[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

Nate Robinson:
Author Thread
Allanfan20
Posts: 35947
Alba Posts: 50
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #542
USA
3/6/2008  10:47 AM
I know a lot of people say he's immature and all that, even though I personally think he's grown up a lot. However, I think something about him has gone under the radar that people don't seem to notice because they think of him as an energizer. Nate Robinson has become a VERY GOOD all around shooter and he jacks up a lot less shots, based on what I've seen recently, than people tend to give him credit for. Though he's a 42% shooter this season, I tend to think that's very good for someone who's 5'6" - 5'8". To top it off, he can hit the midrange AND the long distance. For this reason here, I'd keep him for our future and hopefully he can grow as someone you can rely on to start or bring off the bench at any given time.
“Whenever I’m about to do something, I think ‘Would an idiot do that?’ and if they would, I do NOT do that thing.”- Dwight Schrute
AUTOADVERT
Panos
Posts: 30588
Alba Posts: 3
Joined: 1/6/2004
Member: #520
3/6/2008  10:49 AM
Posted by Allanfan20:

Though he's a 42% shooter this season, I tend to think that's very good for someone who's 5'6" - 5'8".

Maybe we should bring in a 5'1" player that could shoot 36%. I mean that would be pretty good for that height, no?
Posted by Allanfan20:

To top it off, he can hit the midrange AND the long distance.

But can he hit the COLLEGE 3?
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
3/6/2008  11:03 AM
Almost half his FGAs are 3s. So I think his FG% understates his impact, although his % is still a little low. From the rare times I've watched this season, I'd say Nate has played well enough to deserve a place in the rotation if I were to run the team next year.
EnySpree
Posts: 44919
Alba Posts: 138
Joined: 4/18/2003
Member: #397

3/6/2008  11:05 AM
What else does Nate have to do to prove that he belongs in this league. He makes dudes 12" taller look silly.
Subscribe to my Podcast https://youtube.com/c/DiehardknicksPodcast https://twitter.com/DiehardknicksPC https://instagram.com/diehardknickspodcast
Allanfan20
Posts: 35947
Alba Posts: 50
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #542
USA
3/6/2008  11:07 AM
Considering their are star guards that do or have shot 40% or below, I would say his 42% is outstanding. Taller winning guards who have shot right with Nate or worse.

6'0" Allen Iverson shoots 42% for his career.
6'4" Jason Kidd: 40%
6'4" Gilbert Arenas: 43%
6'4" Cuttino Mobley: 43%
5'10 Damon Stoudemire: 40%

No, I'm not comparing Nate to those guys, but at his height, he's doing excellent and I personally think it helps us a lot more than hurts us. He needs to keep working on it.
“Whenever I’m about to do something, I think ‘Would an idiot do that?’ and if they would, I do NOT do that thing.”- Dwight Schrute
Cosmic
Posts: 26570
Alba Posts: 27
Joined: 3/17/2006
Member: #1115
USA
3/6/2008  11:16 AM
Nate's only problems are maturity level and a lack of leadership.

If we had a good mentor for him and he grew up some I think he'd be a very valuable player off the bench for any team in the league.

http://popcornmachine.net/ A must-use tool for NBA stat junkies!
VDesai
Posts: 43301
Alba Posts: 44
Joined: 10/28/2003
Member: #477
USA
3/6/2008  11:20 AM
You guys should really start looking at eFG (which incorporates 3's) and TS%, which incorporates points from FT's, to really gauge a guy's scoring efficiency.

http://www.knickerblogger.net/stats/2008/jh_ALL_eFG.htm

Now, Nate Robinson is still bottom half in shooting, but as a guard he falls in line with a lot of notable players. Take a look at some of the players around him and some of the players below him who are noted for their scoring....

Check out Kevin Pelton's explanation:

Shooting Efficiency - If there is an on-base percentage in the NBA - a statistic that has traditionally been undervalued - it would probably be some measure of a player's efficiency in scoring points. There's a stereotype that all statistical analysts think Allen Iverson is a bad player due to his low shooting percentage that is untrue because Iverson's ability to create shots and get his teammates better looks is valuable. Still, being efficient with your shots is very important. The two most common ways of measuring the concept of shooting efficiency are Effective Field-Goal Percentage (eFG%) and what this site calls True Shooting Percentage (TS%).

Effective Field-Goal Percentage was popularized by current L.A. Clippers Coach Mike Dunleavy and the Rick Barry's Pro Basketball Bible series. It adjusts for the added value of three-pointers by counting them as 1.5 field goals, thus make it more fair to three-point shooters than field-goal percentage.

eFG% = (FGM + .5*3PM)/FGA

True Shooting Percentage goes a step further by factoring in a player's performance at the free-throw line and considering their efficiency on all types of shots.

