TMS wrote:

martin wrote:

TMS wrote:that's not what i'm saying at all... i made the point pretty clear, if the Knicks were already growing tired of Nate's shenanigans, why pay him more than they absolutely had to? it's as if they rewarded him for the player he was... what kinda message does that send to the player? if i'm Nate & i'm getting a bonus from my boss for what i did last year, wouldn't it make sense to keep doing what i was doing last year?

i think there is a lot more finesse that goes on with the relationship between player, team, GM, coach than either you are missing or forgetting about.

Nate did have stretches last year where he was AWESOME, no doubt about it. 6th man fireplug that went on a terror. he also is the kind of guy where coaches need to put too much time into babysitting, and that means Nate in particular is wasting the coaching staff's time to work on other things and taking away from the team in general.

Nate had told Donnie that he wanted to stay in NY. NY prob wanted Nate (needed Nate cause of their lack of depth at PG/SG with a rookie in Douglas) but not the headache. Nate prob told Donnie that he was gonna change (especially after not receiving any other offers) There is a chance that Nate turns things around and becoming a consistent 15ppg scorer off the bench and hell on wheels pressuring the ball which exploding for 25+ppg a couple of times a month- those are the things he has talent for.

Now, as a GM, you can't really offer Lee a raise and not Nate, just wouldn't fly with agents, fans, media, player - someone will feel slighted. If you don't bring back Nate and the same sort of injuries happen to Duhon and Douglas is caca, what happens? So, we offer him an extra million + $1M for playoffs. Good compromise.

Offering a bit of a raise was benevolent by Donnie. No 2 ways around it. But that is NOT to say that Nate wouldn't have to hold up his end of the bargain (team play, do what coach is asking for) nor that it would guarantee minutes. IMHO, Nate has not lived up to what he should be doing on a day-to-day basis.

THIS YEAR. He is still going waaaayyyy under picks. Still being a clown before, during, after. We don't even know what's going on on the plane and in practice. Is he rotating on D like MDA has asked of him and other players? Played the role on O like he has been asked? Pressured the ball?

Nate is not a PG & never was one... if you're worried about someone feeling slighted, then trade Nate, simple... if you're not happy w/the way Nate's behaving on the court, trade him last year before we get to this point where now everyone knows MDA can no longer stand him & we're about to buy him out of his contract.

we needed a PG & the Knicks drafted Toney Douglas thinking he'd be able to fill the role in the future... so far it looks like they missed on that one too cuz he's more of a SG himself than a PG... so basically we passed on drafting a PG this year in the lottery, re-signed Nate thinking he was a PG even tho it was obvious he wasn't, & drafted Toney Douglas who we thought could be a PG but isn't (at least not yet)... i love the way this team thinks.

& dude, u don't gotta ask me whether Nate's been doing the things MDA has asked of him... i was the one telling you that Nate would not have a future on this team last year, remember? this was even before & after that awesome stretch of games he had where he was lighting it up... this is what u get from Nate... awesome games like those & then the other stupid nonsense he brings to the table... this is who the Knicks should have known he'd be, we've been dealing w/this kid since he was drafted.

i know of no other company in the business world that rewards its employees for acting like a fool & doesn't do what is asked of him... by giving Nate a pay raise we in effect did just that... & now people are asking why Nate can't learn how to behave like a professional... i know of no other company out there that buys out contracts of employees that bring nothing to the table as often as the Knicks do either, but after watching guys like Steve Francis, Mo Taylor, Jalen Rose & Stephon Marbury get their lucrative buyouts & allowed to walk for nothing, my guess is Curry & Nate are both just counting the days until they're given their buyouts too.

IMO this entire situation was mishandled from not trading him last year, to his contract signing this past offseason, to the way they've handled his benching this year... i'm just waiting for the final shoe to drop so we can watch Nate get his buyout & go sign on w/another team & he starts putting up numbers again... you're gonna see the threads pop up like crazy around here about why MDA didn't play Nate more, why we didn't lock him up to a longterm extension this past offseason, blah blah blah... just watch, it's gonna happen.

it seems to me you didn't really address anything that I posted or take any of it into account.

