I think Nate Robinson just broke a new record

[air gordon]

Most pgs are bigger but can't dunk the ball as Robinson. Besides he adds a lot of pressure and intensity to the game, not to mention speed. I believe Nate will have a very good career because of all that and if he can improve his shooting.

ok
i don't dislike robinson just yet but i agree with cklisitie or however you spell his friggin name:

I really dislike Nate Robinson, overhyped as fuck and he hasn't really done anything spectacular yet. People like him because he's small and can jump.
Pretty funny too that when he gets a block you guys are like 'wow, he's 5-10 and he blocks someone' and all of a sudden forget it's the same Nate you overhype because he can jump so high

.

About Boykins, he is a really efficient player mostly because he is a great ft shooter and also because he is one of the faster players of the league. Because of that i think he is a player he can start without problems in some teams.

boykins is space efficient. he can be a starter on a team that wants to be lottery bound

[Jackie Kong]

Boykins had 18 points, 4 assists, 2 rebounds, 3 steals, 1 block, 80% ft and fg % today against Memphis in 24 minutes and half. Bad timing to talk bad about him.

[air gordon]

lol i wasn't trashing him. i think he's a decent player. IMO he won't be starting on a winning team

but hey, he's got the tools to be one of the best in the league- he's fast and can make ft's . man, imagine if he can dunk...

[Stevesanity]

Congratulations to him although Nate is over-hyped just cause he can dunk and is quick on the floor. Give him an average point guard height of say 6-1 to 6-2 and he'd be half as loved/popular as he is now.

agreed

Its the reason why the Nuggets start Miller over Boykins, Dre may not be as quick or as exciting as Boykins but he has much more mature point guard skills...I dont even like Dre(lost us D-Mile and had a flop of a season) but common sense says you start him over Earl Boykins 99% of the time. I love Boyk as a person and an player but he's no Muggsy nor is Nate.

yep- boykins is a good change of pace type player to bring off the bench. most of the time he's just looking for his own shots. his height basically makes it 5-4 for the defense.

Most pgs are bigger but can't dunk the ball as Robinson. Besides he adds a lot of pressure and intensity to the game, not to mention speed. I believe Nate will have a very good career because of all that and if he can improve his shooting.

About Boykins, he is a really efficient player mostly because he is a great ft shooter and also because he is one of the faster players of the league. Because of that i think he is a player he can start without problems in some teams.

So because Nate can dunk the ball that makes him special, last time I check dunks dont mean your a good player ala Darvin Ham, Donyell Harvey etc. He might add pressure and intensity but with his size the impact he can make is very little besides steal the ball once or twice, physically he'll still get pushed around.

You really think Boykins can run a team? Your kidding yourself by saying that cause if you really watch him play you'd know how efficient a player he is. He might be a handy if not good player on offense but when the pass is the better option compared to shooting it, Boykins will get that decision right about 1 outta 10 times and well he might have 1 block to his name but how many shots are easily whizzed passed him. Blocks doesnt mean he can play defense nor does steals, he's a huge defensive liability and I dont think a winning team would even think of starting him unless its a must(injury to other pg's, lack of form etc).

Your too wrapped up about dunking and this whole 'small guy - love him' scenario. Plenty of respect to them for playing in a league of giants and doing a decent job on one end of the floor but lets not get carried away here thinking there capable of being the best point guards in the league.

[J@3]

I'm guessing he also considers Spud Webb one of the 50 greatest players of all time.

[Jackie Kong]

I'm guessing he also considers Spud Webb one of the 50 greatest players of all time.

lol, no. However Boykins is good. And dunking is always good and more for a fast point guard. Right now i am thinking about the sixers and all the shoots they had been missing when going alone against the basket, lol.

hmm, the main reason why i like earl and nate is because i think the best teams are those that can have a solid inside defense and an even better fast break. The height might not help neither nate or earl but their quickness can make them great fast break players. And for the defense if the other 4 players are solid defensively they can always back him up. Moreover, a defense in which defensive assignations are changed constantly can be more that efficient in a case like this.

About being a great ft shooter i think it is really important because if you go 2 times to the line it is like shooting 2 mid-range shoots. If you make one of 2 mid-range shoots you have 50 % which would be the same as if you score 2 of 4 fts, 50 %, lol. That way of thinking is mainly one of the reasons why D.Wade scores so much every night.

[Led Zeppelin]

lol i wasn't trashing him. i think he's a decent player. IMO he won't be starting on a winning team

but hey, he's got the tools to be one of the best in the league- he's fast and can make ft's . man, imagine if he can dunk...

I think he can dunk. I know he can reach rim.

