crzymdups wrote:i think nate is being wrongly villified, but i'm not around him everyday so i don't know what his affect on the team is in practice and stuff. he seems like a guy who cares about winning and tries hard and just has a big, annoying personality. it's kind of a shame it can't work. it does often seem like he's our best player - he just needs to learn to pass the ball more and learn to realize passing to gallinari will actually get him playing time. sigh. nate, you knucklehead.

watch Nate play defense. even if a player setting a pick that is 5 feet away from Nate, Nate will go under it. and he looses his man all the time.

martin wrote:

crzymdups wrote:i think nate is being wrongly villified, but i'm not around him everyday so i don't know what his affect on the team is in practice and stuff. he seems like a guy who cares about winning and tries hard and just has a big, annoying personality. it's kind of a shame it can't work. it does often seem like he's our best player - he just needs to learn to pass the ball more and learn to realize passing to gallinari will actually get him playing time. sigh. nate, you knucklehead.

watch Nate play defense. even if a player setting a pick that is 5 feet away from Nate, Nate will go under it. and he looses his man all the time.

I don't consider him a villain at all, nor is he anywhere close to Marbury as people may make him out to be. At least that's my opinion. However, it's a problem when such a talented player has such poor instincts and a low level on the defensive end. If he doesn't pass a ton, that's one thing. I can go with that just b/c I think he's such an efficient scorer. However, when he's not doing a lick on a defensive end, and his maturity is STILL a problem, then maybe a couple of benchings are in order.

McK1 wrote:Is Nate being told to go under screens?

he so short, he go under screen by default.

Bringing in Mcgrady here for half the season makes no sense. We only trade for him is we can clear more cap. If they want nate, sure why the hell not. But to get the Mobley exemption they gotta take eddy.

WE get Mcgrady, just buy him out and release him and let him hoist up Shots that Gallo and wilson should take.

McK1 wrote:

Allanfan20 wrote:

McK1 wrote:Is Nate being told to go under screens?

You're kidding right? It's hard to take a question like that seriously. He has probably been going under screens for his entire life as a basketball player and it's probably a habit he has not been able to break.

D'Antoni said himself he has to put up a better defensive effort. This is all on Nate.

nate played corner in the pac-1o. i don't think contact is an issue with him.

its speculation on my part but i believe in a more aggresive defense that pressed and trapped we'd see a nate that causes a lot more turnovers

and the question remains... why doesn't nate hound the ball more? cause he should and we all know the coaches have asked him to. And it's clearly an advantage for him cause of his size and speed.

McK1 wrote:

martin wrote:

McK1 wrote:

Allanfan20 wrote:

McK1 wrote:Is Nate being told to go under screens?

You're kidding right? It's hard to take a question like that seriously. He has probably been going under screens for his entire life as a basketball player and it's probably a habit he has not been able to break.

D'Antoni said himself he has to put up a better defensive effort. This is all on Nate.

nate played corner in the pac-1o. i don't think contact is an issue with him.

its speculation on my part but i believe in a more aggresive defense that pressed and trapped we'd see a nate that causes a lot more turnovers

and the question remains... why doesn't nate hound the ball more? cause he should and we all know the coaches have asked him to. And it's clearly an advantage for him cause of his size and speed.

if its nate's choice whether to press perhaps not ever having a shotblocker behind him causes him to refrain.

you forgot to put the smiley after you post so I know your talking funny

McK1 wrote:

martin wrote:

McK1 wrote:

martin wrote:

McK1 wrote:

Allanfan20 wrote:

McK1 wrote:Is Nate being told to go under screens?

You're kidding right? It's hard to take a question like that seriously. He has probably been going under screens for his entire life as a basketball player and it's probably a habit he has not been able to break.

D'Antoni said himself he has to put up a better defensive effort. This is all on Nate.

nate played corner in the pac-1o. i don't think contact is an issue with him.

its speculation on my part but i believe in a more aggresive defense that pressed and trapped we'd see a nate that causes a lot more turnovers

and the question remains... why doesn't nate hound the ball more? cause he should and we all know the coaches have asked him to. And it's clearly an advantage for him cause of his size and speed.

if its nate's choice whether to press perhaps not ever having a shotblocker behind him causes him to refrain.

you forgot to put the smiley after you post so I know your talking funny

perhaps coming up Nate was taught your personnel on the court with you determines how you defend another team and those are the instincts he plays by.

what do u believe to be the issue?

getting Nate to play defense is not a personnel on the court issue. Giving effort to getting over screens is not a personnel on the court issue. Getting Nate focused on winning is not a personnel on the court issue. It's between the ears is what the problem is.

I really don't know what to tell you if you sincerely believe that Nate goes under screens because the coaches tell him to do that. Going under screens is what coaches hate more than anything, including Isiah, including D'Antoni and including Larry Brown. All three had issues with Nate regarding this.

The problem with Nate is that he was such an attractive looking player coming into the NBA that it was impossible to ignore. It was hard as hell to not give him just a little bit of playing time. Yet he almost instantly became a part of the rotation under Brown, Isiah and now D'Antoni, that he rarely got any chance to fight for anything. I don't know who is to blame for this, but if Nate doesn't start playing defense, he's not going to be part of anybodys rotation in the future. Including the most overrated coach in the NBA, Don Nelson.

PresIke wrote:http://www.realgm.com/src_checktrade.php?tradeid=5307313

Nate + Darko + Mobley for McGrady

Would you do it?

Would the Knicks do it?

Would the Rockets do it?

or i'm crazy...

They might go for it, but why would we? It doesn't eliminate either of our two undesired contracts. They get a sixth man super-midget who can give you 25+ points off the bench, a cash money insurance payment, and a 7 footer who is still figuring things out, but was a low lottery pick just a few years ago. We get a guy who rides the pine.

I just don't see what's in it for us. Take Darko out and stick Fishlips in there, then I'd say booya. I think the only player the Rockets would consider from us is Curry. I'd gladly throw in Mobley and N8 to get it done.

McGrady wouldn't get many minutes, but it would give him a chance to prove himself in a tough situation before trying for his last long-term deal someplace.