Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: On Hazards And Hulks And Tigers, Oh My!

Rumor: Celtics In Talks For Nate Robinson (w/ Updates)

Sources: Celtics eye Knicks’ Nate Robinson - BostonHerald.com

A league source, as well as a Knicks source, said today that there is interest in a trade that would send New York guard Nate Robinson to the Celtics. The Celtics have narrowed their positional need to a backup point guard who can defend the position. They have until Thursday’s trade deadline to fill that need.

The Knicks, who are trying to slash their payroll for this summer’s free agent market, are only interested in players with expiring contracts. The Celtics have three players who would match up to Robinson: Eddie House ($2.8 million), Brian Scalabrine ($3.4 million) and Tony Allen ($2.5 million).

The Knicks may have particular interest in House, who played for Knicks coach Mike D’Antoni in Phoenix. D’Antoni was said to be a fan of House’s abilities at that time.

A league source said any interest the Celtics had in Sacramento forward Kevin Martin expired. A second source said that while the Celtics have continued interest in Chicago’s Kirk Hinrich, the sides aren’t close on a deal.

This rumor is being reported by the NY Daily News as well.

Here is some detail on Nate Robinson's BYC status (via Paul Flannery)

Update via the Herald:

A team source just confirmed that the Celtics are still in discussions with the Knicks over a trade for guard Nate Robinson, but that the sides are no closer to a deal.

Update via Alan Hahn:

Knicks will likely secure a draft pick in the Robinson swap with the Celtics. At least that's the goal here. Eddie House likely in the deal.

Poll
Would you trade Eddie House for Nate Robinson?
Yes
2230 votes
No
1615 votes

3845 votes | Poll has closed

Comment 72 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

You mean

we’d have the 3-point champ AND the dunk contest champ?!?! Dare we dream?

by Hal Jordan on Feb 16, 2010 9:53 PM EST reply actions  

oh, and...

trading Eddie wouldn’t be my first choice, but I’d trade him over Tony the way he’s been playing. We’re more in need of TA’s athleticism than the streaky 3 point game. I have no problem throwing in Scal.

by Hal Jordan on Feb 16, 2010 9:58 PM EST up reply actions  

no gm would prefer nate to TA...

if TA was smarter he would have become an allstar

by friedgreentomatoes on Feb 16, 2010 10:29 PM EST up reply actions  

Wait...what?

Two stories on the front page of CelticsBlog stating the exact same thing? It must be crazy season, with all the rumors and such! LOL!

by KG's Knee on Feb 16, 2010 9:59 PM EST reply actions  

Oh

I see Jimmy T’s is now gone. I guess I jumped the gun. Oops, sorry.

by KG's Knee on Feb 16, 2010 10:01 PM EST up reply actions  

can anyone

suggest a trade on the machine that works?

"We few, we happy few, we band of brothers" Henry V

by Jeff Clark on Feb 16, 2010 10:04 PM EST reply actions  

with nate as BYC, it makes the deal more complicated

Article by Larry Coon clears it up a bit

Robinson made $2,020,179 last season, and re-signed for $4 million, triggering BYC. This means his outgoing salary for trade purposes is $2,020,179. Since teams can only acquire as much as 125 percent (plus $100,000) of their outgoing salary, the Knicks can accept no more than $2,625,223 in exchange for Robinson.

The team at the other end of the transaction would use Robinson’s full $4 million salary, rather than his BYC amount. Working the math the other way, this means that another team would have to trade away at least $3.12 million in order to acquire Robinson.

See the problem here? The other team would need to trade away more salary than the Knicks could accept. Robinson could not, for example, be traded straight-up for another $4 million player.

