport professionally at the management level believes that

I agree with you a fair amount of the time but not on the Kirk/Nate thing, and I want to point out that you've denigrated Melo for years even though "just about everybody involved in the sport professionally at the management level" believes differently than you. So it might be a bit disingenuous to use that standard against someone else in this case.

[RedBulls23]

Somebody point out to me the instances when Nate's shot was off and he started hurting our offense because to the best of my knowledge that never actually happened.

what are you, kidding? that's one of the main drawbacks to nate's game. he gives himself the green light at all times

I never saw any examples of Nate's chronic green light hurting our team in any way.

Yeah that's just far from the truth. I want nate back but there was a saying on these boards last season..."Live by Nate, die by nate."

[Tenchi Ryu]

Yeah that's just far from the truth. I want nate back but there was a saying on these boards last season..."Live by Nate, die by nate."

I've never seen Nate help us lose a game defensively though. It was ALWAYS offensively. I can't think of one moment where I've said "man, that guy is killing Nate".

[Jvaughn]

Kirk is important because it allows Deng and Butler to not have to play 39 mpg and we still can have two very good wing defenders on the court at all times.

Kirk has strengths that are necessary for winning basketball teams. Nate has strengths that are necessary for winning basketball teams. Strange that you seem so eager to downplay and belittle Nate's strengths though. Especially considering how they directly led to playoff success last season against all odds.

Well Kirk's strengths are there 100% of the time, Nate's are there 27.8% of the time.

WTF! Kirk's strength's are defending slow PGs and SGs lacking strength and hitting wide open shots in the 2nd half of the season. You're telling me he's never struggled with that? You can't be that biased. As it's already been beat to death, we have a ton of defense only players. We need some offensive minded guys even if it comes at the expense of some defense. We're never going to be able to out talent MIA, so adding as many diverse types of players at possible. What's the harm in adding a player as explosive as Nate at minimum salary? He has his faults, but if he didn't we wouldn't even have a chance at securing him.

[dice]

i'm merely noting that your befuddlement at someone considering kirk to be better than nate is odd considering that just about everybody involved in the sport professionally at the management level believes that

I agree with you a fair amount of the time but not on the Kirk/Nate thing, and I want to point out that you've denigrated Melo for years even though "just about everybody involved in the sport professionally at the management level" believes differently than you. So it might be a bit disingenuous to use that standard against someone else in this case.

the difference is that i never expressed particular astonishment that somebody on the internet would consider melo to be a fabulous player given that so many people seem to, including those charged with signing his paycheck. i just disagreed with the notion. strongly

[RedBulls23]

Yeah that's just far from the truth. I want nate back but there was a saying on these boards last season..."Live by Nate, die by nate."

I've never seen Nate help us lose a game defensively though. It was ALWAYS offensively. I can't think of one moment where I've said "man, that guy is killing Nate".

We aren't talking about defense. And there were times he did struggle because of his size.

[Ben]

Which other teams out there are considered to be interested in Nate? Do we know?

Purely my own assumption here, but given that Jarret Jack has now found a new home in Cleveland and that Golden State have a whole at the back up point spot, it makes complete sense for them to bring back Nate given he has ties there.

Hmm, that would suck (if Nate went to GSW). I guess we have to hope that they pursue someone like Mo Williams-- he can't possibly hope to get a starting gig now, can he? I think he was demanding that in Utah, but in GS he could probably get a reasonable amount of PT.

I've been pretty bummed with some of the other teams' moves to improve themselves thus far, but it would really make my summer if we could retain Nate...

[dice]

We're never going to be able to out talent MIA, so adding as many diverse types of players at possible

diversity for the sake of it is wrongheaded. it's only good if the players are of like caliber. i.e. you don't replace a guy with someone inferior for the sake of diversity

What's the harm in adding a player as explosive as Nate at minimum salary?

nothing. we'd all love him back at minimum salary

[Tenchi Ryu]

We aren't talking about defense. And there were times he did struggle because of his size.

A majority of Dice's and my debate was about defense. That's what I'm going on about.

