Lakers making "serious inquiries" about Nate Robinson

Re: Lakers making "serious inquiries" about Nate Robinson

Postby Venti Quattro on Sun Jul 05, 2009 1:23 pm

I believe Nate Robinson is the perfect addition to the bench mob. Two seasons ago, the bench mob excelled at a run-n-gun style offense, and Jordan Farmar was a large part of the success. Both his penetration and shooting was keeping the opposition on their heels. This past season, Jordan was not effective doing either, and it showed. Other teams were backing off and allowing him to shoot or force a pass to a tightly covered teammate. With Superman's Kryptonite running the show, the other team will have to make a decision, guard him and allow more space for his teammates off of the pass OR back off and let him penetrate past you or rise up for a jump shot. The second unit as currently constructed does not have a perimeter player who creates his own shot.
March 21, 1999:

Los Angeles Lakers 115, Orlando Magic 104 FINAL/Overtime

Kobe Bryant - 38 Points, 4 Assists, 3 Rebounds, 2 Steals, 1 NEW FAN
User avatar
Venti Quattro

 
Posts: 2815
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 9:27 pm
Location: Burke, VA

Re: Lakers making "serious inquiries" about Nate Robinson

Postby Barnstable on Sun Jul 05, 2009 1:38 pm

Helljumper wrote:
Savory Griddles wrote:Not sure if some of you guys are putting this in its proper perspective. Nate would not be the starter. He'd be the change of pace pg for our bench mob with Odom, Sasha and Luke. I know he can't play defense. Neither can Farmar. At least Nate can score consistently. Imagine a running lineup of Odom, Walton, Sasha, Brown and Nate as our bench mob. Not bad at all.


Thank you. We can all agree that Farmar has been mediocre at best on defense this past year. Jordan chucks up a lot of shots and tries to be a scoring point guard but most of the time, he doesn't score much. So if we're not going to get a defensive point guard (and there aren't many on the market), why not make an improvement by getting a better scoring point guard.

And actually, scoring is something we need. Other than Lamar, last season there was nobody who could create their own shot. Our bench struggled offensively last year and Nate could really help.


:bow: Yes, Yes, and Yes!

Nate is the perfect role player in that his role would be to score off the bench. He does that very well, and we don't need anything else from him.

I don't get the not enough shots argument. Did anyone see how hard the lakers struggled to create shots without Kobe out there? Artest helps that effort, but there is absolutly no reason to not get even better.

Nate is an upgrade over Farmar plain and simple.
"league getting mitch-slapped"
User avatar
Barnstable
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 14272
Joined: Mon Jul 17, 2006 1:01 pm
Location: Queens NY

Re: Lakers making "serious inquiries" about Nate Robinson

Postby Helljumper on Sun Jul 05, 2009 1:50 pm

EDIT: Posted in wrong thread.
Image
User avatar
Helljumper

 
Posts: 14856
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 4:40 pm
Location: Riverside, CA

Re: Lakers making "serious inquiries" about Nate Robinson

Postby hdtvset on Sun Jul 05, 2009 2:03 pm

How is Robinson's defense vs. big name PGs?
Image
User avatar
hdtvset

 
Posts: 1619
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: LA

Re: Lakers making "serious inquiries" about Nate Robinson

Postby live and die in LA on Sun Jul 05, 2009 2:23 pm

I just dont see the point of signing Nate at all. The guy is a 5-8 shooting guard who has hit his ceiling. Sure, he can score in bunches but he brings no defense or point guard facilitating. if the Lakers really want this type of player why not go after the 6-5 version in Von Wafer.

Not to mention the guy will want 5-8 million dollars a season. Why spend that type of money on a career backup with huge flaws. I would much rather take my chances on Farmar and Shannon improving.
User avatar
live and die in LA

 
Posts: 4842
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2004 6:23 pm

Re: Lakers making "serious inquiries" about Nate Robinson

Postby Frank The Tank on Sun Jul 05, 2009 2:44 pm

live and die in LA wrote:Not to mention the guy will want 5-8 million dollars a season. Why spend that type of money on a career backup with huge flaws. I would much rather take my chances on Farmar and Shannon improving.



