<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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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 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 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?
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.
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.
<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.