Agent Asks Knicks To Trade Nate
Agent Asks Knicks To Trade Nate
More Knicks News
Agent Contacts Knicks About Nate's Benching
Bender Scores Nine Points In Return
Knicks Could Send Jordan Hill To D-League
Darko Confirms He'll Play In Europe Next Season
New York Knicks Archive
RSS Feed | Twitter
New York Home Page
New York Roster
New York Message Board
Find Knicks Tickets
Feedback or Suggestions
Dec 20, 2009 10:55 AM EST
Agent Aaron Goodwin has asked the Knicks to look into trading guard Nate Robinson.
Robinson has been glued to the bench in recent weeks. He hasn't played in New York's last eight games.
A team spokesman says the request was made Saturday and that Knicks team president Donnie Walsh will have discussions with Goodwin.
New York coach Mike D'Antoni insists that the benching isn't personal. He claims that he's only playing the guys he feels give the team their best chance to win.
"We're trying to win," D'Antoni said. "I can't explain exactly every second the ins and outs, and we were on a roll and that roll doesn't quit just because you lose a game. You see over time if this works or not."
CITE YOUR SOURCES!!!!! Or just give us the link next time.....
Nate might be good on the Warriors or the Suns, but who would they give up? Golden State can't be dumb enough to give up Randolph for Robinson straight up, and the Suns would more than likely have to give up a starter or a first-round pick.
shouldnt have signed him to begin with.
Little Nate might as well get comfortable because the Knicks aren't trading him, unless they get back another player with an expiring contract. As the Knicks showed with Marbury... They don't have a problem making a player sit the bench or telling him to go home if he becomes a problem.
who would want him?..i mean he's a pretty good player but what team would give up something to bring in nate and make them a better team?..i cant see him in gs because they are set at the guard positions. plus nate has a one year contreact so that comes off the books next season
why trade for him when you could get him for free this offseason
Well I don't think it will be for free. I know that for sure. Now I know I would sit on an NBA bench for free, no problem, but I know what you are saying. Why give up anything for a guy that is on the final year of his deal if you don't have to.
I think Nate is a good player though. I know why he signed. He loves the city and his teammates, but I'm not sure why they signed him. There were a lot of times that you could tell that D'Antoni wanted to choke him. He makes some bone headed decisions, but he's really good at what he does. There are teams that could use his scoring, but I have a feeling they want to dump him with a bad contract. I just don't see anyone wanting to take on Jeffries or Curry, especially if Curry can't get any meaningful time. Curry only has value if people think he can play. This whole gluing players to the bench thing is probably going to start to haunt them soon, first Marbury, then Curry and now Nate. I'm not sure how good Marbury would have been, but I think they really shattered his ego more than it already was.
okay, so the bulls need a low post scorer and a scoring guard off the bench. So, nate could be their sixth man (like ben gordon) and they could try curry at center, because he can score, and if he fails, he is in his last year anyways. Chicago would have to give up brad miller tho, who has a very large expiring contract, which the knicks would want..
hmmm thats actually not a bad idea dmo. but the contracts are far from adding up...i think nates is about 2 million and i know miller is 12million plus
I would love to have the Knicks get Brad Miller.
Nate needs to be moves I would love to see him as a 6th man for a good team but i doubt it happens
it should add up nate is 4, curry is 10 and miller is about twelve. couldnt really do it on trade machine cause you cant trade nate on their yeat, but i just added some other guys off the knicks to add up to his 4 mil.
A trade proposed on here that makes sense. Once again, I think it's a reason why they have to play Curry. People know that Nate can play, but not Curry. The Knicks are never going to get any trade value for their guys if they keep burying them on the bench. It seems they learned nothing from the Marbury fiasco. They wanted to trade him, but wouldn't pay him so other teams are just waiting for a buyout.
lol..they arent dumb enough to take on curry's contract..no one is dumb enough to do that this year since this is a big free agent year..and you cant play curry because he hurts youre team when hes out there which leads to loses which is not what the coaches or organization wants to do