How would you have handled the situation? As a GM, you just drafted Douglas and Hill. What's your next step withNate? Not sign Nate?

martin wrote:

TMS wrote:

martin wrote:

TMS wrote:that's not what i'm saying at all... i made the point pretty clear, if the Knicks were already growing tired of Nate's shenanigans, why pay him more than they absolutely had to? it's as if they rewarded him for the player he was... what kinda message does that send to the player? if i'm Nate & i'm getting a bonus from my boss for what i did last year, wouldn't it make sense to keep doing what i was doing last year?

i think there is a lot more finesse that goes on with the relationship between player, team, GM, coach than either you are missing or forgetting about.

Nate did have stretches last year where he was AWESOME, no doubt about it. 6th man fireplug that went on a terror. he also is the kind of guy where coaches need to put too much time into babysitting, and that means Nate in particular is wasting the coaching staff's time to work on other things and taking away from the team in general.

Nate had told Donnie that he wanted to stay in NY. NY prob wanted Nate (needed Nate cause of their lack of depth at PG/SG with a rookie in Douglas) but not the headache. Nate prob told Donnie that he was gonna change (especially after not receiving any other offers) There is a chance that Nate turns things around and becoming a consistent 15ppg scorer off the bench and hell on wheels pressuring the ball which exploding for 25+ppg a couple of times a month- those are the things he has talent for.

Now, as a GM, you can't really offer Lee a raise and not Nate, just wouldn't fly with agents, fans, media, player - someone will feel slighted. If you don't bring back Nate and the same sort of injuries happen to Duhon and Douglas is caca, what happens? So, we offer him an extra million + $1M for playoffs. Good compromise.

Offering a bit of a raise was benevolent by Donnie. No 2 ways around it. But that is NOT to say that Nate wouldn't have to hold up his end of the bargain (team play, do what coach is asking for) nor that it would guarantee minutes. IMHO, Nate has not lived up to what he should be doing on a day-to-day basis.

THIS YEAR. He is still going waaaayyyy under picks. Still being a clown before, during, after. We don't even know what's going on on the plane and in practice. Is he rotating on D like MDA has asked of him and other players? Played the role on O like he has been asked? Pressured the ball?

Nate is not a PG & never was one... if you're worried about someone feeling slighted, then trade Nate, simple... if you're not happy w/the way Nate's behaving on the court, trade him last year before we get to this point where now everyone knows MDA can no longer stand him & we're about to buy him out of his contract.

we needed a PG & the Knicks drafted Toney Douglas thinking he'd be able to fill the role in the future... so far it looks like they missed on that one too cuz he's more of a SG himself than a PG... so basically we passed on drafting a PG this year in the lottery, re-signed Nate thinking he was a PG even tho it was obvious he wasn't, & drafted Toney Douglas who we thought could be a PG but isn't (at least not yet)... i love the way this team thinks.

& dude, u don't gotta ask me whether Nate's been doing the things MDA has asked of him... i was the one telling you that Nate would not have a future on this team last year, remember? this was even before & after that awesome stretch of games he had where he was lighting it up... this is what u get from Nate... awesome games like those & then the other stupid nonsense he brings to the table... this is who the Knicks should have known he'd be, we've been dealing w/this kid since he was drafted.

i know of no other company in the business world that rewards its employees for acting like a fool & doesn't do what is asked of him... by giving Nate a pay raise we in effect did just that... & now people are asking why Nate can't learn how to behave like a professional... i know of no other company out there that buys out contracts of employees that bring nothing to the table as often as the Knicks do either, but after watching guys like Steve Francis, Mo Taylor, Jalen Rose & Stephon Marbury get their lucrative buyouts & allowed to walk for nothing, my guess is Curry & Nate are both just counting the days until they're given their buyouts too.

IMO this entire situation was mishandled from not trading him last year, to his contract signing this past offseason, to the way they've handled his benching this year... i'm just waiting for the final shoe to drop so we can watch Nate get his buyout & go sign on w/another team & he starts putting up numbers again... you're gonna see the threads pop up like crazy around here about why MDA didn't play Nate more, why we didn't lock him up to a longterm extension this past offseason, blah blah blah... just watch, it's gonna happen.

it seems to me you didn't really address anything that I posted or take any of it into account.

