ElimiNate

Near the end of his otherwise uninteresting profile of the increasingly overhyped Nate Robinson in this week's issue of New York magazine, Mark Jacobson makes an important point about the diminutive guard and, by extension, his frontcourt running mate, David Lee, both of whom will be restricted free agents this summer: "Fact is, both Robinson and Lee are sixth men on a team of seventh and eighth men."

I couldn't have said it better myself, particularly about Nate Robinson. When Nate burst onto the scene in 2005, I cheered on his histrionics and tantalizingly inconsistent play because, well, the Knicks didn't exactly have much else going for them at the time, and I honestly thought Nate had game, a belief that hasn't really changed over the years. As the team gears up for the future, though, it's becoming increasingly clear that Nate and his game don't exactly fit into the organization's long-term plans. Sure, Nate's an explosive role player, a quick spark off the bench. But he's not a building block—at least not for this team, which has failed to win more than 35 games in any year with him on the roster. What, exactly, has Nate shown over his tenure with the Knicks to warrant a second contract, other than two meaningless Slam Dunk titles and four years of losing basketball? For all his talents and razzle-dazzle, I'm afraid Nate is simply a luxury the Knicks can no longer afford.