[Ben]

i'm merely noting that your befuddlement at someone considering kirk to be better than nate is odd considering that just about everybody involved in the sport professionally at the management level believes that

I agree with you a fair amount of the time but not on the Kirk/Nate thing, and I want to point out that you've denigrated Melo for years even though "just about everybody involved in the sport professionally at the management level" believes differently than you. So it might be a bit disingenuous to use that standard against someone else in this case.

the difference is that i never expressed particular astonishment that somebody on the internet would consider melo to be a fabulous player given that so many people seem to, including those charged with signing his paycheck. i just disagreed with the notion. strongly

So, OK, the astonishment could have been expressed differently. I've gotten touchy when I've felt dissed by someone's response. But mode of expression aside, it's probably accurate to say that most of us RealGM Bulls fans considered Nate to be better than Kirk last season. Especially since many of us were furious at Kirk for sucking early in the year. Kirk's main advantage is that he's taller, but that only goes so far if you're missing more than 62% of your shots...

[dice]

it's probably accurate to say that most of us RealGM Bulls fans considered Nate to be better than Kirk last season

and i'd agree that that was true for much if not most of the season. despite the terrible stretch of team basketball when kirk was out of the lineup

[HomoSapien]

People are constantly criticizing Robinson for being inconsistent, yet those same posters turn the other cheek when discussing Hinrich's inconsistencies. As previously mentioned he can't be relied upon to play in games as he constantly gets injured, half the year he can't be relied on to provide any scoring or shooting, and year after year starts the season unprepared as he begins almost every season in a slump.

The truth of the matter is that Kirk Hinrich is the most inconsistent player on this team.

[HomoSapien]

it's probably accurate to say that most of us RealGM Bulls fans considered Nate to be better than Kirk last season

and i'd agree that that was true for much if not most of the season. despite the terrible stretch of team basketball when kirk was out of the lineup

And using that stretch to point to some sort of weakness of Robinson is incredibly short-sighted. Kirk Hinrich had Nate Robinson backing him up. Nate Robinson had **** Teague.

[Jvaughn]

We're never going to be able to out talent MIA, so adding as many diverse types of players at possible

diversity for the sake of it is wrongheaded. it's only good if the players are of like caliber. i.e. you don't replace a guy with someone inferior for the sake of diversity

What's the harm in adding a player as explosive as Nate at minimum salary?

nothing. we'd all love him back at minimum salary

He's not an inferior player though. If Nate was a few inches taller, he'd get JR Smith money easily. Same type of player just in the wrong body. For as much love as Kirk gets, you'd think he would have better numbers. All you ever hear is that he provides the type of things that the numbers don't show. For comparison sake, PER 36:



1 Kirk Hinrich

FG% .377 3FG% .390 FT% .714 AST 6.4 TOV 2.0 PTS 9.4 PER 10.8 TS% .493

2 Nate Robinson

FG% .433 3FG% .405. FT% .799 AST 6.2 TOV 2.5 PTS 18.5 PER 17.4 TS% .540


Where exactly is Kirk so superior at outside D? I'm tired of hearing about intangibles.

[Hangtime84]

Yeah that's just far from the truth. I want nate back but there was a saying on these boards last season..."Live by Nate, die by nate."

I've never seen Nate help us lose a game defensively though. It was ALWAYS offensively. I can't think of one moment where I've said "man, that guy is killing Nate".

D. Williams was killing Nate

Where exactly is Kirk so superior at outside D? I'm tired of hearing about intangibles.

Offense ran smoother for everyone when Kirk was playing point. He made sure people got the ball in their spots. Nate not so much it was more of drive and create type of thing.

Btw I would like Nate back as well too.

[dice]

it's probably accurate to say that most of us RealGM Bulls fans considered Nate to be better than Kirk last season

and i'd agree that that was true for much if not most of the season. despite the terrible stretch of team basketball when kirk was out of the lineup

And using that stretch to point to some sort of weakness of Robinson is incredibly short-sighted. Kirk Hinrich had Nate Robinson backing him up. Nate Robinson had **** Teague.

i agree. in fact i might have been the first to point that out when this discussion came up during the season. though i'm not sure it was the 12 minutes a game of teague on the floor instead of nate that accounted for much of the huge disparity in record

[TylerB]

Kirk has strengths that are necessary for winning basketball teams. Nate has strengths that are necessary for winning basketball teams. Strange that you seem so eager to downplay and belittle Nate's strengths though. Especially considering how they directly led to playoff success last season against all odds.

Well Kirk's strengths are there 100% of the time, Nate's are there 27.8% of the time.

What?