There are ways to work around BYC. If another team has a trade exception for at least $4 million, it can use it to acquire Robinson without adhering to the salary matching requirement. It could also find a third team willing to take on some additional salary in order to help balance the books. Or it can add more players to both sides of the trade, until the numbers are sufficiently large that they overcome the effects of BYC. But any of these alternatives would make a trade more complicated, and therefore make it much harder for Walsh to get a deal done.

by Jimmy Toscano on Feb 16, 2010 10:10 PM EST up reply actions  

Be a heck of a lot better than Nate the Punk

This could be one of the worst trades of the Ainge era. Seems like he’s shooting real low.

by lemonade sky on Feb 16, 2010 10:14 PM EST up reply actions  

Eddie for Nate??

Trade Eddie for Nate. You can’t be serious. As a life-long Celtics fan I’ve seen some poor trades, but this would be moronic. In Eddie you have a well seasoned veteran who can make clutch plays. I Nate you have a complpete head case.

This trade would be disastrous!!!!

by BCeltfan12 on Feb 16, 2010 10:16 PM EST reply actions  

I’d rather keep Eddie and get rid of Scal. Prefer to keep Tony too, but I’d trade him or Scal for Nate in a heartbeat.

by post-it note on Feb 16, 2010 10:19 PM EST reply actions  

What

Eddie and Nate in the backcourt = GYAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

As in, “OH GOD NO”.

by Tai on Feb 16, 2010 10:23 PM EST up reply actions  

Oh yeah

I don’t believe the Celtics lost interest in Martin for a single second. If Danny gets Ellis I will blow a gasket.

by Tai on Feb 16, 2010 10:24 PM EST reply actions  

i dont like krypto-nate

but i couldnt care less if it is house…

by friedgreentomatoes on Feb 16, 2010 10:35 PM EST reply actions  

Why cant we?

why cant we just trade Scal for Keyon Dooling????

I dont understand. Thats a perfect deal. straight up. we could keep House and package him with TA or Baby, and get something of even more value in return, if we wanted to.

I am just going to go crazy if we dont trade Scal for Keyon Dooling!!!!

by fanofgreen on Feb 16, 2010 10:57 PM EST reply actions  

I say yes...

..I feel the Nets say no, though.

by Tai on Feb 16, 2010 11:15 PM EST up reply actions  

But why???

The Nets have no reason to keep Dooling though.
His contract doesnt expire until 2011 summer.
Scal’s contract expires this summer.
Scal is a fan favorite and going back to New Jersey, would give them slight boost in ticket sales.

This is why i think this deal could happen.
They dont lose anything giving up Dooling, they gain a boost in attendance, and gain slight cap space for the summer. They have only one 4 or 5 games all season, they have no reason to keep anyone except Brook Lopez, on that roster.

by fanofgreen on Feb 16, 2010 11:24 PM EST up reply actions  

The basketball and finances are one thing,

but this is the second time you’ve made the rather reach-y remark that Scal would be a boost in ticket sales for the Nets.

Let’s relax.

-sw

Growing up in the Weinman household, you learn two rules very quickly if you aspire to reach double-digits in the years-of-age category: Hate thy Knick, hate thy Yankee.

Go Celtics, Go Dodgers. -sw

by Steve Weinman on Feb 17, 2010 3:49 AM EST up reply actions  

Exactly where could you send Scal to boost anyone’s ticket sales?

Perhaps his old high school, but beyond that, the statement’s a huge reach.

by CoachBo on Feb 17, 2010 7:47 AM EST up reply actions  

Exactly

Exactly…….The team is trying to tank games….even more reason to trade for Scalabrine.

Boost ticket sales, you cant deny the fact that Scalabrine is still a fan favorite amongst Nets fan!
Everyone know he’s a fan favorite in New Jersey. Which is why people would be willing to go see him a game or two…..Im not saying he’s gonna sell out the place, just boost it slightly higher, give the fans some short-term enjoyment by bringing back Scal.

by fanofgreen on Feb 17, 2010 12:02 AM EST up reply actions  

you're trying really really hard

to justify how the Nets would be remotely interested just because you really really really want Dooling. A Nets fan isn’t thinking of a way to get Scal by using Dooling as trade bait.

by post-it note on Feb 17, 2010 12:13 AM EST up reply actions  

what would the nets be losing by giving up a player like dooling???

