# Is Fizer for real?



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

IF Fizers performance the last 2 nights is any indication on what we can expect from him, then what does that change?


----------



## Parabull (Nov 4, 2003)

If Fizer can keep rebounding like he did tonight, it's hard to see Tyson getting that much time at PF when he gets back. Maybe Tyson will play more at center, platooning with AD.

But tonight I take back everything (well, not quite everything) bad I've ever thought about Fizer. He looked superb: hustling, cleaning up every defensive rebound, shooting great, passing if he didn't have an opening... nothing like the Fizer I remember.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

Fizer could ALWAYS score.

If Fizer version 4.0 can rebound and D... then the Bulls have a new x-factor.


----------



## 7thwatch (Jul 18, 2002)

If Fizer continues to play like this it means we can stick EC on the bench till he gets his head out of his arse, and say hello to Fizer as our new primary post scorer


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

I think this is what he can do if he wants to. I don't know if it'll keep up, but I hope so. It reminds me of the way he was playing last year before his ACL tear.

Fizer seems to respond to benching. His good play last year was after Cartwright bashed him in the media. Tonight it's after Skiles hasn't played him. I just hope the motivation doesn't wear out. The rebounds he had tonight were great, and after the trade, we could really use his O. Once Tyson gets healthy (hopefully), I don't know where he fits in. Hopefully he can keep getting some burn if we continue to play JYD at 3.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

if fizer can do what he did tonight regularly, he hurts Curry far more then he hurts Chandler. just my opinion


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>rlucas4257</b>!
> if fizer can do what he did tonight regularly, he hurts Curry far more then he hurts Chandler. just my opinion


I agree. 

If Fizer keeps this up, Curry becomes almost unnecessary and could bag us a more natural small forward in a trade (like prince  )


----------



## Benny the Bull (Jul 25, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>rlucas4257</b>!
> if fizer can do what he did tonight regularly, he hurts Curry far more then he hurts Chandler. just my opinion


Agreed. They would start Fizer, Chandler plays center, and Curry off the bench.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>7thwatch</b>!
> If Fizer continues to play like this it means we can stick EC on the bench till he gets his head out of his arse, and say hello to Fizer as our new primary post scorer


I was thinking the same thing. Fizer didn't have a great shooting night tonight, but he made quick work of Croshere and Foster deep in the post.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

This trade has a easy solution for pt when Chandler gets back.


PG-Kirk Hinrich 36/ Crawford 12
SG-Jamal Crawford 24/ Gill 24
SF-Jerome Williams 20/ Fizer 28
PF-Chandler 36/Davis 12
C- Curry 36/Davis 12

What do we got that 8 man rotation that it has been said that we have to cut down to by posters. Break it down by minutes.

Hinrich 36
Crawford 36
gill 24
Williams 20
Fizer 28
Chandler 36
Davis 24
Curry 36

That is enough minutes for each of those guys to have good games. 

Hinrich 12 PTS
Crawford 22 PTS
Gill 8 PTS
Williams 6 PTS
Fizer 10 PTS
Chandler 14 PTS
Davis 8 PTS
Curry 16 PTS
Total 96 PTS

That seems about right. That team could reak some havok


----------



## Benny the Bull (Jul 25, 2002)

This is the aspect of the Toronto trade that most people overlooked. Many of us thought the writing was on the wall for Fizer, before and after the trade. Maybe it still is.

While Marshall could play SF, his defense at this position was poor. With JYD, who I personally prefer at PF, can play SF since he is a very good perimeter defender, which in turn opens up playing time for Fizer. With the team looking for scoring options, we probably need Fizer more than anytime before.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BabyBlueSlugga7</b>!
> This trade has a easy solution for pt when Chandler gets back.
> 
> 
> ...


until they play a team with a real SF who has scouted it. The point is, there is no spacing on this team, and they wont be able to defend the fleet footed 3s. the bulls are going to have to move one of their big guys, too many of them. Fizer is still the most likely to go, but jeez, you have to atleast consider keeping him. when he is healthy, he can dominate


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>rlucas4257</b>!
> until they play a team with a real SF who has scouted it. The point is, there is no spacing on this team, and they wont be able to defend the fleet footed 3s. the bulls are going to have to move one of their big guys, too many of them. Fizer is still the most likely to go, but jeez, you have to atleast consider keeping him. when he is healthy, he can dominate


Fizer can play the 4. Chandler can play the 5. I am confident in those two things. 

Now we should wait on a trade for awhile, and see what Fizer (and Curry) can do consistently. If Fizer can play consistently at a high level, and Curry doesnt drastically change his whole outlook, then I dont see why Curry shouldnt be the one to go and not Fizer.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>John The Cool Kid</b>!
> 
> 
> Fizer can play the 4. Chandler can play the 5. I am confident in those two things.
> ...


Curry might just be the one


----------



## lou4gehrig (Aug 1, 2003)

Fizer has never had a real NBA coach coaching him. Who knows how he will react? He can score, we know that. His high energy seems to work well on defence and rebounding. I think he's here to stay.


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>rlucas4257</b>!
> 
> 
> Curry might just be the one


What about his potentials and who is going to be a center
of the future ?


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Bulls96</b>!
> 
> 
> What about his potentials and who is going to be a center
> of the future ?