TS% = Pts/(2*(FGA + (.44*FTA)))

Former Sonics guard Brent Barry - Rick's son - led the NBA in both categories in 2006-07, posting a 62.6% effective field-goal percentage and a 66.6% True Shooting Percentage. Barry has led the NBA in True Shooting Percentage three times, including twice while in Seattle. Rashard Lewis (58.7%) was the most efficient Sonics shooter by True Shooting Percentage.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
3/6/2008  11:44 AM
Posted by VDesai:

You guys should really start looking at eFG (which incorporates 3's) and TS%, which incorporates points from FT's, to really gauge a guy's scoring efficiency.

http://www.knickerblogger.net/stats/2008/jh_ALL_eFG.htm

Now, Nate Robinson is still bottom half in shooting, but as a guard he falls in line with a lot of notable players. Take a look at some of the players around him and some of the players below him who are noted for their scoring....

Check out Kevin Pelton's explanation:

Shooting Efficiency - If there is an on-base percentage in the NBA - a statistic that has traditionally been undervalued - it would probably be some measure of a player's efficiency in scoring points. There's a stereotype that all statistical analysts think Allen Iverson is a bad player due to his low shooting percentage that is untrue because Iverson's ability to create shots and get his teammates better looks is valuable. Still, being efficient with your shots is very important. The two most common ways of measuring the concept of shooting efficiency are Effective Field-Goal Percentage (eFG%) and what this site calls True Shooting Percentage (TS%).

Effective Field-Goal Percentage was popularized by current L.A. Clippers Coach Mike Dunleavy and the Rick Barry's Pro Basketball Bible series. It adjusts for the added value of three-pointers by counting them as 1.5 field goals, thus make it more fair to three-point shooters than field-goal percentage.

eFG% = (FGM + .5*3PM)/FGA

True Shooting Percentage goes a step further by factoring in a player's performance at the free-throw line and considering their efficiency on all types of shots.

TS% = Pts/(2*(FGA + (.44*FTA)))

Former Sonics guard Brent Barry - Rick's son - led the NBA in both categories in 2006-07, posting a 62.6% effective field-goal percentage and a 66.6% True Shooting Percentage. Barry has led the NBA in True Shooting Percentage three times, including twice while in Seattle. Rashard Lewis (58.7%) was the most efficient Sonics shooter by True Shooting Percentage.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Briggs needs to look at EY's ranking on the TS%
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
3/6/2008  11:45 AM
Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by VDesai:

You guys should really start looking at eFG (which incorporates 3's) and TS%, which incorporates points from FT's, to really gauge a guy's scoring efficiency.

http://www.knickerblogger.net/stats/2008/jh_ALL_eFG.htm

Now, Nate Robinson is still bottom half in shooting, but as a guard he falls in line with a lot of notable players. Take a look at some of the players around him and some of the players below him who are noted for their scoring....

Check out Kevin Pelton's explanation:

Shooting Efficiency - If there is an on-base percentage in the NBA - a statistic that has traditionally been undervalued - it would probably be some measure of a player's efficiency in scoring points. There's a stereotype that all statistical analysts think Allen Iverson is a bad player due to his low shooting percentage that is untrue because Iverson's ability to create shots and get his teammates better looks is valuable. Still, being efficient with your shots is very important. The two most common ways of measuring the concept of shooting efficiency are Effective Field-Goal Percentage (eFG%) and what this site calls True Shooting Percentage (TS%).

Effective Field-Goal Percentage was popularized by current L.A. Clippers Coach Mike Dunleavy and the Rick Barry's Pro Basketball Bible series. It adjusts for the added value of three-pointers by counting them as 1.5 field goals, thus make it more fair to three-point shooters than field-goal percentage.

eFG% = (FGM + .5*3PM)/FGA

True Shooting Percentage goes a step further by factoring in a player's performance at the free-throw line and considering their efficiency on all types of shots.

TS% = Pts/(2*(FGA + (.44*FTA)))

Former Sonics guard Brent Barry - Rick's son - led the NBA in both categories in 2006-07, posting a 62.6% effective field-goal percentage and a 66.6% True Shooting Percentage. Barry has led the NBA in True Shooting Percentage three times, including twice while in Seattle. Rashard Lewis (58.7%) was the most efficient Sonics shooter by True Shooting Percentage.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Briggs needs to look at EY's ranking on the TS%

And bitty should look at Zach's: he's 143rd!!!!
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
3/6/2008  6:27 PM
Posted by Cosmic:

Nate's only problems are maturity level and a lack of leadership.

If we had a good mentor for him and he grew up some I think he'd be a very valuable player off the bench for any team in the league.

this was my biggest problem with having Marbury around when we drafted all those guys that year... i knew he'd be a poisonous influence on our young guys... now all of a sudden u see Nate improving on his game cuz Marbury's no longer around taking his minutes away & being a distraction in the locker room... Nate's still got a ways to go to work on his maturity tho, but i think he is becoming a leader in some respects... i see him talking to his teammates all the time & trying to work out where they're supposed to be on the floor during certain plays that are called... his discipline during crunchtime on defense also needs to be majorly worked on, cuz he tends to fall in love with jacking up shots & not working as hard on locking down his man, which he should be doing.
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
Nate Robinson:

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy