Reggie Bullock was another one of those numerous Knicks players who had rumors swirling around him as the trade deadline drew closer, closer, and ultimately went by. He is a good shooter in theory, and he was inactive for enough of the season that his stats don’t necessarily represent how good of a player he is now. Also, he was inactive for enough of the season that the Knicks didn’t have a chance to annihilate his soul like the souls of his teammates were annihilated. A player with an intact soul is very desirable for some teams who are looking for that in a player.
In the end, however, he wasn’t coveted enough for any deals to get done. Perhaps his 32% shooting from three, which places him squarely in the “below average” category of long-distance shooters, dampened the market for him. So now he gets to play out the season on a Knicks team that isn’t competing for anything and has no need for a 28-year-old shooter in his “prime”.
I wonder if players on bad teams ever get mad that having to play on a bad team has a negative impact on their efficiency, which then makes it less likely that other trades will rescue them from their bad situation via trade. That might be what happened with Bullock here. Do him and Ellington resent the Knicks for not having a system where he can thrive as a three-point specialist? Or are they responsible for their own shooting woes?