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

[Mr Funk]

Nate is great off the ball though and very effective at the two guard, and Thibs does like him.

[kyrv]

Did Nate do anything appreciably different for the Bulls last season then he did for the Warriors the season before? Hell, his PER was actually lower in CHI then in GSW.

And yet he was sitting on the trash heap waiting for the Bulls to pick him up for the minimum. It looks like Nates deficiencies outweigh everything else he brings to a team. Especially a team that is getting back a 36 mpg player at Nate's position and has a 5 million dollar player as the backup.

I'd take Nate again at the vet min for next year - but where does he play?

I like Nate but I just don't know where and when he would play.

I've also noted a few times that without exception, every team that has had Nate, has chosen to continue life without Nate, despite his low price and his outright production far exceeding his salary.

[Magilla_Gorilla]

Nate is great off the ball though and very effective at the two guard, and Thibs does like him.

I'm going to go ahead and just disagree with you there.



Thats said - if we can get Nate at the 120% - then I'd love to have him back. Though another big is likely a bigger need.

If Gar is a big fan of Teague (as another poster referenced) then I can see why he wouldn't be looking to sign him.

[Mr Funk]

I like Nate but I just don't know where and when he would play.

At the two guard, backing up Jimmy.

Teague probably won't be ready. He's barely 20 and is very green.

Kirk will get hurt, even backing up Rose, and won't play all 82 games (pretty much stating the obvious).

Knowing Thibs, Snell probably won't see a lot of playing time (just like Buckets).

Rose/Kirk/Teague
Buckets/Nate/Snell
Deng/Dorkleavy
Booze/Taj/Murphy/Thomas?
Noah/free agent/Nazr

[Mr Funk]

I'm going to go ahead and just disagree with you there.



Thats said - if we can get Nate at the 120% - then I'd love to have him back. Though another big is likely a bigger need.

If Gar is a big fan of Teague (as another poster referenced) then I can see why he wouldn't be looking to sign him.

Disagree all you like, but Nate is far better off the ball than running the point.

Getting another big to back up Noah and having a scorer come off the bench and create his own shot are two crucial needs.

Without Nate we're back to all the pressure back on Rose to create and score.

And Gar may like Teague but Teague probably isn't ready.

[Magilla_Gorilla]

I'm going to go ahead and just disagree with you there.



Thats said - if we can get Nate at the 120% - then I'd love to have him back. Though another big is likely a bigger need.

If Gar is a big fan of Teague (as another poster referenced) then I can see why he wouldn't be looking to sign him.

Disagree all you like, but Nate is far better off the ball than running the point.

Getting another big to back up Noah and having a scorer come off the bench and create his own shot are two crucial needs.

Without Nate we're back to all the pressure back on Rose to create and score.

And Gar may like Teague but Teague probably isn't ready.

Thats a different statement then the one I disagreed with. You said Nate was a very good player off the ball - I said thats not true. Playing off the ball, and playing point, are not the only two options. Nate is a SG who needs the ball in his hands.

[Mr Funk]

Oh FFS.

It's essentially the same thing except with some elaboration.

[League Circles]

I've read before that Nate, despite working hard and playing hard and good, is simply an annoying person to be around. It wouldn't shock me if possible immature antics in the lockeroom have been partially to blame for his short stints everywhere.

[League Circles]

FWIW, I think nate is awesome offensively as a pg. Much better than kirk. Nate isn't a great post entry passer - kirk is good, but he's so much better on p&r and can draw the momentary double team and pass back to the open guy on pick and pop between the defenders.

I've long been wanting nate and boozer to run pick and pop against opposing benches every play.

[Rerisen]

I'm an enormous Nate fan, but I don't really think Thibbs is. Sure, he wanted him for the minimum this season as what he expected to be a JL3 role guy behind Kirk and later Rose and Kirk, but even after so many heroics, Thibbs never really gave Nate a lot of credit. I try not to read too much into it, but I think Thibbs was given many chances to praise Nate publicly and almost always hesitated. Maybe he just thinks that Nate is a guy that responds poorly to praise or something, but I can't help but think Thibbs might actually prefer Kirk and Teague. I don't, but it's not quite as bad if they have shooters around and are playing against backups. We'll see.

