TMS wrote:

loweyecue wrote:Grown men don't preen in the middle of the court like N8 does. If he could behave like a grown man we wouldn't be having this discussion would we?

Nate hasn't been a disruption to the team the way Marbury has, i don't understand why he's getting the Marbury treatment... a game or 2 benching is enough to get the point across... otherwise u either release him or trade him.

trust me i was bitching about Nate's idiotic shenanigans before any one else here was... people told me i was just hatin' on the guy, but i noticed it was a clear problem from day one... but this is going too far if u ask me... this is just the way he's wired, he's not trying to purposely disrupt things the way Dinglebury was... Nate doesn't have his own agenda here.

I agree with you. Except about Dinglebury. I don't think he did it on purpose either.
I really think Marbury is insane/delusional and soft in the head.
I think he has no idea what he's saying at any given moment.

Swishfm3 wrote:

martin wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:D'Antoni is an interesting guy. He is not a disciplinarian and yet once a guy gets into his dog house he doesn't let him out until Walsh handles it. I wonder how Walsh feels about being put in this position again. I have to believe D'Antoni was consulted before Nate was resigned.

You make it out like MDA and Walsh don't talk or never do. You don't think that Walsh and MDA come to the same conclusion on guys like Marbury or Nate?

It's my understanding that Walsh goes to every Knicks practice. We see him in the stands at games.

and you make it out like you're in the "know".

Are you in the room with MDA and Walsh when they come to these conclusions? Your understanding doesnt make a fact...

ain't gotta be in the know to KNOW that a gm/coach having regular conversations is the NORM. And it's well documented that Walsh goes topractices and games.

This team's talent affords them no margin for error.

TMS wrote:

Nalod wrote:Does anyone realize the knicks have a much better record with nate on the bench?

This is about who gets in the rotation and effectiveness. Nate is a distraction. Nate has no trust or rescpect by coaches and his team mates so it takes away from what we are trying to do which is WIN!

nate has talent to do wonderful things but his defense lapses and judgement distracts any intensity. The team is playing much better without him.

even the last two losses where we blew leads is an impovement. WE HAD LEADS!!!!!

Nate is a great player when your down 20 and he scores in bunches.

IM sure the clown has been talked to many times and they are frustrated over it going in one ear and the out the other. Yeah, its a distraction.

our W-L record is not as important as it is to pump up our players' trade values & try to swing some kinda deal to dump some bad contracts... Nate would have been a useful asset to use to try & accomplish that... instead his value is pretty much zero now that he's not playing... he wasn't gonna be here past this season regardless, i see no point in dishing out punishments like this when we could have been trying to get him playing time just like we're doing w/Fishlips to try & dump his contract... yeah i know all about trying to change the culture but IMO it's more important to get that cap space first... after the deadline u have plenty of time to change the culture & then get the young kids some burn... i have no idea WTF MDA is trying to accomplish here, it seems pretty petty if u ask me & IMHO is not in the best interest of the franchise to go this route.

I am not sold on this Nate trade value theory. The pre-season showed that no team has any real interest in him. The only contract that will make a difference if we can dump is Fishlips. Curry cannot be traded unless there's another Isiah out there. And if Nate is to be packaged with that then so be it. But Nate's trade value is not getting dinged here, all GM's around the league know by now exactly what he can do.

Papabear wrote:Papabear Says

How long must Nate stay on punishment? I think D'Antoni need to be on punishment for not drawing up plans to win hoisting up 3s all night. Nate will leave the Knicks probably and maybe get with winners. Hey I hope the Knicks are not trying to destroy this kids career. If they don't want him and he is not worth anything to this team just put Nate on waivers and be done with it. If the Kid means nothing then just give him away. I'm a Knicks die hard fan and I just would like to see at least one player from this team grow with the team to the playoffs.

Can you explain to me why Nate should be guaranteed minutes. If D'Antoni determines that the team is better at this point with the current rotation that unfortunately does not include Nate(and the record and better defense so far shows this to be true), why is it mistreatment that he is not playing? Why does Nate deserve any different treatment then Landry or Hill? Because he's a veteran? Because he's Nate? Because he scores a lot and dunks real pretty? The team is 7-3 in the last 10 games, how can anyone on the bench be complaining that they deserve minutes? Is Eddie Curry also being mistreated?

Part of the cultural change here is changing this notion that you "deserve" minutes based on who you are. You deserve minutes based on whether the team wins or not. The team is winning and even playing well in losses. Those on the bench have no argument. If they start losing and the rotation proves not to be working then Nate has an argument. Until then, what leg does he have to stand on? What leg do any of them have to stand on? Jordan Hill is a lottery pick and he's not playing, shouldn't he be screaming mistreatment next?

I have no problem with Nate wanting to play. I have no problem with Nate even asking for a trade to go to a team that may want to give him minutes. But the bottom line is, he has no right to cry mistreatment on this team. While he's been here we have won 23, 33, 23 and 32 games. We started out this year 1-9 with him as a major player in the rotation. Now no single player is to blame for that turnaround. But the mix was not working. Now we finally have a mix that is playing well together and has been for the past 3 or 4 weeks. Nobody on the bench has a right to complain if they are not a part of it.

markvmc wrote:Trading Nate may be easier said than done. Even if we assume we don't want Nate around to play in the event of injuries or him cracking the rotation after a string of losses, a trade would have to:
1. Be to our benefit
2. Be somewhere Nate won't veto.
3. Match salaries
4. Find a team that actually wants him

3 is more of a problem than one might think:

http://espn.go.com/nba/dailydime/_/page/dime-091220/daily-dime

Who said it would be easy? There are a few things that will help though:

1. A playoff team looking for an energy scorer off the bench and has disposable young assets. Hard to believe that Nate wouldn't approve a trade to a playoff bound team where he will see minutes. It is a contract year for him and he needs to play. Putting up some playoff stats won't hurt his value none either. Easy, no. Impossible, never. BTW -nates salary at 4m, trade value @ 2m mnatches up with just about every Rookie contract out there. That is why I think Walsh was so generous