How would you have handled the situation? As a GM, you just drafted Douglas and Hill. What's your next step withNate? Not sign Nate?

i took all of it into account... all of it could have easily been avoided by trading him last year, which is what i said they should have done all along... i believe you agreed that Walsh made the right move in re-signing Nate to a 1 year deal... he missed the boat long before the draft.

martin wrote:

TMS wrote:i took all of it into account... all of it could have easily been avoided by trading him last year, which is what i said they should have done all along... i believe you agreed that Walsh made the right move in re-signing Nate to a 1 year deal... he missed the boat long before the draft.

on and on and on about how Donnie and MDA mishandled and your biggest thing is he shoulda been traded last year? That didn't happen. Not trading Nate wasn't a mishandle, it is just something that did not happen.

Back to what did happen post draft and up until today.

martin, i gave u my take on it & explained it well enough... if it ain't good enough for u, that's up to u... what else is left to say? i thought he shoulda been traded last year, & yes, not trading him last year is a mishandle IMO... signing him to a bigger contract than we had to was a mishandle IMO... devalueing Nate by benching him this year was a mishandle IMO... u don't agree, that's your opinion... i know it always pains u to admit anything i ever say is right, but in this case i think the results speak for themselves... we now have a disgruntled player with a lot of talent who we will likely see walk for nothing in return... but Donnie can never do any wrong i guess.

martin wrote:

TMS wrote:that's not what i'm saying at all... i made the point pretty clear, if the Knicks were already growing tired of Nate's shenanigans, why pay him more than they absolutely had to? it's as if they rewarded him for the player he was... what kinda message does that send to the player? if i'm Nate & i'm getting a bonus from my boss for what i did last year, wouldn't it make sense to keep doing what i was doing last year?

i think there is a lot more finesse that goes on with the relationship between player, team, GM, coach than either you are missing or forgetting about.

Nate did have stretches last year where he was AWESOME, no doubt about it. 6th man fireplug that went on a terror. he also is the kind of guy where coaches need to put too much time into babysitting, and that means Nate in particular is wasting the coaching staff's time to work on other things and taking away from the team in general.

Nate had told Donnie that he wanted to stay in NY. NY prob wanted Nate (needed Nate cause of their lack of depth at PG/SG with a rookie in Douglas) but not the headache. Nate prob told Donnie that he was gonna change (especially after not receiving any other offers) There is a chance that Nate turns things around and becoming a consistent 15ppg scorer off the bench and hell on wheels pressuring the ball which exploding for 25+ppg a couple of times a month- those are the things he has talent for.

Now, as a GM, you can't really offer Lee a raise and not Nate, just wouldn't fly with agents, fans, media, player - someone will feel slighted. If you don't bring back Nate and the same sort of injuries happen to Duhon and Douglas is caca, what happens? So, we offer him an extra million + $1M for playoffs. Good compromise.

Offering a bit of a raise was benevolent by Donnie. No 2 ways around it. But that is NOT to say that Nate wouldn't have to hold up his end of the bargain (team play, do what coach is asking for) nor that it would guarantee minutes. IMHO, Nate has not lived up to what he should be doing on a day-to-day basis.

THIS YEAR. He is still going waaaayyyy under picks. Still being a clown before, during, after. We don't even know what's going on on the plane and in practice. Is he rotating on D like MDA has asked of him and other players? Played the role on O like he has been asked? Pressured the ball?

It might be apples and oranges but I think Cashen does this every year with the Yankees and he is good at it. Letting Matsui and probably Damon go after winning the world series takes alot of guts but it was right for the team. Re-signing Nate didn't have to happen. The Knicks plan, to acquire cap space, was well known throughout the league. Letting Nate go would have fit with the plan. Nate's knuckle head rep is well known throughout the league. Walsh brought Nate back with D'Antoni's knowledge. MDA needed to speak up over the summer if Nate was such a big issue for him. His handling of players he doesn't want to deal with brings on alot of publicity, and drama for the team, reduces the players value in a trade, and creates a difficult situation for the GM.

CrushAlot wrote:

martin wrote:

TMS wrote:that's not what i'm saying at all... i made the point pretty clear, if the Knicks were already growing tired of Nate's shenanigans, why pay him more than they absolutely had to? it's as if they rewarded him for the player he was... what kinda message does that send to the player? if i'm Nate & i'm getting a bonus from my boss for what i did last year, wouldn't it make sense to keep doing what i was doing last year?

i think there is a lot more finesse that goes on with the relationship between player, team, GM, coach than either you are missing or forgetting about.