8 million dollars? Who the hell do you think is going to give Nate Robinson 8 million dollars? No way he gets that much.
User avatar
Frank The Tank

 
Posts: 4810
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2005 10:20 pm

Re: Lakers making "serious inquiries" about Nate Robinson

Postby hypotenuse on Sun Jul 05, 2009 2:51 pm

uh robinson is a dunk contest player
_____________________________________________________________________
User avatar
hypotenuse

 
Posts: 778
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 9:47 am
Location: atlien

Re: Lakers making "serious inquiries" about Nate Robinson

Postby live and die in LA on Sun Jul 05, 2009 3:24 pm

Frank The Tank wrote:
live and die in LA wrote:Not to mention the guy will want 5-8 million dollars a season. Why spend that type of money on a career backup with huge flaws. I would much rather take my chances on Farmar and Shannon improving.



8 million dollars? Who the hell do you think is going to give Nate Robinson 8 million dollars? No way he gets that much.


Does want = get?
User avatar
live and die in LA

 
Posts: 4842
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2004 6:23 pm

Re: Lakers making "serious inquiries" about Nate Robinson

Postby Frank The Tank on Sun Jul 05, 2009 3:43 pm

live and die in LA wrote:
Frank The Tank wrote:
live and die in LA wrote:Not to mention the guy will want 5-8 million dollars a season. Why spend that type of money on a career backup with huge flaws. I would much rather take my chances on Farmar and Shannon improving.



8 million dollars? Who the hell do you think is going to give Nate Robinson 8 million dollars? No way he gets that much.


Does want = get?




Umm I'm sure everyone wants another 8 million dollars. He's not getting it though so how is that relevant to the discussion?
User avatar
Frank The Tank

 
Posts: 4810
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2005 10:20 pm

Re: Lakers making "serious inquiries" about Nate Robinson

Postby lkrfn85 on Sun Jul 05, 2009 4:30 pm

He's not a good fit. A nice player in another system, but not for the triangle, which needs TALL guards who can play D and shoot. Nate is more of an attack player who shoots alot. Great fit for D'antoni, but not Phil. Plus, every Mike D'Antoni player has inflated stats...dude isnt the guy we're looking for. Felton would be nice.
User avatar
lkrfn85

 
Posts: 492
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 3:57 pm

Re: Lakers making "serious inquiries" about Nate Robinson

Postby SignPippenNow on Sun Jul 05, 2009 4:33 pm

live and die in LA wrote:I just dont see the point of signing Nate at all. The guy is a 5-8 shooting guard who has hit his ceiling. Sure, he can score in bunches but he brings no defense or point guard facilitating. if the Lakers really want this type of player why not go after the 6-5 version in Von Wafer.

Not to mention the guy will want 5-8 million dollars a season. Why spend that type of money on a career backup with huge flaws. I would much rather take my chances on Farmar and Shannon improving.


He is making just over 2 million. No one is going to pay Nate anything remotely close to 8 million. Where do you guys think all this money is coming from when only a very few teams have that kind of cap space? The nBA has a salary cap and Nate isn't going to get anything near that kind of money. He wasn't making that kind of money so why would he now?
SignPippenNow

 
Posts: 3296
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 10:44 am

Re: Lakers making "serious inquiries" about Nate Robinson

Postby rebounds67 on Sun Jul 05, 2009 4:36 pm

why do you nmeeed nate when we already got DFisher/Shannon/Farnmar? i think dr. bus is trying totop all the other moves teams are making. dont fix something thats not broken
User avatar
rebounds67

 
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 12:41 pm

Re: Lakers making "serious inquiries" about Nate Robinson

Postby live and die in LA on Sun Jul 05, 2009 4:40 pm

SignPippenNow wrote:
live and die in LA wrote:I just dont see the point of signing Nate at all. The guy is a 5-8 shooting guard who has hit his ceiling. Sure, he can score in bunches but he brings no defense or point guard facilitating. if the Lakers really want this type of player why not go after the 6-5 version in Von Wafer.

