Knicks · Knicks want Bullock back (page 2)

As a bench instant offense player im curious about trading for Malik Beastly, a little younger than Bullock

Jimbo5 wrote:Im worried if the FO brings Bullock back since Thibs is a huge supporter there might be a small chance he could edge off Grimes as a starter.

As a bench instant offense player im curious about trading for Malik Beastly, a little younger than Bullock

I don’t see a world where Bullock replaces Grimes as starter.

Jimbo5 wrote:Im worried if the FO brings Bullock back since Thibs is a huge supporter there might be a small chance he could edge off Grimes as a starter.

As a bench instant offense player im curious about trading for Malik Beastly, a little younger than Bullock

Danny would try to screw us with that deal too.

Jimbo5 wrote:Im worried if the FO brings Bullock back since Thibs is a huge supporter there might be a small chance he could edge off Grimes as a starter.

As a bench instant offense player im curious about trading for Malik Beastly, a little younger than Bullock

Not sure that would be so terrible. The bench needs some more scoring.

Jimbo5 wrote:Im worried if the FO brings Bullock back since Thibs is a huge supporter there might be a small chance he could edge off Grimes as a starter.

As a bench instant offense player im curious about trading for Malik Beastly, a little younger than Bullock

Beasley has proven himself to be worse than a knucklehead, doing time for threatening a family house hunting with a gun. Don’t think this FO brings on total fools.

I would not want Bullock back because the coach will simply give him Grimes' minutes and then sell it as a defensive upgrade.
Thibs is not mature enough to handle a vet presence on the roster that he does not lean on at the expense of development.
Frankly, Knicks would have been much further along if we had let Quickly run point last year... a better pick over the summer and a more developed Quickly.
I don't trust Thibs with a guy like Bullock.

Knixkik wrote:

Jimbo5 wrote:Im worried if the FO brings Bullock back since Thibs is a huge supporter there might be a small chance he could edge off Grimes as a starter.

As a bench instant offense player im curious about trading for Malik Beastly, a little younger than Bullock

I don’t see a world where Bullock replaces Grimes as starter.

Isn't that what people want? The guys playing heavy minutes to play less minutes?

I'm thinking if things were reversed. Imagine we had Bullocks playing as bad as he has for Dallas, but for us. How much would we move to get Cam on this team instead?
I blame Thibs and not the front office here.

SergioNYK wrote:Bully was one of my favs on that pandemic team. I wanted to keep him over signing Fournier tbh.

I never thought SG was a weakness. They didn’t like that bullock couldn’t score off the dribble, but Knicks could have just kept him and started Burks instead for that. The issue was a real PG to pair with rose. I really thought the Knicks were going to go after Brunson that summer instead of Kemba.

CanItGetAnyWorse wrote:Will this be the last straw? Trading a nice young player in Cam for a once 3&D player in Bullocks?

I'm thinking if things were reversed. Imagine we had Bullocks playing as bad as he has for Dallas, but for us. How much would we move to get Cam on this team instead?
I blame Thibs and not the front office here.

But bullocks would most likely be playing better here. He was clearly an ideal fit. Sometimes it’s more about how a player fits. Thibs would maximize Bullock just like he always did Rose, Gibson etc. sometimes players just work better some places than others. Maybe there’s some slight decline there but he didn’t just forget how to shoot.

ramtour420 wrote:Yes to Bullock. Doesn't he instantly become our best 3 point shooter? Or our top 3? And he plays D? Where do I sign up?

I had high expectations for Bullock when we first got him. Classic 3 & D off the bench vet.

Knicks I’m starving need for length at all 4 positions. The wing span in the starting lineup is short (minus Mitch). And when you play teams that are long like Toronto, who push you to OT, then u have to deal with Washington who’s also long.

We are missing that cam length type players.

Also if RJ is going to get bullied at the SF position, then him or grimes should come off the bench. Add a 3&D SF.

Philc1 wrote:Bullock can’t create his own shot and his defense is way overrated. Pass.

He's a bench player for a reason. He plays defense and can hit the three and can play at least 2 positions. He has the physical attributes to back his limited skill set. He is the type of bench player winning teams use.

blkexec wrote:

ramtour420 wrote:Yes to Bullock. Doesn't he instantly become our best 3 point shooter? Or our top 3? And he plays D? Where do I sign up?

I had high expectations for Bullock when we first got him. Classic 3 & D off the bench vet.

Knicks I’m starving need for length at all 4 positions. The wing span in the starting lineup is short (minus Mitch). And when you play teams that are long like Toronto, who push you to OT, then u have to deal with Washington who’s also long.

We are missing that cam length type players.

Also if RJ is going to get bullied at the SF position, then him or grimes should come off the bench. Add a 3&D SF.

joec32033 wrote:

Philc1 wrote:Bullock can’t create his own shot and his defense is way overrated. Pass.

He's a bench player for a reason. He plays defense and can hit the three and can play at least 2 positions. He has the physical attributes to back his limited skill set. He is the type of bench player winning teams use.

The best thing bullock has going for him is Thibs likes him personally. Other than that the guy is a totally mediocre player and doesn’t help us in any significant way

ramtour420 wrote:

blkexec wrote:

ramtour420 wrote:Yes to Bullock. Doesn't he instantly become our best 3 point shooter? Or our top 3? And he plays D? Where do I sign up?

