avatar

Berman: Lakers, Magic Interested in Nate

by Chris Alvino on July 4th, 2009 at 8:59 am

Marc Berman has given an update on the Nate Robinson situation. According to Berman, at least five teams have inquired about Nate Robinson, including the Lakers, Magic, Heat, Bulls, and Blazers.

I am not sure what either the Lakers or Magic would offer for Nate. The Lakers have Vujacic.  They also have Jordan Farmar, who can be very interesting for the Knicks, especially if they get Jason Kidd. If the Lakers lose Lamar Odom, then perhaps the Lakers would love to have Jared Jeffries to fill that void. Jeffries is versatile like Odom, but Odom is a much better scorer and rebounder. I am not so sure on the Magic.

We all know what the Bulls have on their roster. I am not sure if they are a good match for us. Portland can offer Travis Outlaw or Bayless. The Heat have nothing either, unless they are finally willing to take on Eddy Curry. Nate and Wade would be an interesting backcourt.

avatar

About Chris Alvino

Chris Alvino grew up in Crestwood, NY. He graduated from Regis High School in 2005. There he played both basketball and baseball. Chris is currently a student at Boston College, where he practices with the varsity Women's Basketball Team (... seriously). Chris has been a Knicks' fan for years and can literally talk about them all day long, every day of the week. Chris enjoys writing on this blog and seeing what everyone out there has to say about it. View all posts by Chris Alvino →
  • Cheech

    This is great to hear. The more teams that have interest in nate the better.
    Because in my opinion he is a goner last year no matter what. dantoni is sick of nate. if they can get anything back for nate, or if they get rid of currys or jeffries contract then i think its worth it to give up nate.

    I have a feeling jj will be gone by the start of the year. otherwise i dont think DW would going after kidd and possibly grant hill.

  • KBT1615

    Farmar would be a nice addition.

  • Jeff Cykiert

    yes, farmar would definitely be a nice cheap addition to deepen our PG spot… plus, i have always thought the kid has it in him to be a starting PG in this league. He’s one of those guys that has a chance to be good, and given his price, would be a great pickup in exchange for nate, who we know we are done with.

    Even if we can’t get a S&T, which i doubt we can, we should still let him walk if anyone offers him anything reasonable. We need to move forward without him, and the worst case scenario is that we have some extra cap room by letting him go.

  • Bart

    No brainer you send him to Portland For Bayless, Jordan Farmar is a bum pass.

  • CircleLimit4

    I think we should try to get a pick or two for Nate. I’m not really interested in anyone who can be had on either the Lakers or Magic now that Courtney Lee is gone.

  • gilcher82

    farmer = career backup
    nate is already a much better player

  • willynilly1688

    Hi, Chris. Less is more. No one is interested in replacing Lamar Odom with Jared Jeffries. Please do some more homework, less is more. HA. Tommy Dee your the man.

  • CircleLimit4

    I gotta agree. Replacing Odom with Jeffries is like replacing Conan with Jimmy Fallon.

  • KBT1615

    Heat Are Interested? Lee and Nate for Beasley.

  • bob go knicks

    thank god someone here tells the truth.NO WAY TO FARMAR

  • bob go knicks

    JOKE

  • KBT1615

    your a joke.

  • coocoo4knicks

    What about Chandler, Lee, and Nate for Beasley, Blount, and Haslem?

    That would give us a starting five of:
    Darko/Curry
    Gallinari
    Beasley
    Hughes
    Duhon

    In 2010 we could be looking at:

    Bosh
    Gallinari
    Beasley
    LeBron
    Nash

    OR we could ship Beasley to ‘Sota for Rubio and a 2011 first rounder

    2009 lineup:
    Darko*/Curry/Blount*
    Gallinari/Haslem*/Hill/Jeffries
    Harrington*/Jeffries
    Hughes*/Douglas
    Rubio/Duhon*

    *expiring contracts, can be valuable trade chips

    potential 2010 lineup
    Bosh/Darko
    Hill/Jeffries
    Gallinari/Patrick Ewing Jr
    Lebron James/Almond/Acker
    Rubio/Douglas/

    Why for Miami?
    They replace Haslem with Lee and upgrade at PF.
    Chandler replaces Beasley
    They add Nate as their microwave 6th man.
    They get rid of Blount

    Why for Knicks?
    They get Beasley who will THRIVE in Knick’s system.
    Can trade Beasley for Rubio if they want.
    Haslem is a decent one year rental.
    Blount won’t be of any use, but he comes off the books and could be used as a trade chip.
    With all the expiring contracts, Knicks may be able to acquire some key talent from teams looking to clear up more cap space for 2010. If they get some key pieces they may just need enough cap space to sign James and not have to get two superstars in free agency.

  • bob go knicks

    MIAMI wouldnt trade us BEASLEY,for our entire team. got any more mushrooms?

  • Qaspec

    You gave yourself the right name…that entire post was coocoo…plus I like the whole why Miami does it and why New York does it angles…priceless…hey coocoo how bout if we trade Lebron James for Anthony Roberson.

    Why Cleveland Does it –

    1) Danny Ferry decided he hates Cleveland and wants to get fired
    2) Cleveland has decided that this country hasn’t had a decent riot in years
    3) Every team in the NBA wants to give away superstars for nothing (Just look at your Miami proposal coocoo)…..hahahaaha

  • coocoo4knicks

    Hey Bob – Shouldn’t you be chasing down Earl Monroe right now and my informing him of your man crush?

    Gas Pack – Miami was reportedly looking at trading Beasley for the #2 pick.

    Washington was considering trading the #5 pick for Chandler and Hughes.

    It is not inconceivable that if Beasley = #2 pick, and Chandler and Hughes is considered for the #5 pick, that Lee, Chandler, and Nate could be worthy of the #2 pick and thus conceivably equivalent for Beasley.

    Beasley is clearly the best of the players considered, but 3 very good players for 1 great player, if it benefits the team with the 1 great player, is not inconceivable.

  • Pingback: äåìîíòàæ çäàíèé