Lakers making "serious inquiries" about Nate Robinson

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.

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.

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.

How is Robinson's defense vs. big name PGs?

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.

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.

uh robinson is a dunk contest player

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?

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?

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.

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?

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

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.

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.

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)

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.

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.

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.

some of you are really undervaluing nate

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.

^sounds like a description of jordan farmar. lolz

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

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.

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...

felton, hinrich or nothing for me