Dooling has 2 yrs left on his deal. Scal has 1 yr left on his.
The Nets have won 5 games and it is officially after the All-Star Break. Why would the Nets have any reservations about trading any of their players away, especially ones who dont expire this summer??

The Nets take Scal mainly because of his expiring contract; with the added bonus of him being a fan favorite and possibly giving your fans at least something to be “excited” about for a little while.

And yes I really want Dooling, because I thnk he would be a very good fit on this team, espcially with the issue of backup point guard. Keyon Dooling can is more of a small combo type of guard, which increases his versatility.

But once again, what reasoning or justifications do the Nets have, as to keeping anybody on that roster right now?

by fanofgreen on Feb 17, 2010 12:24 AM EST up reply actions  

I live in NJ and have been to my share of Nets-Celts games here. I can and will deny that Scal remains a Nets fan favorite — I’m not sure there is such a thing as a Nets fan favorite.

by BouncingBuckeye on Feb 17, 2010 2:19 PM EST up reply actions  

Anyways
to multiple sources, the Celtics [team stats] and Knicks are close to a deal that would bring guard Nate Robinson to the Celts, possibly in exchange for Eddie House.[/quote]

http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/basketball/celtics/view/20100216sources_celtics_eye_knicks_nate_robinson/srvc=home&position=recent

First paragraph. 8 )

by Tai on Feb 16, 2010 11:42 PM EST reply actions  

I wonder if they’d consider putting eddie curry in the deal and we could add scal I like him he can really play dantoni don’t use bigs and we could use a post presence or atleast someone who can rebound we’ve been getting murdered ojn the glass

by reggie_35 on Feb 16, 2010 11:57 PM EST via mobile reply actions  

What is it that you like about Eddy Curry?

His poor rebound rate? His disgusting defense?

-sw

Growing up in the Weinman household, you learn two rules very quickly if you aspire to reach double-digits in the years-of-age category: Hate thy Knick, hate thy Yankee.

Go Celtics, Go Dodgers. -sw

by Steve Weinman on Feb 17, 2010 3:50 AM EST up reply actions  

That would make him fit right in with the C's

At least Curry commands a double team on the post.

by lemonade sky on Feb 17, 2010 9:46 AM EST up reply actions  

if we get nate...

how could we resign him…he won’t have his bird right….and we might have to give up a 1st round pick to get nate…if we get him i want to keep him.

by rayallen_35_24 on Feb 17, 2010 1:38 AM EST reply actions  

i love curry's game...

but i’m not sure what happened to him…i think his ex-girlfriend passedaway also?

by rayallen_35_24 on Feb 17, 2010 1:40 AM EST reply actions  

Huh, so that’s why we keep hearing all the DJ Augastin smoke…

by D Dub on Feb 17, 2010 2:47 AM EST reply actions  

Nate for House?

It’s basically moving deck chairs on the Titanic. I hope he starts the rebuild by moving Ray.

by Mencius on Feb 17, 2010 3:08 AM EST reply actions  

You don’t rebuild when you have a legit shot at getting to the Finals.

I’d rather wait till 2012, when KG and Sheed have expiring deals. Considering how much lower the cap will be then, the value of those combined deals will be much greater Ray’s is now.

by D Dub on Feb 17, 2010 3:19 AM EST up reply actions  

We dont really have a legit chance at the finals, and moving ray for a good piece wouldnt change that

by lennz on Feb 17, 2010 3:22 AM EST up reply actions  

Exactly

I don’t consider our team a legitimate contender anymore. Moving Ray for younger talent just gets us back on the road to contention a year sooner. Let him expire and all we have is the MLE next year and more deterioration from Sheed, Garnett, and Paul. Whoopee! 1988 redux.

by Mencius on Feb 17, 2010 3:33 AM EST up reply actions  

No, we don’t have a legitimate shot at the finals and Nate doesn’t change that. This deal earns a huge MEH and if it includes a first round draft choice, it makes zero sense.

by CoachBo on Feb 17, 2010 7:42 AM EST up reply actions  

a 1st also - no

espn states that boston may have to sacrifice a 1st in order to land nate. no thanks, i’ll pass!

by boscel33 on Feb 17, 2010 6:37 AM EST reply actions  

Danny MUST pass on this if a first must be coughed up.

