Author | Thread |
AUTOADVERT |
BigDaddyG
Posts: 39792 Alba Posts: 9 Joined: 1/22/2010 Member: #3049 |
![]() smackeddog wrote:BRIGGS wrote:Obvious to begin playing time integration at the expense of near any of our wings including Fournier I wanted to keep Reggie over Bullock, even before the Fournier signing. Sounds like the Knicks wanted to offered Reggie after other moves where made and Reggie decided not to wait. That said, I'd still start Fournier over Bullock, but I'd still feel more comfortable having a solid 3&D vet on the roster. https://nypost.com/2021/08/30/reggie-bullock-calls-leaving-knicks-for-mavericks-a-no-brainer/ The Knicks didn’t need to use cap space to re-sign Bullock as they had his early Bird rights. According to a source, Bullock would have considered the Knicks had they agreed beforehand to a package, but they asked him to wait. That was not happening. Always... always remember: Less is less. More is more. More is better and twice as much is good too. Not enough is bad, and too much is never enough except when it's just about right.
- The Tick
|
smackeddog
Posts: 38389 Alba Posts: 0 Joined: 3/30/2005 Member: #883 |
![]() BigDaddyG wrote:smackeddog wrote:BRIGGS wrote:Obvious to begin playing time integration at the expense of near any of our wings including Fournier I'd read the third year was the sticking point- he wanted it guaranteed, the Knicks didn't. Bullock doesn't seem to have been too impressive in Dallas, so who knows if they'd be open to a Burke for Bullock trade at the deadline (not sure if I'd do that, mainly because of the third year). |