Nate for Sean?

Discussion in 'Brooklyn Nets' started by netsking, Aug 13, 2008.

  1. netsking

    netsking Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2008
    Messages:
    97
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Location:
    Brooklyn
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>A source close to the Nets front office told TKB that the team would most definately accept a Knicks offer of Nate Robinson in exchange for forward Sean Williams.</div>

    http://www.theknicksblog.com/2008/08/13/ne...-williams-swap/

    I like the trade. Gives us instant offense and gives us a versatile back-up point guard.
     
  2. jerseycarter15

    jerseycarter15 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2008
    Messages:
    296
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
  3. pegs

    pegs My future wife.

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2007
    Messages:
    12,079
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Nooooooooooooooooooooo

    Wow, Nate Robinson is just terrible. That would be the worst possible trade you could find. I don't know if I could follow the team after pulling shit like that.


    First passing on Bayless, then trading Sean for shit? Fucking ridiculous.

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>however a phone call from Donnie Walsh has yet to be made.</div>
    And I hope it never is made
     
  4. ToddMacCulloch11

    ToddMacCulloch11 Who me?

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,371
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    NJ
    no sir, I don't like it.

    I wouldn't want to trade him, and especially not to the Knicks.
     
  5. netsking

    netsking Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2008
    Messages:
    97
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Location:
    Brooklyn
    why not though i think he's a great player, a scorer which we need and we give them one of our bigs, its not like we have limited PF in this team.
     
  6. Netted

    Netted Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2007
    Messages:
    1,804
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Nooooooooo thank you.

    First of all the Nets would never trade Williams to the Knicks out of fear he can develop into a player that would make them look like idiots and the Knicks geniuses.

    Second, not crazy about Nate on this team.

    I rather trade Williams for Crittenton or Lowry.
     
  7. Malorkayel

    Malorkayel Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2008
    Messages:
    647
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Tiny shooting guard. I'd rather keep Sean Williams for defense.

    The Knicks will love this trade. I don't see the reason for the Nets.

    Not a terrible trade, but why help your rivals.
     
  8. GMJ

    GMJ Suspended

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2007
    Messages:
    12,067
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    0
    That would be goddamn miserable. Nate Robinson can hit the 3 on occasion, and can dunk. That's it.
     
  9. networks

    networks Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2008
    Messages:
    453
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    18
    This trade is stupid. I refuse to trade with the Knicks. This is our competition for Lebron. No thanks.

    Nate aint that good anyway. The other thing is why would D'antoni trade away "Want-to-be-Barbosa". That is his type of player.
     
  10. TheKidHypno

    TheKidHypno Coming for that #1 spot!

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2007
    Messages:
    363
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (networks @ Aug 13 2008, 01:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>This trade is stupid. I refuse to trade with the Knicks. This is our competition for Lebron. No thanks.

    Nate aint that good anyway. The other thing is why would D'antoni trade away "Want-to-be-Barbosa". That is his type of player.</div>
    he would trade a want-to-be-barbosa for someone who is compared to amare
     
  11. reganomics813

    reganomics813 Get ready for typos!

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2007
    Messages:
    495
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    18
    I'm curious as to just how hard the Nets source was laughing when he relayed that information.
     
  12. rory

    rory One of the 7 New Wonders

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2007
    Messages:
    276
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Don't like it at all. Plus, it goes against the whole "character team" mantra they've been selling.
     
  13. Lavalamp

    Lavalamp Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2007
    Messages:
    2,042
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Don't do it Thorn!
     
  14. Real

    Real Dumb and Dumbest

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2007
    Messages:
    2,858
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    38
    That story has to be false.
     
  15. New Breed

    New Breed New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2008
    Messages:
    16
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    You don't trade big for small

    no way!!
     
  16. networks

    networks Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2008
    Messages:
    453
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    18
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TheKidHypno @ Aug 13 2008, 01:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (networks @ Aug 13 2008, 01:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>This trade is stupid. I refuse to trade with the Knicks. This is our competition for Lebron. No thanks.

    Nate aint that good anyway. The other thing is why would D'antoni trade away "Want-to-be-Barbosa". That is his type of player.</div>
    he would trade a want-to-be-barbosa for someone who is compared to amare
    </div>

    Did someone here compare him to amare?
     
  17. danxcr

    danxcr Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Messages:
    1,710
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    38
    i dont think thorn is that stupid... this is would be a horrible trade..
     
  18. Mr. J

    Mr. J Triple Up

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Messages:
    9,912
    Likes Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    New York, NY
    I have no problems with people not liking this trade. However, many of you are misguided if you think Nate is “terrible”, or Sean Williams is the next Amare (which is rather laughable).

    In addition to being instant offense and energy off the bench, Nate’s decision making has improved, making him more than serviceable for your team. The Nets’ PG position is also somewhat thin. After Keyon Dooling (whom Nate is better than), there is no other PG. While adding depth, the Nets subtract from their mini glut of big men: Brook Lopez, Josh Boone, Ryan Anderson, Stromile Swift (a carbon copy of Sean Williams), and Yi (who will probably play a lot of 4-5).

    And saying that Nate is a player that only dunks and hits the occasional three is vastly underrating him. He’s actually prone to numerous scoring outbursts (ex: when he dropped 45 on Portland). Considering the Nets lost their leading scorer in Jefferson, Nate should contribute in that aspect. Another intangible Nate brings to the table is energy, which is often the catalyst for many Knick runs, as the crowd responds well to Nate.

    And for those who think Nate is a distraction and immature, need to do some research on Sean Williams’ troubled past.
     
  19. Netted

    Netted Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2007
    Messages:
    1,804
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    The trade sounds like the hopeful wishings of someone that writes a blog.

    Biggest mistake in the proposal is thinking Nets management would risk looking like idiots for giving Sean to the Knicks and he later turns into a very good player. They are not that stupid.

    Nate is Nate, he's a known commodity... a bench player. If they trade Sean it will be for another player with "potential" like Crittenton or Lowry or as part of bigger package.
     
  20. netsking

    netsking Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2008
    Messages:
    97
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Location:
    Brooklyn
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Mr. J @ Aug 13 2008, 05:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I have no problems with people not liking this trade. However, many of you are misguided if you think Nate is “terrible”, or Sean Williams is the next Amare (which is rather laughable).

    In addition to being instant offense and energy off the bench, Nate’s decision making has improved, making him more than serviceable for your team. The Nets’ PG position is also somewhat thin. After Keyon Dooling (whom Nate is better than), there is no other PG. While adding depth, the Nets subtract from their mini glut of big men: Brook Lopez, Josh Boone, Ryan Anderson, Stromile Swift (a carbon copy of Sean Williams), and Yi (who will probably play a lot of 4-5).

    And saying that Nate is a player that only dunks and hits the occasional three is vastly underrating him. He’s actually prone to numerous scoring outbursts (ex: when he dropped 45 on Portland). Considering the Nets lost their leading scorer in Jefferson, Nate should contribute in that aspect. Another intangible Nate brings to the table is energy, which is often the catalyst for many Knick runs, as the crowd responds well to Nate.

    And for those who think Nate is a distraction and immature, need to do some research on Sean Williams’ troubled past.</div>

    Thank you, thats why i like nate and i think would be good as a back-up. And he goes great as a high energy back-up and we need to get rid of sean before his stock drops even lower, even though we can wait till his stock goes higher(hopefully). I for one would rather have a high energy small player that an lazy and undersized big. Also at this time shooters are more valuable to us than bigs.
     

Share This Page