A three month rental of Nate costs a first? I think not.

by Mencius on Feb 17, 2010 10:03 AM EST up reply actions  

Am I taking crazy pills here???! Of course you take Nate Robinson - Here's why:

People – Do people forget he was third in voting for 2008-09 NBA Sixth Man of the Year Award?!! He is 26 years old!!! We need a backup point guard badly!!! His defense is better than House’s. When was the last time Eddie or Tony had these numbers (see below): Over 74 games lasy year (11 starts), he averaged 17.2 points, 4.1 assists, 3.9 rebounds and .437 shooting (449-1,028) over 29.9 minutes…Shot .841 from the line (249-296) and .325 from Downtown (125-385)!!!…Oh and he is a YOUNG natural pointguard who plays very well off the bench…

HE is capable of 30+ and even 40+ nights! Season Highs last year: Points: 41 (Feb. 23 vs. Indiana); Assists: 15 (Feb. 11 at Clippers); Rebounds: 10, three times…Career highs in a wealth of categories, including scoring average (17.2, after averaging 10.7 over first three seasons), total points (1,272), field goal percentage (.437), free throw percentage (.841), total rebounds (290), total assists (301), assists per game (4.1), steals (95), games played (74) and total minutes (2,209)…Led Knicks in scoring 19 times, assists 20 times…