Nate did have stretches last year where he was AWESOME, no doubt about it. 6th man fireplug that went on a terror. he also is the kind of guy where coaches need to put too much time into babysitting, and that means Nate in particular is wasting the coaching staff's time to work on other things and taking away from the team in general.

Nate had told Donnie that he wanted to stay in NY. NY prob wanted Nate (needed Nate cause of their lack of depth at PG/SG with a rookie in Douglas) but not the headache. Nate prob told Donnie that he was gonna change (especially after not receiving any other offers) There is a chance that Nate turns things around and becoming a consistent 15ppg scorer off the bench and hell on wheels pressuring the ball which exploding for 25+ppg a couple of times a month- those are the things he has talent for.

Now, as a GM, you can't really offer Lee a raise and not Nate, just wouldn't fly with agents, fans, media, player - someone will feel slighted. If you don't bring back Nate and the same sort of injuries happen to Duhon and Douglas is caca, what happens? So, we offer him an extra million + $1M for playoffs. Good compromise.

Offering a bit of a raise was benevolent by Donnie. No 2 ways around it. But that is NOT to say that Nate wouldn't have to hold up his end of the bargain (team play, do what coach is asking for) nor that it would guarantee minutes. IMHO, Nate has not lived up to what he should be doing on a day-to-day basis.

THIS YEAR. He is still going waaaayyyy under picks. Still being a clown before, during, after. We don't even know what's going on on the plane and in practice. Is he rotating on D like MDA has asked of him and other players? Played the role on O like he has been asked? Pressured the ball?

It might be apples and oranges but I think Cashen does this every year with the Yankees and he is good at it. Letting Matsui and probably Damon go after winning the world series takes alot of guts but it was right for the team. Re-signing Nate didn't have to happen. The Knicks plan, to acquire cap space, was well known throughout the league. Letting Nate go would have fit with the plan. Nate's knuckle head rep is well known throughout the league. Walsh brought Nate back with D'Antoni's knowledge. MDA needed to speak up over the summer if Nate was such a big issue for him. His handling of players he doesn't want to deal with brings on alot of publicity, and drama for the team, reduces the players value in a trade, and creates a difficult situation for the GM.

not such a good example with Matsui and Damon. One left on his own accord and the other aging player demanded a raise.

Walsh resigned Nate for $3M + $1M bonus. Peanuts.

You say Walsh is in a difficult position because of the way MDA handled Nate? I say rubbish. Is Walsh in a bad way because of Carl Landry not playing? Darko?

These things play out. Nate did not play well and got benched at the same time the team started to win. I think Walsh is very happy.

martin wrote:

TMS wrote:

martin wrote:

TMS wrote:i took all of it into account... all of it could have easily been avoided by trading him last year, which is what i said they should have done all along... i believe you agreed that Walsh made the right move in re-signing Nate to a 1 year deal... he missed the boat long before the draft.

on and on and on about how Donnie and MDA mishandled and your biggest thing is he shoulda been traded last year? That didn't happen. Not trading Nate wasn't a mishandle, it is just something that did not happen.

Back to what did happen post draft and up until today.

martin, i gave u my take on it & explained it well enough... if it ain't good enough for u, that's up to u... what else is left to say? i thought he shoulda been traded last year, & yes, not trading him last year is a mishandle IMO... signing him to a bigger contract than we had to was a mishandle IMO... devalueing Nate by benching him this year was a mishandle IMO... u don't agree, that's your opinion... i know it always pains u to admit anything i ever say is right, but in this case i think the results speak for themselves... we now have a disgruntled player with a lot of talent who we will likely see walk for nothing in return... but Donnie can never do any wrong i guess.

if by mishandling you meant that MDA benched Nate and the Knicks started wining, then I am on board. The rest is just your opinion.

the rest is my opinion just like it's your opinion that Walsh didn't mismanage anything... you asked for my opinion i gave it to u.

TMS wrote:

martin wrote:

TMS wrote:

joec32033 wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

Uptown wrote:

anrst wrote:Talented players are benched every game in the NBA. Only it New York does someone have to be dramatic and in-the-wrong about it.

Exactly...Case and point, TMac was sent home for the weekend, Salmons was sent to the bench in Chi, Tinsley was bannished from Indy last year, yet this seems to be the biggest story of them all.....

