We can't know how Nate will play the rest of the season, but it has to at least be a good sign that he did the things he was asked to do by MDA. MDA is the kind of guy that has to feel he can trust you and once you lose that trust it can be hard to get it back, but a game like that goes a long way to rebuilding MDA's trust in Nate. All he has to do is keep it up. MDA isn't the bad guy here and neither is Nate. This is all part of the process. People are upset about some idea that maybe we lost a game or two cuz we didn't use Nate and they totally lose the point of how many more games this could cause us to win if Nate got the message and stays on the script. This is all a coach can do with a player that is stubborn and hasn't listened to several coaches. MDA did the right thing regardless of how this ends up. It's always been up to Nate to determine how his career goes. MDA is really trying to help him become a better player, much like other coaches tried to help Nate. Trying to find fault with MDA is silly and shows a lack of appreciation for what coaching is all about. MDA won in Europe and he's won in the NBA, give him some damn credit for knowing what he's doing.

sebstar wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

kam77 wrote:If you looked at Nate's play vs. the Hawks and thought he turned a over a new leaf, you're delusional.
If you think D'antoni's brilliant button-pushing produced 41 points, you're delusional.
If you think Nate can consistently channel his fire into winning basketball, you're delusional.
If you think Nate hasn't frustrated every NBA head coach he's had, you're delusional.
If you think D'antoni cost the knicks wins with nate's benching, you're delusional
(no one ever counts how many more losses would we have with Nate's bonehead plays?)

Nate hasn't proven he is a winning basketball player. One game down not a career define. He just happened to be in the zone for a night an played unstoppable. Unless you want to turn your entire offense over to Nate-ball, his style of play is not conducive to being a winning ingredient on a good team. He can be an iverson-lite. And we already passed on that type of ball dominating offensive weapon.

How can you bash a guy who just put up 41-8-6 and was the main conduit in winning? He'll have a 4-13---that will give you an opening! but give the guy slack for a night??

Dont mind them, some people around here have been conditioned to hate Robinson for any and everything. Hahaha at the haters. Let em be.

Fool. Who you calling some people? I didn't hate on nate. I explained how his style is at odds with what we did in December. Yes i watched this game and yes i was happy for Nate. But he vetoed a trade to Memphis that would've brought us a future pick. I wouldn't have been upset if that trade had gone through.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=291129018

Al Harrington & Larry Hughes have pisspoor games... Wilson Chandler has an off night shooting as well... Nate Robinson is basically the only player that played with any kind of energy in the 4th quarter of that game, but he's the one that gets benched 2 games later after reports surface that the coach wasn't happy with how he was yucking it up with Dwight Howard before that game.

but yeah, it's nothing personal... it's all about winning.

kam77 wrote:There was nothing surprising in Robinson’s performance Friday. His talents are well known, and he has had big games under D’Antoni. The key is what happens on the nights when Robinson is not the center of the offense, or not making 75 percent of his shots. Can he stay within the system? Can he shine without detracting from the team? Will he play consistent defense? Can he celebrate without losing track of the next play?

- Howard Beck

None other than Ho Beck backing up the point of my post.
Guys you just don't get it if you think it was personal. It's about winning.

"Ho beck" lauded the effort and hopes for the best.
Your post said we were all dillusional. Not the same.

babyKnicks wrote:

kam77 wrote:There was nothing surprising in Robinson’s performance Friday. His talents are well known, and he has had big games under D’Antoni. The key is what happens on the nights when Robinson is not the center of the offense, or not making 75 percent of his shots. Can he stay within the system? Can he shine without detracting from the team? Will he play consistent defense? Can he celebrate without losing track of the next play?

- Howard Beck

None other than Ho Beck backing up the point of my post.
Guys you just don't get it if you think it was personal. It's about winning.

"Ho beck" lauded the effort and hopes for the best.
Your post said we were all dillusional. Not the same.

Read my post before spouting nonsense. I called Nate an offensive weapon in the mold of Allen Iverson who could be the center of an offensive scheme. I lauded Nate, but pointed out that we're not trying to build around Nate going one on five.

TMS wrote:

AnubisADL wrote:Nate Robinson is ideal as a scorer for 15-20 minutes a night. If he has is going that night bump his minutes.

if he's used for 15-20 minutes last night we probably lose the game, but i get your point... he's not gonna have it going like he did last night all the time obviously... it's a fine line how to determine how many minutes to give a guy like Nate cuz sometimes he can look like garbage for 25 minutes & then heat up & take over a game by himself in the next 10-15.

A lot of it will come down to whether he is doing other things on the court to help the team- Assists-Rebounds-Steals-basic D.

The 15-20 MPG and maybe more (if he "has it going that night") strategy seems fine to me, but I think MDA is going to look at the other things Nate does or does not do, besides just looking at his scoring that particular night.