Not to mention the guy will want 5-8 million dollars a season. Why spend that type of money on a career backup with huge flaws. I would much rather take my chances on Farmar and Shannon improving.


He is making just over 2 million. No one is going to pay Nate anything remotely close to 8 million. Where do you guys think all this money is coming from when only a very few teams have that kind of cap space? The nBA has a salary cap and Nate isn't going to get anything near that kind of money. He wasn't making that kind of money so why would he now?


The reason he is making 2 million is because he is still on his rookie contract, no? Listen, I said he would want 5-8 million just as a rough number. Nit-pick if you want, I know that he will most likely get in the 5-6 range. I said the max that the player would want, the guy would have to agree to a deal with us for a sign and trade to go through. Why would he agree to a sign and trade for a lowball contract when he can stick around in NYK for one more year, raise his stats a bit, and hope an idiot GM overpays him in a year where alot of teams have cap room.
User avatar
live and die in LA

 
Posts: 4842
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2004 6:23 pm

Re: Lakers making "serious inquiries" about Nate Robinson

Postby Savory Griddles on Sun Jul 05, 2009 5:43 pm

rebounds67 wrote:why do you nmeeed nate when we already got DFisher/Shannon/Farnmar? i think dr. bus is trying totop all the other moves teams are making. dont fix something thats not broken



Our pg rotation IS broken. Did you not watch us last year? Fisher's 4 minutes at the end of game 4 in the Finals does not excuse his horrific performance the rest of the playoffs. He's only going to get worse as age catches up with him even further. Farmar and Brown are not starting material in this league (neither is nate, btw) but we do need to improve on the position.
User avatar
Savory Griddles

 
Posts: 9024
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 10:56 am
Location: AV,CA

Re: Lakers making "serious inquiries" about Nate Robinson

Postby rebounds67 on Sun Jul 05, 2009 5:54 pm

Savory Griddles wrote:
rebounds67 wrote:why do you nmeeed nate when we already got DFisher/Shannon/Farnmar? i think dr. bus is trying totop all the other moves teams are making. dont fix something thats not broken



Our pg rotation IS broken. Did you not watch us last year? Fisher's 4 minutes at the end of game 4 in the Finals does not excuse his horrific performance the rest of the playoffs. He's only going to get worse as age catches up with him even further. Farmar and Brown are not starting material in this league (neither is nate, btw) but we do need to improve on the position.


yeah i saw all the games, last i recall we won the ring

i dont like these insults towards DFisher. the lakers didnt make the finals again till Dfish came back, and they won partly cause of him

the guy NEVER was a playmaker. in his prime he played better defense but that's it. he was always a kickout shooter. don't expect him to play like baron davis (neither should you want to)

when you have a team as young as the lakers, experienced, veteran, cool-headed champs like Dfish is crucial to keeping the locker room together. and i guarantee you there was a lot of drama going on behind the scenes where Fish was key to calming everyone down. Phil Jackson asked him to come back for a reason, don't insult my man

as far as shannon not being starting material, fish still has some years left in him. what i endorse is still letting him start the games, but slowly transition shannon into a more dominant role, up to the point where shannon is comfortable closing games (the type of role reggie would have taken in his last year were it not for the riot in detroit that left them without artest)
User avatar
rebounds67

 
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 12:41 pm

Re: Lakers making "serious inquiries" about Nate Robinson

Postby Ras Algethi on Sun Jul 05, 2009 6:03 pm

I don't like him as a starter. He's not what we need. Off the bench as an offensive spark? Sure, but that's the extent of it. Small pg, weak D, he's good for quick offensive burst thats about it.
Image
The most important image ever taken in 3D.
User avatar
Ras Algethi
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 18073
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 10:11 pm
Location: Laker Land