Hinrich missed 30 games this season (regular season and playoffs) due to injury. Nate missed 0.

100%

You don't understand what I was saying. Nate has some incredible offensive moments but when he isn't playing at that incredible level hes hurting the team. Kirk is always playing defense.

[HomoSapien]

We're never going to be able to out talent MIA, so adding as many diverse types of players at possible

diversity for the sake of it is wrongheaded. it's only good if the players are of like caliber. i.e. you don't replace a guy with someone inferior for the sake of diversity

What's the harm in adding a player as explosive as Nate at minimum salary?

nothing. we'd all love him back at minimum salary

He's not an inferior player though. If Nate was a few inches taller, he'd get JR Smith money easily. Same type of player just in the wrong body. For as much love as Kirk gets, you'd think he would have better numbers. All you ever hear is that he provides the type of things that the numbers don't show. For comparison sake, PER 36:



1 Kirk Hinrich

FG% .377 3FG% .390 FT% .714 AST 6.4 TOV 2.0 PTS 9.4 PER 10.8 TS% .493

2 Nate Robinson

FG% .433 3FG% .405. FT% .799 AST 6.2 TOV 2.5 PTS 18.5 PER 17.4 TS% .540


Where exactly is Kirk so superior at outside D? I'm tired of hearing about intangibles.

I'm glad you brought up intangibles. The funny thing about them is that they only seem to apply to bad basketball players. It's like they are invisible traits assigned to him so that people can convince themselves of his importance. The interesting things about these intangibles though are that they are never applied to Nate Robinson. Kirk is often characterized as smart (another invisible trait typically assigned to players that aren't very good) and hard-working yet Robinson's energy, courage, and heart are never brought into the equation.

[TylerB]

diversity for the sake of it is wrongheaded. it's only good if the players are of like caliber. i.e. you don't replace a guy with someone inferior for the sake of diversity


nothing. we'd all love him back at minimum salary

He's not an inferior player though. If Nate was a few inches taller, he'd get JR Smith money easily. Same type of player just in the wrong body. For as much love as Kirk gets, you'd think he would have better numbers. All you ever hear is that he provides the type of things that the numbers don't show. For comparison sake, PER 36:



1 Kirk Hinrich

FG% .377 3FG% .390 FT% .714 AST 6.4 TOV 2.0 PTS 9.4 PER 10.8 TS% .493

2 Nate Robinson

FG% .433 3FG% .405. FT% .799 AST 6.2 TOV 2.5 PTS 18.5 PER 17.4 TS% .540


Where exactly is Kirk so superior at outside D? I'm tired of hearing about intangibles.

I'm glad you brought up intangibles. The funny thing about them is that they only seem to apply to bad basketball players. It's like they are invisible traits assigned to him so that people can convince themselves of his importance. The interesting things about these intangibles though are that they are never applied to Nate Robinson. Kirk is often characterized as smart (another invisible trait typically assigned to players that aren't very good) and hard-working yet Robinson's energy, courage, and heart are never brought into the equation.

Uh the real problem is when Robinson has one big game you completely ignore the 5 bad games hes has. Like I said its not that hes bad on defense, hes like the worst defensive player in the league. hes 5'9! He can score himself but struggles to execute in pick and roll situations badly. I mean hes not even capable of making the pass to an open teammate when he gets doubled most the time.

Yes he can score the ball but whats his overall contribution. Hinrich can defend and hit open 3s. What else do you need?

[Polynice4Pippen]

Well Kirk's strengths are there 100% of the time, Nate's are there 27.8% of the time.

What?

Hinrich missed 30 games this season (regular season and playoffs) due to injury. Nate missed 0.

100%

You don't understand what I was saying. Nate has some incredible offensive moments but when he isn't playing at that incredible level hes hurting the team. Kirk is always playing defense.

And Nate is always providing energy. Kirk hurt the Bulls NUMEROUS times last season with his anemic offense. He shot 37% from the floor despite mostly taking wide open shots. And while Kirk is a great defender, his defense isn't always great. Exhibit A: Game 1 of the Brooklyn series. Deron Williams dominated him all game long which set the tone for the blowout. Hinrich and Robinson are two valuable players with significant flaws. Yet you're downplaying Kirk's weaknesses and hyping up Nate's. Nate at his best won us games, playoff games, against elite competition. Hinrich at his best simply doesn't match that type of impact.