He gave him grudging credit, "Nate has been more good than bad for us." Words to that effect.

I think Thibs just can't abide bad basketball decisions, and Nate is always going to make some of those. So regardless how well he plays, Thibs has that innate perfectionist desire to clean up the inherent reckless nature in his game.

[Rerisen]

FWIW, I think nate is awesome offensively as a pg. Much better than kirk. Nate isn't a great post entry passer - kirk is good, but he's so much better on p&r and can draw the momentary double team and pass back to the open guy on pick and pop between the defenders.

I've long been wanting nate and boozer to run pick and pop against opposing benches every play.

Nate's drive and kick game, and just natural aggression which leads to open coverage for others is undervalued.

Yes Kirk ran the offense more by the book, an offense that when ran by the book, just wasn't that good.

Reality is the difference per 36 in made shots assisted by Kirk and Nate: 6.4 to 6.2

For every set play Nate did an audible on, he as likely made a shot that the set offense would have missed.

[Indomitable]

FWIW, I think nate is awesome offensively as a pg. Much better than kirk. Nate isn't a great post entry passer - kirk is good, but he's so much better on p&r and can draw the momentary double team and pass back to the open guy on pick and pop between the defenders.

I've long been wanting nate and boozer to run pick and pop against opposing benches every play.

When did nate do this. Most of the time he would not even get us into an offense. He was great at getting his shot off when he was not doubled.

The legend of Nate grows.

[aaqubed]

I'm an enormous Nate fan, but I don't really think Thibbs is. Sure, he wanted him for the minimum this season as what he expected to be a JL3 role guy behind Kirk and later Rose and Kirk, but even after so many heroics, Thibbs never really gave Nate a lot of credit. I try not to read too much into it, but I think Thibbs was given many chances to praise Nate publicly and almost always hesitated. Maybe he just thinks that Nate is a guy that responds poorly to praise or something, but I can't help but think Thibbs might actually prefer Kirk and Teague. I don't, but it's not quite as bad if they have shooters around and are playing against backups. We'll see.

He gave him grudging credit, "Nate has been more good than bad for us." Words to that effect.

I think Thibs just can't abide bad basketball decisions, and Nate is always going to make some of those. So regardless how well he plays, Thibs has that innate perfectionist desire to clean up the inherent reckless nature in his game.

I didn't really see it as "grudging". The reporters usually asked questions about how the team is so disciplined, and then there's Nate doing his own thing, so he responded with the "Good Nate/Bad Nate" thing and how you have to take the bad with the good.

Wasn't Nate Thibs' guy? He wanted him because they knew each other from the Boston days and he showed how he could be explosive off the bench there.

At the end of the day, though, they (Gar/Pax/Thibs) wanted a wing shooter more than they wanted another point guard, even if Nate provides something that we don't have as a second creator. If he is willing to come back for his 120% raise, I'm sure they'd be happy to keep him.

[kingkirk]

Things aren't boding well for Nate at this point.

This plays into our hands well, assuming the reason we don't want him back isn't all about $.

It's still really early though. The market for some players doesn't shake out as quickly. When Dwight Howard makes his decision, that could end up being the domino. He's holding up the plans of quite a few teams who have big cap space (Atlanta, Dallas, Houston).

Very true. This is likely the case, but other guards have been snapped up e.g. CJ Watson, but your right, he has plenty of time.

With each day he remains unsigned though, we're still some sort of a chance.

[southpaw954]

You're absolutely obsessed with a 12 game sample. Yeah, he had great moments in the playoffs. That was 12 games. Throughout his entire career, he's had many great moments. But has glaring weaknesses, which is what allowed the Bulls to pay him peanuts on a one-year contract last year.

To some people that 12 game sample is more important. Myself included

Before this becomes the stuff of legend, Robinson had 2 great playoff games (Brooklyn game 4 and Miami game 1). Both were wins. He had 3 good playoff games (Brooklyn game 5 and Miami games 3 and 5), but all were losses. He also had 2 atrocious playoff games (Miami games 2 and 4). Both were losses. In the other 5 playoff games Nate's performance was mostly meh.

