Mitchell Robinson · Court Sentiment

Verdict

37.8%32.3%29.9%

37.8%Negative713 comments

32.3%Neutral610 comments

29.9%Positive565 comments

−8Net sentimentpositive minus negative

n=1,888 comments about Mitchell RobinsonUnofficial

Receipts

What the room said about Mitchell Robinson, verbatim: the highest-scoring comments in each class.

Exhibit 01Negative.NYK flair
Mitchell Robinson and Jaxson Dart sure do love them some pedophilia
Post · Mitchell Robinson responds to a TikTok saying he'll play harder with the president in attendance for game 3: "You ain’t lying brother 🤘🏾🤟🏾🇺🇸"▲ 699Jun 5, 2026Source ↗
Exhibit 02Negative.NYK flair
And 6 in first half all mitch rob, fucking disgrace
Post-game thread · NYK 105 @ SAS 104 · R4 G2 · Jun 5▲ 44Jun 6, 2026Source ↗
Exhibit 03Negative.NYK flair
You have to understand that Mitchell Robinson will absolutely play around with supporting child predators. He has never been credibly accused of being intelligent. Also speaking of supporting child predators, this entire fuckin league man. I still get sick to my stomach when people put Malone on a pedastal. I know it's a whole different level to Trump's tier of evil but it's still evil shit.
Post · James Dolan says the Knicks have accepted the White House Invitation for their Championship▲ 33Jun 17, 2026Source ↗

Method

A receipt is a top-scoring comment about Mitchell Robinson that cleared the classifier's confidence bar and a second pass confirming it is about him. No usernames: the site judges players, not commenters.

Fans

Of what r/NBA says about Mitchell Robinson, his own Knicks fans are 25% negative, rival fans 43%, unflaired commenters 41%. Fewer than two fanbases have 200 comments about him, so no fanbase stands out.

25.3%Own fansNYK flair · 483 comments

42.7%Rival fansevery other flair · 794 comments

41.2%Unflairedno flair · 611 comments

Method

A fanbase is the flair its commenters wear. Flairs with fewer than 200 comments about Mitchell Robinson are left out of the lists; the tick is his rate across every flaired comment, from summed counts, never a mean of rates.

Rooms

Mitchell Robinson was talked about most in the game threads: 792 of his 1,888 comments, −22 net sentiment against −8 across his season. His harshest room was the game threads; his warmest the front page, +3 on 34% of his comments. The game threads ran 26 points harsher than the front page: his play was graded live.

Game threads42% of his commentsHarshest48.126.0792

Front page34% of his commentsWarmest29.432.8637

News11% of his comments31.325.4201

Method

A room is the kind of post a comment sat under: a game thread, the front page, a highlight. A room is drawn when it holds at least 200 comments about Mitchell Robinson; left out here: Highlights (115), Post-game threads (103), Daily chat thread (17), Lowlights (17), Discussion posts (5), Injury posts (1). The bar is the room's share of his comments, its split the room's sentiment. Harshest and warmest are by net sentiment, positive minus negative, from summed counts, never a mean of rates.

Timeline

Over 4-week windows, the negative share of comments about Mitchell Robinson ran between 19% and 50%. His worst week was the week of Jun 8, 58% negative of 487 comments; his best the week of Dec 15, 59% positive. 25 of 40 weeks had fewer than 30 comments and are left off the line.