Re: Lakers making "serious inquiries" about Nate Robinson

Postby GNC on Sun Jul 05, 2009 6:13 pm

two0one7 wrote:I don't like him as a starter. He's not what we need. Off the bench as an offensive spark? Sure, but that's the extent of it. Small pg, weak D, he's good for quick offensive burst thats about it.


pretty much sums up my thoughts.

never would i want him to start. great off the bench tandem with LO though because he can score in bunches.
Image
User avatar
GNC

 
Posts: 16402
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: Next to Kate Upton

Re: Lakers making "serious inquiries" about Nate Robinson

Postby revgen on Sun Jul 05, 2009 6:38 pm

Nate Robinson as a starter or a bench player is a joke. Can he create his own shot? Sure, if he takes 30 shots a game! The guy is a volume shooter and streaky as hell. We need a guy who knows how to select a shot. That's not Nate Robinson. I'd rather keep Farmar.
"Every time he’s hurt, he always plays, he always comes through."

- Metta World Peace on teammate Kobe Bryant
revgen
HDTV/Multimedia Guru
 
Posts: 21718
Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 10:53 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: Lakers making "serious inquiries" about Nate Robinson

Postby GoatMilk16 on Sun Jul 05, 2009 6:41 pm

some of you are really undervaluing nate
GoatMilk16

 
Posts: 2118
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 1:54 am

Re: Lakers making "serious inquiries" about Nate Robinson

Postby revgen on Sun Jul 05, 2009 6:46 pm

GoatMilk16 wrote:some of you are really undervaluing nate

Some people are really overvaluing him.

He's short. He's streaky. He's a ballhog. He's not what we need off the bench or in the starting lineup.
"Every time he’s hurt, he always plays, he always comes through."

- Metta World Peace on teammate Kobe Bryant
revgen
HDTV/Multimedia Guru
 
Posts: 21718
Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 10:53 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: Lakers making "serious inquiries" about Nate Robinson

Postby CaCHooKa Man on Sun Jul 05, 2009 6:51 pm

^sounds like a description of jordan farmar. lolz
User avatar
CaCHooKa Man
Human Highlight Reel
 
Posts: 20529
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 8:22 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Lakers making "serious inquiries" about Nate Robinson

Postby LAKEROC on Sun Jul 05, 2009 7:15 pm

Nate Robinson and Ron Artest on the same team. Why do I feel that is a recipe for disaster?
LAKEROC

 
Posts: 2167
Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 2:49 pm

Re: Lakers making "serious inquiries" about Nate Robinson

Postby revgen on Sun Jul 05, 2009 9:29 pm

CaCHooKa Man wrote:^sounds like a description of jordan farmar. lolz


Exactly.

So why make the trade?

Trade for somebody better. Sky posted a scenerio at LG where we might get Felton from the Bobcats. Sounded farfetched to me, but at least we get somebody better than Farmar.
"Every time he’s hurt, he always plays, he always comes through."

- Metta World Peace on teammate Kobe Bryant
revgen
HDTV/Multimedia Guru
 
Posts: 21718
Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 10:53 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: Lakers making "serious inquiries" about Nate Robinson

Postby Andrew Bynum17 on Sun Jul 05, 2009 9:47 pm

lmao this is ridiculous...

SOme people on this team are really comparing farmar to nate robinson... FARMAR IS NOT NATE ROBINSON....NAte robinson is a scorer hes not a natural pg but he can score! Farmar makes stupid turnovers and can not score like nate...
Image
User avatar
Andrew Bynum17

 
Posts: 31
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 10:28 pm

Re: Lakers making "serious inquiries" about Nate Robinson

Postby last stand on Sun Jul 05, 2009 9:50 pm

felton, hinrich or nothing for me
everyone has their top 10 lists of women heres mine

1. emma watson
2. Natalie Portman
3. Mila Kunis
4. Emma Stone
5. Megan Fox
6. jessica biel
7. Teresa Palmer
8. Katy Perry
9. jessica alba
10. Olivia Wilde
last stand

 
Posts: 7502
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2008 11:43 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Sourced Rumors

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron
Advertise Here | Privacy Policy | ©2008 Sculu Sports. Come Strong.