Notched 26 20-plus scoring games, team-high nine 30-plus games and one 40-plus effort (41 vs. Pacers on Feb. 23; Knicks individual season point high for 2008-09)…Had three 10-plus rebound games (first of career) and one double-figure assist game (career-high 15 at Clippers, Feb. 11)…Scored 20-plus points in a half five times…Connected on 13 consecutive field goal attempts over two-game span, Nov. 12-14 (six shy of Johnny Newman’s 1988 club mark)…Nailed 24 straight free throws, Dec. 19-Jan. 2…Missed eight games due to injury: seven in November-December (strained groin) and also Mar. 4 vs. Hawks (sprained left ankle)…On The Leader Board: Averaged 16.5 points in 63 games off the bench, second in NBA in bench scoring to Dallas’ Jason Terry (19.6 points in 63 bench games), among players who came off the bench in at least 50-percent of their team’s games…Start/Bench: Overall off the bench (63 games), averaged 16.5 points (1,041) with .436 shooting (366-840) over 28.4 minutes (1,791)…Had 20 20-plus scoring games and eight 30-plus games off the bench…Tied team record with 41 points off the bench vs. Pacers, Feb. 23…Scored 32 points on Mar. 10 at Milwaukee; 30 points on Mar. 11 at Detroit: according to the Elias Sports Bureau, became first player to have 30-plus games off the bench on back-to-back-days since Milwaukee’s Ricky Pierce in 1990 (31 at Orlando, Apr. 10, 1990; 31 at Atlanta, Apr. 11, 1990)…As a starter (11 games), averaged 21.0 points (231) on .441 shooting (83-188) over 38.0 minutes (418)…Downtown: Went 125-385 (.325) from three-point range, first career 100-plus home run season…Recorded seven four-homer games and three five-homer games, with two 5-for-5 games (Nov. 5 vs. Charlotte, Nov. 12 at Memphis)…Slam Dunk (Again!): Won his second Sprite Slam Dunk contest by outdueling Orlando’s Dwight Howard at NBA All-Star Weekend in Phoenix, Feb. 14…Donned green "Krypto-Nate" uniform and clinched the contest by leaping and dunking over Howard in the final round…Posted 52%—48% victory margin in final round fan vote…Authored two record-setting performances in February: Shined in OT loss at Clippers, Feb. 11, with game-high 33 points, career-high 15 assists, career-high-tying five steals, nine rebounds and just one turnover in career-high-tying 52 starting minutes…NY’s first 30-point, 15-assist game (regular season) since Walt Frazier vs. Lakers, Feb. 18, 1969 (30 points, 16 assists)…According to Elias, became first player to record 30-plus points, 15-plus assists, 9-plus rebounds and 5-plus steals in one game since Lakers’ Magic Johnson on Mar. 29, 1981 vs. Denver (33 points, 17 assists, 15 rebounds, 6 steals)…On Feb. 23, tied club record with Knicks season-high 41 bench points (11-18 FGA, 4-6 from Downtown, 15-19 FTA, 36 minutes) in win over Pacers at MSG…Matched Bob McAdoo’s 41 points off the bench on Dec. 17, 1978 vs. Hawks…With score tied, 119-119, intercepted Jeff Foster’s hurried inbounds pass and raced the length of the floor for layup that put NY ahead to stay (121-119, :26.1 left)…Key Games: Keyed win at Memphis, Nov. 12, with 21 points on perfect shooting night (8-8 FGA, 5-5 from Downtown). Fell three FGM shy of Knicks club mark for "best perfect" shooting game (11-11 FGA by Bernard King and Johnny Newman)…On Dec. 21 at Boston, authored one of season’s highlight-reel plays with soaring, one-handed putback slam-dunk of Harrington’s missed jumper midway through the fourth quarter…Scored 20 of team-high 24 points in fourth quarter of win over Hawks – Knicks’ high individual quarter of season – on Jan. 28. Authored another highlight-reel play with alley-oop dunk (Duhon assist) midway through fourth quarter…Scored 32 points off the bench in OT win over Spurs, Feb. 17, adding career-high-tying 10 rebounds. Had 12 points in fourth quarter, including driving layup with :20.4 left that forced OT (102-102)…Paced Knicks to win at Milwaukee, Mar. 10, with 32 points; teamed with Hughes (39) to give NY third pair of 30-30 teammates of season…Keyed comeback in OT win at Detroit, Mar. 11, with game-high 30 points, including 10 in fourth quarter as Knicks came from 12 down.

by spencerboz21 on Feb 17, 2010 7:52 AM EST reply actions  

Spencerbozz21:; thank you for all this information. You obviously make a strong case for getting Nate and I respect that you approached the subject with facts rather than emotion or a knee jerk reaction to all the trade rumors. I respectfully disagree for the reasons I have laid out in the post below, but you a great job of stating your case.

by JPV on Feb 17, 2010 9:41 AM EST up reply actions  

I’ll give you all of that.

But Nate is a bum.

by LarBrd33 on Feb 17, 2010 1:42 PM EST up reply actions  

Havent watched a ton of Nate...

Is this 5’9" kid really a good defender…?

by alskor on Feb 17, 2010 4:04 PM EST up reply actions  

Not sure I get this one. The lastest is that Marcus Landry will be included in the deal, and we give up Shelden in addition to House. First, adding Nate does nor give us more rebounding. We are last in this category. Second, Nate and House have a similar shooting game. The difference with Nate is that he can slash and is quick. That is great but we only need him to spell Rondo. He and Rondo will not play at the same time unless the other team has a small lineup in the game. So, if Ray is staying, why lose House for Robinson? If we are going to trade Eddie, then get a big man. We would still have enough guards. Third, Shelden never plays but he is has height we need and no reason why he cannot play 10 minutes and get some rebounds. Landry is 6’ 7" and has had an average collegiate career (unlike Shelden) and not much playing time as a pro. So not sure this would be an upgrade and certainly does not improve our rebounding. If we get Nate, then Sheed will definitely have to step up his play in the post.

by JPV on Feb 17, 2010 9:38 AM EST reply actions  

at the end of the day, as you we all know

none of the aforementioned permutations of this deal do much to impact this team on a meaningful level, particularly in light of what the Cavs are doing for instance which begs the question, why make the trade at all?
just a a thought

by lakersbluedevil on Feb 17, 2010 9:59 AM EST reply actions  

In Support Of Nate

I don’t want to give up House or TA, but if we do bring on Nate I think he’ll be good.

