<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Mr. J @ Aug 13 2008, 11:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Nate isn’t a distraction to the team. Most players and coaches on the Knicks have been quoted saying Nate is a welcome addition, a good teammate, etc. If you think Nate is a distraction to the team then you have bought into the New York media hoopla. I think Nate throwing a towel at Zach during a game which they won is less of a distraction than Sean Williams possibly getting suspended for failing a drug test. Not to say Williams is the only NBA player who smokes; however, it adds negative light to the organization. Negative light is usually a distraction. Your assessment on Nate’s defense is unfair. The whole Knicks team was terrible on defense. Rotations were always late, there was little communication, and Isiah’s defensive philosophy wasn’t too good. How is it laughable to say Nate is better than Keyon Dooling when Nate produces more than him? This whole “on a winning team” thing is a fallacious argument. Nate is not the reason the Knicks have been losing. Prior to this year, Garnett and Gasol haven’t done too much winning; McGrady and Yao have yet to pass the first round; Elton Brand has one career playoff appearance. There are a plethora of solid NBA players who have had the misfortune of playing on bad teams with terrible management. You also have to take into consideration Nate has only played three seasons and Dooling has played eight and still hasn’t lived up to his expectations. I’m sure if Nate actually signed with a winning team like Dooling we wouldn’t be having this discussion. The only thing I can see out of Sean Williams is that he is tall, athletic, and can dunk. Does that sound accurate?</div> 1. Hypocritical paragraph. 2. The whole Knicks team's defense doesn't make Nate's any better. And defensive rotations are the least of Nate's problems. 3. It is laughable because Nate does nothing to contribute to a winning team, unlike all the players you mentioned. And Keyon Dooling, he plays defense, scores, can even run an offense IF NEEDED. He basically does what the team needs. Nate's an all-for-himself type player who hurts chemistry more than he helps. And don't give me that bs "It's just the media everyone says they love him" blah blah blah. Do you really think they would go around saying "Of course he's a malcontent! He always ruins our chemistry, we can't stand him!"...especially if they're trying to trade him? 4. Wrong, you haven't paid enough attention to Sean's game. Maybe you should, if you're going to make silly statements like that. I've sat through enough Knicks games on a boring school night to know how terrible Nate is. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ace @ Aug 14 2008, 01:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Nate sucks</div> I concur.
Mr J. you can't be serious Garnett, Gasol, Mcgrady, and Yao are way more than just solid players. Comparing them to Nate is preposterous and absolutely absurd. Nate isn't even solid in addition to the fact he is on a bad team
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (pegs)</div><div class='quotemain'>1. Hypocritical paragraph.</div> Alright, tell me how Nate is a disruption to the team. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>2. The whole Knicks team's defense doesn't make Nate's any better. And defensive rotations are the least of Nate's problems.</div> You should have been paying more attention. Nate isn’t as bad a defender as you’re making him out to be. Besides, it’s not like Nate can’t improve in this aspect. He’ll probably become a solid defender before Dooling gets a consistent jumper. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>3. It is laughable because Nate does nothing to contribute to a winning team, unlike all the players you mentioned. And Keyon Dooling, he plays defense, scores, can even run an offense IF NEEDED. He basically does what the team needs. Nate's an all-for-himself type player who hurts chemistry more than he helps. And don't give me that bs "It's just the media everyone says they love him" blah blah blah. Do you really think they would go around saying "Of course he's a malcontent! He always ruins our chemistry, we can't stand him!"...especially if they're trying to trade him?</div> You brought up the winning team argument, which is rather foolish since Nate has only been in the league for three years – five less than Dooling. I don’t know what you consider “contributing”, but I think a player who can come off the bench and score 13 points, dish out a few assists, while getting the crowd involved is a solid contribution on any team. Maybe you think Dooling’s playoff 6.6 PPG/1 RPG/0.8 APG is a better contribution? I mean it is on a winning team and everything. And how can Dooling, the 8-year vet with a career 1.9 APG, effectively run the offense if needed? Please explain to me how Dooling can run an offense but Nate can’t. Nate can score and run an offense better than Dooling. Finally, what are you basing this “malcontent” talk over? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>4. Wrong, you haven't paid enough attention to Sean's game. Maybe you should, if you're going to make silly statements like that. I've sat through enough Knicks games on a boring school night to know how terrible Nate is.</div> I actually have followed Sean Williams a lot last season. I clearly wrote that in response to you saying Nate is only short and can dunk. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (J Pis)</div><div class='quotemain'>Mr J. you can't be serious Garnett, Gasol, Mcgrady, and Yao are way more than just solid players. Comparing them to Nate is preposterous and absolutely absurd. Nate isn't even solid in addition to the fact he is on a bad team</div> Read my entire post. My point was there is no relevance in saying “when was the last time Nate was on a winning team” since you can find stars who haven’t been on winning teams, and he has spent all THREE of his NBA years on his first team. Wins don’t necessarily measure a player’s abilities, hence the reason I included the aforementioned players. As I said before, I don’t care if people are opposed to this trade scenario. I probably would too if I was a Net fan. I’m only defending the unwarranted sh!tting on Nate.