Was TMac or Tinsley re-signed last year by their team?

You're right, we shouldn't have signed him at all and just let him dangle out there and give only give him the QO instead of being generous with the extra $2 mil.

i agree w/this... i don't know why the Knicks consistently pay more for players than they have to... if Donnie & MDA thought Nate was deserving of more than he was owed as a show of good faith then they should be playing him, case closed... what's the point in signing him at all if they were already just about fed up with his shenanigans?

it seems as if you are saying that Donnie and MDA should play a player based on his contract.

What's the point of Nate signing if HE know he was not going to change his attitude and not play defense?

that's not what i'm saying at all... i made the point pretty clear, if the Knicks were already growing tired of Nate's shenanigans, why pay him more than they absolutely had to? it's as if they rewarded him for the player he was... what kinda message does that send to the player? if i'm Nate & i'm getting a bonus from my boss for what i did last year, wouldn't it make sense to keep doing what i was doing last year?

I know the two of you have discussed this point in great detail since this post, but I wanted to point out that maybe things have become worse since the contract. Or maybe the team's attitude has improved and Nate's defficiencies became more glaring. Or maybe the team was willing to endure it for $4 mil over one year as opposed to $35 mil over five years. Or maybe something, anything happened to get the team to change their mind.

Also, we weren't privy to what was said during negotiations. Maybe it was said, "Nate, here's a good contract. We know you can ball and are rewarding your talents. That said, if you aren't professional you won't be around much longer." Could that have transpired during negotiations?

They took a short term flyer on seeing if the situation would improve or not. And it didn't.

Bippity10 wrote:Aren't we trying to get away from the culture of "you play because we signed you" and to the culture of "you play because you are helping the team win"?

Contract does not matter. There were no guarantees for Nate despite the fact that he signed the contract. That's like saying, "hey we paid you money, you can do whatever you want, and because we signed you, we have to play you". No, at this point in time the coach feels that the current rotation gives us the best chance of winning. Tough to argue at this point as we are currently playing the best ball that we've played in years. Nates job is to practice hard and remain ready, and when/if he gets a shot, play his arse off and never let his spot go again. In the meantime he has to wait, just like Jordan Hill and Landry and Eddie and Hughes(after first two games). He has done nothing in his career that should guarantee him minutes.

preach on 2000 post guy!

joec32033 wrote:

martin wrote:

Bippity10 wrote:Aren't we trying to get away from the culture of "you play because we signed you" and to the culture of "you play because you are helping the team win"?

Contract does not matter. There were no guarantees for Nate despite the fact that he signed the contract. That's like saying, "hey we paid you money, you can do whatever you want, and because we signed you, we have to play you". No, at this point in time the coach feels that the current rotation gives us the best chance of winning. Tough to argue at this point as we are currently playing the best ball that we've played in years. Nates job is to practice hard and remain ready, and when/if he gets a shot, play his arse off and never let his spot go again. In the meantime he has to wait, just like Jordan Hill and Landry and Eddie and Hughes(after first two games). He has done nothing in his career that should guarantee him minutes.

preach on 2000 post guy!

Wow...2000 posts.....they grow up so fast!

Watch it!!!!!! I won't hesitate to resign from this site again

Allanfan20 wrote:Im with Bip. I still dont see how the situation was mishandled. Walsh resigned Nate and Lee bc he feels or felt they could either help the team now or in the future. If not, he would have traded him last season, or at least Nate. Just as he did to Zach, Jamal and even Quentin.

I have said all along, or at least thought, that this benching was fine. It really should have been done much earlier in his career, but that was when the players were higher in authority than the coach and we were winning 23 games.

Im still thinking this could be the best thing that could happen to Nate and maybe even the Knicks. Maybe he eventuLly comes back with an improved `tude and a decision to play on both ends, which would help us A LOT.

Think about it. Right now, we have 8 or 9 guys busting their arses on D and doing everything in their power to gel as a team. I think that if a guy slacked off, he would hear about it from 8 other guys. If Nate gets time again, what are his choices??? The standard has been raised here by a coach that finally has more juice then some joker players. This is how you win folks. Nate, has to comply to the coaches wishes or we will just win without him. That's what happens when standards are raised.