I had high expectations for Bullock when we first got him. Classic 3 & D off the bench vet.

Knicks I’m starving need for length at all 4 positions. The wing span in the starting lineup is short (minus Mitch). And when you play teams that are long like Toronto, who push you to OT, then u have to deal with Washington who’s also long.

We are missing that cam length type players.

Also if RJ is going to get bullied at the SF position, then him or grimes should come off the bench. Add a 3&D SF.

I was thinking strictly bench. Our whole starting lineup is set at this point. I don't expect it to change. These are the starters that in 3 years should be contending for the ECF. For better or worse.

For the Grimes fan club, I don’t know if Grimes continues to start if we trade for Bullock

Philc1 wrote:

ramtour420 wrote:

blkexec wrote:

ramtour420 wrote:Yes to Bullock. Doesn't he instantly become our best 3 point shooter? Or our top 3? And he plays D? Where do I sign up?

I had high expectations for Bullock when we first got him. Classic 3 & D off the bench vet.

Knicks I’m starving need for length at all 4 positions. The wing span in the starting lineup is short (minus Mitch). And when you play teams that are long like Toronto, who push you to OT, then u have to deal with Washington who’s also long.

We are missing that cam length type players.

Also if RJ is going to get bullied at the SF position, then him or grimes should come off the bench. Add a 3&D SF.

I was thinking strictly bench. Our whole starting lineup is set at this point. I don't expect it to change. These are the starters that in 3 years should be contending for the ECF. For better or worse.

For the Grimes fan club, I don’t know if Grimes continues to start if we trade for Bullock

I'm pretty sure Reggie would come off the bench. If your worried about playing time for RJ and Grimes possibly being cut, that's another issue.

BigDaddyG wrote:

Philc1 wrote:

ramtour420 wrote:

blkexec wrote:

ramtour420 wrote:Yes to Bullock. Doesn't he instantly become our best 3 point shooter? Or our top 3? And he plays D? Where do I sign up?

I had high expectations for Bullock when we first got him. Classic 3 & D off the bench vet.

Knicks I’m starving need for length at all 4 positions. The wing span in the starting lineup is short (minus Mitch). And when you play teams that are long like Toronto, who push you to OT, then u have to deal with Washington who’s also long.

We are missing that cam length type players.

Also if RJ is going to get bullied at the SF position, then him or grimes should come off the bench. Add a 3&D SF.

I was thinking strictly bench. Our whole starting lineup is set at this point. I don't expect it to change. These are the starters that in 3 years should be contending for the ECF. For better or worse.

For the Grimes fan club, I don’t know if Grimes continues to start if we trade for Bullock

I'm pretty sure Reggie would come off the bench. If your worried about playing time for RJ and Grimes possibly being cut, that's another issue.

PhilC's issues are pretty obvious.......

BigDaddyG wrote:

Philc1 wrote:

ramtour420 wrote:

blkexec wrote:

ramtour420 wrote:Yes to Bullock. Doesn't he instantly become our best 3 point shooter? Or our top 3? And he plays D? Where do I sign up?

I had high expectations for Bullock when we first got him. Classic 3 & D off the bench vet.

Knicks I’m starving need for length at all 4 positions. The wing span in the starting lineup is short (minus Mitch). And when you play teams that are long like Toronto, who push you to OT, then u have to deal with Washington who’s also long.

We are missing that cam length type players.

Also if RJ is going to get bullied at the SF position, then him or grimes should come off the bench. Add a 3&D SF.

I was thinking strictly bench. Our whole starting lineup is set at this point. I don't expect it to change. These are the starters that in 3 years should be contending for the ECF. For better or worse.

For the Grimes fan club, I don’t know if Grimes continues to start if we trade for Bullock

I'm pretty sure Reggie would come off the bench. If your worried about playing time for RJ and Grimes possibly being cut, that's another issue.

Nalod wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

Philc1 wrote:

ramtour420 wrote:

blkexec wrote:

ramtour420 wrote:Yes to Bullock. Doesn't he instantly become our best 3 point shooter? Or our top 3? And he plays D? Where do I sign up?

I had high expectations for Bullock when we first got him. Classic 3 & D off the bench vet.

Knicks I’m starving need for length at all 4 positions. The wing span in the starting lineup is short (minus Mitch). And when you play teams that are long like Toronto, who push you to OT, then u have to deal with Washington who’s also long.

We are missing that cam length type players.

Also if RJ is going to get bullied at the SF position, then him or grimes should come off the bench. Add a 3&D SF.

I was thinking strictly bench. Our whole starting lineup is set at this point. I don't expect it to change. These are the starters that in 3 years should be contending for the ECF. For better or worse.

For the Grimes fan club, I don’t know if Grimes continues to start if we trade for Bullock

I'm pretty sure Reggie would come off the bench. If your worried about playing time for RJ and Grimes possibly being cut, that's another issue.

PhilC's issues are pretty obvious.......

Bullock is shooting 34% from 3 this season and 37% overall. He’s going to help us get better how exactly?