Imagine how much better he would be when everything is not on his shoulders. He was pretty much the only scoring option and the only play maker(besides Noah for the most part). Have him back as a 6th man. If Hinrich & Nate could play off each other then so could Nate & Rose for short spurts. Nate would be even more dangerous now with a guy like Dunleavy on the court with him. Opens up the court even more for Nate(& Rose obviously). I know he isn't coming back so really arguing for nothing. I think he would be excellent backing up Rose & prefer him over Teague any day.

[Rerisen]

I didn't really see it as "grudging". The reporters usually asked questions about how the team is so disciplined, and then there's Nate doing his own thing, so he responded with the "Good Nate/Bad Nate" thing and how you have to take the bad with the good.

Wasn't Nate Thibs' guy? He wanted him because they knew each other from the Boston days and he showed how he could be explosive off the bench there.

At the end of the day, though, they (Gar/Pax/Thibs) wanted a wing shooter more than they wanted another point guard, even if Nate provides something that we don't have as a second creator. If he is willing to come back for his 120% raise, I'm sure they'd be happy to keep him.

I think Thibs can at the same time appreciate what Nate brought, realize we need it, but wish we did not need it. It's not ideal that a weak defending min salary guy is your second option, and really first option while D-Rose was out. But that is how this team was built, and it *still* needs that kind of player.

[kyrv]

I didn't really see it as "grudging". The reporters usually asked questions about how the team is so disciplined, and then there's Nate doing his own thing, so he responded with the "Good Nate/Bad Nate" thing and how you have to take the bad with the good.

Wasn't Nate Thibs' guy? He wanted him because they knew each other from the Boston days and he showed how he could be explosive off the bench there.

At the end of the day, though, they (Gar/Pax/Thibs) wanted a wing shooter more than they wanted another point guard, even if Nate provides something that we don't have as a second creator. If he is willing to come back for his 120% raise, I'm sure they'd be happy to keep him.

I think Thibs can at the same time appreciate what Nate brought, realize we need it, but wish we did not need it. It's not ideal that a weak defending min salary guy is your second option, and really first option while D-Rose was out. But that is how this team was built, and it *still* needs that kind of player.

Good way of putting it. I posted last season, it has to be very hard on coaches, as mentioned, we have rules for everyone and then Nate Rules. Nate frankly isn't that good to have his own rules. I mean the freelancing would not even be questioned if there wasn't so much bad Nate.

Nate must have ended up with more good games because during the season there was a much bigger split on if Nate was any good or not.

Thibs wanted him here, and got him, and since he's cheap, I'm guessing if Thibs still wanted him, he'd be here, so, while I like Nate and what he can do, I can't say I want him on the team if Thibs doesn't want him on the team. Which, as mentioned, every other team he's played for has not wanted him on their team after he was on their team.

[Rerisen]

Too early to say if we don't want him or just didn't expect to be able to afford him.

Just because we prioritized more complimentary shooting for D Rose in Mike Dunleavy, doesn't mean we might not like to have Nate too if possible. That we were supposedly interested in Mayo, well that suggests a need similar to what Nate brings.

If Nate signs somewhere else for minimum, or regardless of what reason he wouldn't return to the Bulls, we'll probably know via his twitter and instagram if its because the Bulls didn't offer.

[HomoSapien]

Too early to say if we don't want him or just didn't expect to be able to afford him.

Just because we prioritized more complimentary shooting for D Rose in Mike Dunleavy, doesn't mean we might not like to have Nate too if possible. That we were supposedly interested in Mayo, well that suggests a need similar to what Nate brings.

If Nate signs somewhere else for minimum, or regardless of what reason he wouldn't return to the Bulls, we'll probably know via his twitter and instagram if its because the Bulls didn't offer.

It may not mean anything, but we haven't renounced his rights either.

[HomoSapien]

WojYahooNBA
Free agent guard J.R. Smith is nearing an agreement to re-sign with the New York Knicks, league sources tell Y! Sports.

I would think that this means that Nate to NY isn't happening.