I’ve watched him a bit since I live in NYC, and he’s a total hustle player … bringing tons of energy every time he’s on the floor. Like the above poster wrote, his % stats are also good, he’s a solid ball handler, fearless driving to the hoop, extremely creative and an all around positive.
Yes, he’s short. I give him a thumbs up on the eyeball test given what I’ve seen. Consider him a little Microwave scoring option with more of an all around game than Eddie House.

by Fred Roberts on Feb 17, 2010 10:39 AM EST reply actions  

I concur completely haha :P. Just think of this, at least hes not an Earl Boykins, whos so sad to watch when he gets tangled up in the pick and roll plays and has to cover the power forward, Like that one time when he got stuck with KG and he just looked down at him and took the shot like nobody was on him - but thats beyond the point. he would fill eddies place a little better and we could rest Ray and Rondo more. But Doc seems reluctant to rest anybody >.<

"Victory belongs to the most Preserving" - Napoleon

"The teams that do the best job of putting personal agendas aside are the successful teams. It's not easy. That's why it's hard being a good teammate, but everyone has that choice." - Ray Allen

by AiTheLAviTiCuS#21 on Feb 17, 2010 1:27 PM EST up reply actions  

Nate is a bum. But Eddie House is a bum too. So it’s one bum for another bum. WHo cares.

I wouldn’t get rid of a draft pick in the process though. Even if it’s a late 1st rounder it’s pretty stupid.

by LarBrd33 on Feb 17, 2010 1:25 PM EST reply actions  

Agreed.

Would give them a 2nd at most.

But bottom line is that Nate for House is not a big enough upgrade to suddenly turn us into legitimate contenders with Garnett a shell of his former self, and both Ray and Paul having slowed too. Our reserves are not as big an issue as our starters are at this point, so this amounts to shuffling deck chairs. Certainly would not give up a first for a 3 month rental of Nate.

I’ve made the assessment that this team, even with upgrades from non-Ray expirings, cannot win the title this year. Having decided that, the best way to start the rebuild is trade Ray for assets that will help the rebuild going forward. We don’t win it all with the degradation we have of our Old 3. I’m sure Danny knows this too.

House for Nate = Giant yawn. For god’s sake, don’t throw them a first. Rather no deal than that.

by Mencius on Feb 17, 2010 2:14 PM EST up reply actions  

Ho Hum....

Let’s make a deal that might have some impact on the team….

by celty86 on Feb 17, 2010 1:32 PM EST reply actions  

Am I nuts, or did the Earth go through a wormhole?

‘Cause I could swear I saw this post a while ago, complete with comments, etc. Hmm… mustn’t skip those meds……

by DRJ1 on Feb 17, 2010 1:40 PM EST reply actions  

updates

at the bottom are new

"We few, we happy few, we band of brothers" Henry V

by Jeff Clark on Feb 17, 2010 2:04 PM EST up reply actions  

What could be better at "Crunch" time {or OT}?

Nate & TA on the floor at the same time…with Doc barking instructions from the bench!!

