Lakers were interested in Nate Robinson, may have moved on.

WCDYNASTY · Post #1 » by **WCDYNASTY** » Sat Jul 13, 2013 9:31 pm

[tweet]https://twitter.com/AlexKennedyNBA/status/356158372283817984[/tweet]

WCDYNASTY · Post #2 » by **WCDYNASTY** » Sat Jul 13, 2013 9:32 pm

Damn, I would rather have signed Robinson than Farmar.

Tiesto_Lakers · Post #3 » by **Tiesto_Lakers** » Sat Jul 13, 2013 9:38 pm

No way Robinson signs for the Vet. Min.

I bet he won't even sign for the MMLE with anyone.

leeprettyp · Post #4 » by **leeprettyp** » Sat Jul 13, 2013 10:13 pm

I rather have Farmer to be honest. I like Nate though, but its obviously a reason teams arent lining up to sign him.

kinein · Post #5 » by **kinein** » Sat Jul 13, 2013 10:25 pm

Nate Robinson is looking for a legit payday after last years amazing performance with the Bulls.

He's got to insure the rest of his future as he's nearing 30

kblo247 · Post #6 » by **kblo247** » Sat Jul 13, 2013 11:03 pm

If he's still available later for the vet min, doubt he is now, you sign him up, and make sure to just package Blake off somewhere or move Meeks for a second rounder. Farmars defensive metrics at the 2 were better than his at pg anyhow in NJ

Nash (24) / Nate (20) / Blake(4)
Blake (16) / Farmar (24) / Young (8)
Kobe (32) / Young (16)
Hill (20 / Kenyon or LO (24) / Pau (4)
Pau (24) / Kaman (24)

kblo247 · Post #7 » by **kblo247** » Sat Jul 13, 2013 11:04 pm

leeprettyp wrote:I rather have Farmer to be honest. I like Nate though, but its obviously a reason teams arent lining up to sign him.

He wants years and/or money. Can't blame a guy for wanting years though after so many one yr deals

MAMBAEMD · Post #8 » by **MAMBAEMD** » Sat Jul 13, 2013 11:48 pm

He is one of the most frustrating players for me to figure out.
He shows signs and flashes of brilliance but as a PG, you can't trust him to run the team.
You can't trust that he will make the right decisions.
He is fun to watch, has heart and is not afraid to penetrate, but then pulls up for a 3 on a fast break.
He would be a decent back up, but he has a lot of growing up to do before he become an impact player on a contending team.

Tiesto_Lakers · Post #9 » by **Tiesto_Lakers** » Sun Jul 14, 2013 1:11 am

kblo247 wrote:If he's still available later for the vet min, doubt he is now, you sign him up, and make sure to just package Blake off somewhere or move Meeks for a second rounder. Farmars defensive metrics at the 2 were better than his at pg anyhow in NJ

Nash (24) / Nate (20) / Blake(4)
Blake (16) / Farmar (24) / Young (8)
Kobe (32) / Young (16)
Hill (20 / Kenyon or LO (24) / Pau (4)
Pau (24) / Kaman (24)

Only 24 minutes for Pau? Blake and Kobe guarding the wings? Do you want to get completely slaughtered on defense?

Michael Lucky · Post #10 » by **Michael Lucky** » Sun Jul 14, 2013 1:41 am

can't afford him so i'm not shocked.

kblo247 · Post #11 » by **kblo247** » Sun Jul 14, 2013 2:17 am

Tiesto_Lakers wrote:
kblo247 wrote:If he's still available later for the vet min, doubt he is now, you sign him up, and make sure to just package Blake off somewhere or move Meeks for a second rounder. Farmars defensive metrics at the 2 were better than his at pg anyhow in NJ

Nash (24) / Nate (20) / Blake(4)
Blake (16) / Farmar (24) / Young (8)
Kobe (32) / Young (16)
Hill (20 / Kenyon or LO (24) / Pau (4)
Pau (24) / Kaman (24)

Only 24 minutes for Pau? Blake and Kobe guarding the wings? Do you want to get completely slaughtered on defense?

28 mins of Pau, 4 mins at PF, where hes a weak link. Pau's minutes are on line with Tim and KG.

Blake will play the 2 and with Nash, its Dantoni. The again Brown had a hard on for Blake at 2 next to Sessions as well. IT's just a fact at this point. Kobe and Nikc have no choice but to guard the wing, and no CDR changes that. Likewise a Ronnie Brewer or Johnson ain't getting when they male Metta look like prime Kerr. Farmar's sg metrics also suggest he will defend the 2 some.

And besides **** it we seem to get that we need multiple gaurds to get back on D and spread the floor with balance to defend leaks. Might as well shoot teams out the place

Ckay · Post #12 » by **Ckay** » Sun Jul 14, 2013 2:19 am

more guards?

KB89 · Post #13 » by **KB89** » Sun Jul 14, 2013 3:03 am

Ckay wrote:more guards?

Pretty sure us no longer being interested is a direct result of bringing in more guards. So no, no more guards.

chefy · Post #14 » by **chefy** » Sun Jul 14, 2013 4:17 am

I know what our FO is doing now, we're collecting undersized shooting guards that cant play D.

Kobe System · Post #15 » by **Kobe System** » Sun Jul 14, 2013 5:27 am

We already have too many guards. No need for Nate.

dAdo dA dEvil · Post #16 » by **dAdo dA dEvil** » Sun Jul 14, 2013 8:26 am

i think we will only do this if we are moving blake / meeks ...

Post #17 » by **Jakay** » Sun Jul 14, 2013 1:54 pm

Nate's pretty good. He'd be quite a different look than Nash.

ngcoolman · Post #18 » by **ngcoolman** » Sun Jul 14, 2013 9:51 pm

I don't mind signing him for vet min. There is never enough guards for MDA anyway.

JustAwesome · Post #19 » by **JustAwesome** » Sun Jul 14, 2013 11:04 pm

I think Robinson is going to cost more than the minimum.

TruSkool · Post #20 » by **TruSkool** » Mon Jul 15, 2013 6:21 am

should have signed nate earlier. hes playoff tested and doesnt back down from anybody.