thebuzzardman wrote:HEZI wrote:thebuzzardman wrote:
You don't see him as switchable 2/3 with RJ, where they both shoot, playmake, score, but Fournier better at it now as he's 7 years older and it gives RJ some time to grow into the role?
None of these moves are my favorite but I can kind of understand them.
No no way Fournier is terrible. Let’s just say I rather have Bullock back thank pay Fournier
I could see that.
But Knicks needed a more well rounded wing starting than Bullocks.
And the Knicks are losing Burks, who was the best on the roster at getting his own shot, outside Rose. And Randle, but Randle is the PF - so the guys who could collapse the D from the out to in.
I brought this up before as a bit of harsh truth:
RJ makes it hard to build the team, right now.
Or, taking up Channel, RJ & Randle.
RJ isn't there yet as a top level wing who can just go and score from 3 levels.
So it demands that the PG is great or the other wing is well rounded, to make up for his CURRENT deficiencies.
Then again, the Knicks apparently have decided to INVEST IN RJ'S DEVELOPMENT.
But I believe it's going to be another 2 full seasons where you can really get away with a Bullocks next to RJ.
Sure, Knicks got 4th seed etc, but I think they played over their head.
Also, making a move for Fournier is an inherent risk in the "1 year deal" since the Knicks have to replace the following:
Starting PG. Backup PG. Starting Wing. Backup Wing. Backup Center. Their two best perimeter drive and score guys in that group. Their best 3 point shooter.
It's going to be a bit of work to break even.