[spreeul8r]

lol i wasn't trashing him. i think he's a decent player. IMO he won't be starting on a winning team

but hey, he's got the tools to be one of the best in the league- he's fast and can make ft's . man, imagine if he can dunk...

I think he can dunk. I know he can reach rim.

I think he was being sarcastic

[cklitsie]

About being a great ft shooter i think it is really important because if you go 2 times to the line it is like shooting 2 mid-range shoots. If you make one of 2 mid-range shoots you have 50 % which would be the same as if you score 2 of 4 fts, 50 %, lol. That way of thinking is mainly one of the reasons why D.Wade scores so much every night.

That made no sense at all. (Yes, I left out the 'fucking')

[Metsis]

Boykins, Robinson, Webb, Bogues etc. have all had to adjust to play the game of giants... The guys are small and thus they HAVE to be a lot more skilled than their bigger counter parts...

What comes to Robinson, well he did play considerable minutes in the summer leagues and got some good games under his belt... I think he needs to play more to be effective and I think he will be a good player for years to come...

There are tons of players that have come into the league with nothing but that big leaping ability and the skill to put the ball through the hoop by dunking... Several of those guys are some of the biggest names in the game today. TMac was one, Carter was one... Of course those guys are bigger, but what I'm getting at is that Robinson is probably more of a shooting guard than a point guard... Like Boykins... Boykins is only a point guard due to his size, but he is really a shooting guard... He only has a small frame for it... Spudd Webb was a shooting guard trapped inside a point guard frame. Bogues is the only one of the four that truly was a point guard. I think Robinson and Boykins could really benefit from a "Chicago" type situation where they didn't have to do all the PG responsibilities and could really run the screens and use their superior speed to an offensive advantage...

In the defensive end, a guy who's 5'9" tall is always going to be a risk... And the higher the skill level of players, the bigger the risk. Speed and good jumping ability can make up for some of the defense lost by size, but it's always a risk... Thus the little guys need to be extra effective on the other end to surmount that risk to make them worthwhile to put on the floor.

For a little guy, the game is always tougher and there will always be questions about the size and durability in a game where you sometimes take big hits...

Isn't Allen Iverson one of the best players in the league right now??? I thought he was... Ask him, how tough it is to make it, ask him how much better he has to be than everyone else to get into the game, ask him how can he guard anyone in the league??? He's gone down that road which is ahead of little Nate...

The dice have been cast, but the decision is still in the air... Will Nate be a good player or not... It remains to be seen... It isn't that much different from anyone else, no matter how big or small you are... There's always room for a great player on a team, no matter if he's 5'3" or 7'3" tall...

[Stevesanity]

About being a great ft shooter i think it is really important because if you go 2 times to the line it is like shooting 2 mid-range shoots. If you make one of 2 mid-range shoots you have 50 % which would be the same as if you score 2 of 4 fts, 50 %, lol. That way of thinking is mainly one of the reasons why D.Wade scores so much every night.

That made no sense at all. (Yes, I left out the 'fucking')

I second that.

lol, no. However Boykins is good. And dunking is always good and more for a fast point guard. Right now i am thinking about the sixers and all the shoots they had been missing when going alone against the basket, lol.

Nor does this make any sense. What has the sixers got to do with Nate Robinson and Earl Boykins? Plus you talk about Nate and Earl being good fast break players later on, do you realise most of the time fast breaks see a player go 'alone' to the basket. Are you saying going 'alone' to the basket is a bad choice or that if Philly had Nate or Earl there problems will be solved?

hmm, the main reason why i like earl and nate is because i think the best teams are those that can have a solid inside defense and an even better fast break. The height might not help neither nate or earl but their quickness can make them great fast break players. And for the defense if the other 4 players are solid defensively they can always back him up. Moreover, a defense in which defensive assignations are changed constantly can be more that efficient in a case like this.

None of them are extremely gifted offensive players either. Just cause they maybe good on the fast break that doesnt mean there gonna win games or become star players. My advice is for you to sit back, grab a cold one and watch a Knicks game or a Nuggets game carefully next time specially when Nate or Earl take to the floor. To me it seems like your basis for your answers are coming from viewing box scores from espn and reading the article about Nate being the Knicks saviour.

[Jackie Kong]

I never said Nate Robinson is going to be a super star, lol, but i think he can be a pretty good player in the league.

[John WB]

If any of the Knicks 3 big rookies is going to be ROY, it's definately got to be Channing Frye. I think they they'll all need more playing time and Frye deserves to start the way he's playing, but Brown likes to play the old guys(Rose, Davis, Taylor and Hardaway when he wasn't injured).