by Title 18 on Feb 17, 2010 1:54 PM EST reply actions  

Answer for steve weinmann ,I like eddie curry’s game I never noticed him as insufficient on the glass,for me I play ball and watch ball,numbers ,per,+,- ,all that statistical breakdown is all fine and good but at the end of the day doesn’t tell a true story as to how good or bad ,or how valuable or invaluable a player is ,can it really tell you how valuable derek fisher is to the lakers even though for all intents and purposes he can look like a liability on the floor ,can it tell you how valuable KG is to this team even at half strength,or how bout how good your numbers make ray allen look ,but answer this year one in a celtic uniform where was he against the hawks, where was he against the cav’s ,where was he against the pistons,thank God he showed up for a couple games in the finals or I would not known he played,but his numbers for the season would tell a different story but I don’t watch numbers I watch games,so when he dissapears for weeks or whole series general numbers mean nothing.Now as for Curry I have WATCHED the man play and his stats or numbers for you look fine but in watching the games he is tough talented can score can box out,and can really finish at the rim he doesn’t get his dunks or lay ups thrown like Perk,like Sheldon if he even catches the ball,like Baby,and now like KG,and aside from that the only post player we have is Perk .All I was saying was that if we are gonna do this deal for Robinson and may have to include others on both sides,since Dantoni doesn’t want him I’d take him ,wouldn’t it be nice to have someone who wants to be in the paint unlike,Sheed unlike Baby unlike KG and who can rebound

by reggie_35 on Feb 17, 2010 2:30 PM EST via mobile reply actions  

ummmm

eddie for nate straight up doesnt work.. how can a writer break a story when it cant even happen the way he reports it??

by jbuell719 on Feb 17, 2010 2:58 PM EST reply actions  

Late first rounder stink in a league where you have to guarantee those picks multi-year deals.

We’re not giving up anything special here. If we make a playoff run at all we’re probably better off without the pick, unless you’re afraid of missing out on the next JR Giddens.

by alskor on Feb 17, 2010 4:05 PM EST reply actions  

Why???

Why does Ainge feel the need to make THIS deal??? Does he envision Nate being like Crawford in Atlanta? Can anyone tell me how long we will have Nate for??? Thanks.

by celty86 on Feb 17, 2010 4:09 PM EST reply actions  

this is GREAT!!!

we lose tht bum eddie house aka chuck norris and we pick up an actual 6th man some who doesnt just shoot 3’s all the time .. cant believe i hear ppl saying this is a bad trade like eddie house was good or something… this is a steal if it goes through

by jaygunna3 on Feb 17, 2010 4:37 PM EST reply actions  

I was just about ready to get rid of House..

then he breaks out of his slump by killing it from three against the Kings!

by rav123 on Feb 18, 2010 3:23 AM EST reply actions  

good decision

If you ask me, who is better for our team, I definitely pick Nate. He’s a tremendous athlete and better defender as Eddie – but otherwise I hate it, because we lose one of our best 3P-shooter and even don’t have a true backup-Point we really need. Nate is a shooting guard and he will always be a shooting guard – you can say a better Eddie House for the team, because he can drive, jump(!!!) and has a lot of energy to give. We will see how he fits! The other good thing: he is a great personality and could bring some good changes to our team. Personally I love this guy and only watched NY-games because of him – I really hope that he brings the piece we need.

I asked god and he said: L.A. will lose again next year!! ^_°

by greenmech on Feb 18, 2010 4:44 AM EST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

CelticsBlog is a growing interactive community dedicated to providing fresh, comprehensive coverage of the Boston Celtics.

CEO

Shamrock-blk-trans_small Jeff Clark

Authors/Editors

Hoosiers-dvdcover_small Roy_Hobbs

300h_small Wide Load

Big_4_small Jimmy Toscano

Leon_powe_small Green17

Ud_small Tom Bellinger

Grawful3_small Kiorrik

Authors/Mods

1_koolaid_avi_small FLCeltsFan

Po3_small Master Po

Images_small Bent

Green_avatar_small Fafnir

Small Tom Halzack

N23879518902_8484_small Jon Duke - CSL

Small jose3030

5bill_small Jack Jemsek

Small wjsy

Small Ryan Desmarais

250_small Brendan O'Hare

1119816_small JoshZavadil

Small TLayman

Small Anthony_Bruzzese

Small theoriginalhagrid

Sheed_small evansclinchy

Moderators

Photo_14_small Steve Weinman

Too_much_coffe_man_small Edgar

Small Chris72

Small thirstyboots18

Small CfanMissippi