Sep 29 · 3 comments, under the floor
- W vs PHI 99–84
- W vs PHI 113–104
Oct 6 · no comments
- W vs MIN 100–95
Oct 27 · 12 comments, under the floor
- L @ CHI 125–135
- W vs CHI 128–116
Nov 3 · 10 comments, under the floor
- W vs MIN 137–114
- W vs BKN 134–98
Nov 10 · 21 comments, under the floor
- L vs ORL 107–124
- W vs MIA 140–132
Nov 17 · 10 comments, under the floor
- L @ MIA 113–115
- W @ DAL 113–111
- L @ ORL 121–133
Nov 24 · 5 comments, under the floor
- W @ CHA 129–101
- W vs MIL 118–109
- W vs TOR 116–94
Dec 1 · 23 comments, under the floor
- L @ BOS 117–123
- W vs UTA 146–112
- W vs ORL 106–100
Dec 8 · 37% negative · 30% positive · 30 comments
- W @ TOR 117–101
- W vs ORL 132–120
Dec 15 · 18% negative · 59% positive · 108 comments
- W vs SAS 124–113
- L vs PHI 107–116
- W vs MIA 132–125
Dec 22 · 21% negative · 58% positive · 72 comments
- L @ MIN 104–115
- W vs CLE 126–124
- W @ ATL 128–125
Dec 29 · 17 comments, under the floor
- L vs PHI 119–130
Jan 5 · 14 comments, under the floor
- L @ DET 90–121
- W vs LAC 123–111
- L @ PHX 107–112
- W @ POR 123–114
Jan 12 · 12 comments, under the floor
- L @ SAC 101–112
- L vs PHX 99–106
Jan 19 · 26 comments, under the floor
- L vs DAL 97–114
- W vs BKN 120–66
- W @ PHI 112–109
Jan 26 · 11 comments, under the floor
- W vs SAC 103–87
- W vs POR 127–97
- W vs LAL 112–100
Feb 2 · 19% negative · 48% positive · 42 comments
- W vs DEN 134–127
- L @ DET 80–118
- W @ BOS 111–89
Feb 9 · 16 comments, under the floor
- W @ PHI 138–89
Feb 16 · 11 comments, under the floor
- L vs DET 111–126
- W vs HOU 108–106
Feb 23 · 18 comments, under the floor
- L @ CLE 94–109
- W @ MIL 127–98
- W vs SAS 114–89
Mar 2 · 15 comments, under the floor
- W @ TOR 111–95
- W @ DEN 142–103
- L @ LAL 97–110
Mar 9 · 7 comments, under the floor
- W @ UTA 134–117
- W @ IND 101–92
- W vs GSW 110–107
Mar 16 · 7 comments, under the floor
- W vs IND 136–110
- W @ BKN 93–92
- W vs WAS 145–113
Mar 23 · 10 comments, under the floor
- W vs NOP 121–116
- L @ CHA 103–114
- L @ OKC 100–111
Mar 30 · 6 comments, under the floor
- L @ HOU 94–111
- W vs CHI 136–96
Apr 6 · 16 comments, under the floor
- W @ ATL 108–105
- W vs BOS 112–106
Apr 13 · 34% negative · 41% positive · 32 comments
- W vs ATL 113–102
Apr 20 · 47% negative · 18% positive · 38 comments
- L vs ATL 106–107
- L @ ATL 108–109
- W @ ATL 114–98
Apr 27 · 38% negative · 23% positive · 71 comments
- W vs ATL 126–97
- W @ ATL 140–89
May 4 · 32% negative · 37% positive · 68 comments
- W vs PHI 137–98
- W @ PHI 108–94
- W @ PHI 144–114
May 18 · 38% negative · 25% positive · 133 comments
- W vs CLE 115–104
- W vs CLE 109–93
- W @ CLE 121–108
May 25 · 35% negative · 28% positive · 81 comments
- W @ CLE 130–93
Jun 1 · 39% negative · 29% positive · 229 comments
- W @ SAS 105–95
- W @ SAS 105–104
Jun 8 · 58% negative · 17% positive · 487 comments
- L vs SAS 111–115
- W vs SAS 107–106
- W @ SAS 94–90

Method

Lines are 4-week rolling rates from summed counts (Σ negative ÷ Σ comments), drawn only where the window holds at least 30 comments. Dots are single weeks, sized by n. Bands follow the season calendar.

Games

The room talked about Mitchell Robinson in 9 of his 82 games, at least 20 comments each. It was harsher after losses: net sentiment −35 in losses (52% negative, 17% positive) against −28 in wins (53% negative, 25% positive), on a season net sentiment of −8.

−28In wins53% neg · 25% pos · 517 comments

−35In losses52% neg · 17% pos · 71 comments

−8His season38% neg · 30% pos · 1,888 comments

Games the room talked about Mitchell Robinson in, at least 20 comments each, newest first.
Date	Phase	Opp	Result	Min	Pts	Reb	Ast	FG	3P	TOV	+/−	P/R/A	Comments	Verdict
Jun 13R4 G5	R4 G5	@ SASW 94–90	W 94–90	20	2	10	2	1-2	0-0	0	+5	2/10/2	56,307	9 points harsher than his season, from 75 comments.
Jun 10R4 G4	R4 G4	vs SASW 107–106	W 107–106	13	2	5	1	1-5	0-0	1	-14	2/5/1	73,619	67 points harsher than his season, from 173 comments.
Jun 8R4 G3	R4 G3	vs SASL 111–115	L 111–115	7	5	4	0	2-3	0-0	0	-13	5/4/0	59,290	27 points harsher than his season, from 71 comments.
Jun 5R4 G2	R4 G2	@ SASW 105–104	W 105–104	14	7	3	0	2-2	0-0	1	-10	7/3/0	54,897	31 points harsher than his season, from 64 comments.
Jun 3R4 G1	R4 G1	@ SASW 105–95	W 105–95	13	2	6	0	1-2	0-0	0	-4	2/6/0	45,156	16 points warmer than his season, from 48 comments.
May 21R3 G2	R3 G2	vs CLEW 109–93	W 109–93	12	4	4	0	2-2	0-0	1	-1	4/4/0	7,682	38 points harsher than his season, from 22 comments.
May 19R3 G1	R3 G1	vs CLEW 115–104	W 115–104	14	4	6	1	1-3	0-0	0	-8	4/6/1	19,144	29 points harsher than his season, from 41 comments.
Dec 25		vs CLEW 126–124	W 126–124	17	0	13	2	0-1	0-0	1	0	0/13/2	4,301	48 points warmer than his season, from 47 comments.
Dec 16		vs SASW 124–113	W 124–113	18	4	15	2	2-6	0-0	1	+9	4/15/2	8,936	57 points warmer than his season, from 47 comments.