I dont think Chandler can put on the weight, but maybe they can get enough beef behind him. I stick by comments, curry and chandler dont mesh well. last year chandler played great with fizer, Curry played well with Marshall. maybe chandler with fizer, jyd and ad is the way to go. Curry can get you a ton. but who knows, just thinking outloud


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

I think the Bulls should stay away from the trades for awhile, or atleast the big ones (I dont count the Brunson type deals)...I think atleast until summer. Just play the guys who are hustling and producing. From there, decide who should go and fill the weaker spots. 

Right now, if anyone doesnt fit into the equation, its Curry based on his lack of defense and rebounding and intensity.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>John The Cool Kid</b>!
> I think the Bulls should stay away from the trades for awhile, or atleast the big ones (I dont count the Brunson type deals)...I think atleast until summer. Just play the guys who are hustling and producing. From there, decide who should go and fill the weaker spots.
> 
> Right now, if anyone doesnt fit into the equation, its Curry based on his lack of defense and rebounding and intensity.


im guessing pax would agree with you. and if anyone is going to go, it might just be curry, though fizer is the easiest one to move by far


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

Curry needs to be coached more than Fizer. Fizer can eat up boards... he's learned how last season. Fizer can score... he's always known how to do that. Now that we're out of the triangle and we've got guys like AD and JYD on the floor, "black-hole" Fizer is actually better off taking a shot. The odds at securing an offensive rebound are good enough with guys like AD, JYD, and TC ready to crash that his offensive role doesn't have to be the double-team draw and the kick out to a guard. Keep it simple, stupid.

Fizer is the guy for us, right now. The guards on this team are showing that they can step up after this Rose trade (Hinrich is showing some of that sweet shooting that he was renown for in college... I love his J), but regardless of what rebuilding plan we're on (G? H?), this team has always been about big men, ever since Jordan left. We need a low post scorer. Curry was supposed to be the guy, and he still will become that guy, but he needs a real off-season regime and he needs legitimate coaching. He's 21 and still has some cushion (although if Skiles can't find a way to get game out of him, I think Curry'll have run out of chances, at least in my book).

Fizer down low; Craw and Hinrich up top; Gill, JYD, AD to do the scrappy work. 

Then, let Curry develop, and either re-sign Fizer for cheap (I think we can get nab him into a 3-year $14 mil type of contract, if we wanted to), or make the qualifying offer and just take him for another year. 

I would not trade Fizer this season, and that basically rules out trading him at all. We need him in the short run and I can't imagine that his trade value is very high, even in a scoring-deprived league. He's been injured for too long and has never gotten a real chance, and as a result, he's worth a lot more to us than anyone else.

But mark my words: Fizer's strong play will get us more wins today, but he can and MUST be replaced by Curry. If Fizer stays on for a sixth man role as the team's vision for the future continues to develop, that's fine, but as the primary post scorer, Curry must take it over.

And I believe he will. At the same time, I'm glad we've got someone who is already in his prime game to get us a few wins while we continue to wait for our Twin Towers to recover (from funk or from injury).


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

I really want Fizer to find his niche. 

Though I've never been a huge fan of him, he has had a rough go of it in the pros. Tim Floyd and playing the 3, BC's doghouse and the infamous 'f***ing embarrasment' quote. ACL injury while he was finally playing well. None too easy.

Fizer can be our scoring and boarding 3/4 off the bench. A more low post version of Corliss Williamson.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Showtyme</b>!
> Curry needs to be coached more than Fizer. Fizer can eat up boards... he's learned how last season. Fizer can score... he's always known how to do that. Now that we're out of the triangle and we've got guys like AD and JYD on the floor, "black-hole" Fizer is actually better off taking a shot. The odds at securing an offensive rebound are good enough with guys like AD, JYD, and TC ready to crash that his offensive role doesn't have to be the double-team draw and the kick out to a guard. Keep it simple, stupid.
> 
> Fizer is the guy for us, right now. The guards on this team are showing that they can step up after this Rose trade (Hinrich is showing some of that sweet shooting that he was renown for in college... I love his J), but regardless of what rebuilding plan we're on (G? H?), this team has always been about big men, ever since Jordan left. We need a low post scorer. Curry was supposed to be the guy, and he still will become that guy, but he needs a real off-season regime and he needs legitimate coaching. He's 21 and still has some cushion (although if Skiles can't find a way to get game out of him, I think Curry'll have run out of chances, at least in my book).
> ...


this is an intelligent post. The only thing that i wonder about is minutes. we have 5 guys (chandler, curry, fizer, ad, jyd) who are really either 4 or 5s. we might be able to steal 20 minutes at the 3 on any given night, to get us a total of 116 minutes for these guys. that comes out to 23 minutes a night for these guys. and that is if we steal 20 minutes at the 3. and playing one of these guys at the 3 is a gamble. its a gimmick. its not a question if pax is going to move one, but when. he simply has too. the question is when? maybe its this summer, maybe its closer to the break. the bulls arent entirely out of the playoff race yet so Pax might hold off for awhile. i doubt he deals any of these guys until the summer to be honest. but fizer is the easiest to move. the reason is cause he is in the last year of his deal and his 3 mil dollar deal can help some team get cap flexibility this summer.


----------



## Benny the Bull (Jul 25, 2002)

This is my point. Curry still needs time to develop. We have placed expectations on the kid that are too high. I agree Showtyme. Great post. Couldn't have said it better.


----------



## FJ_of _Rockaway (May 28, 2002)

I've been saying since he went down last year that Marcus was/is our best passing big man 

For him it was just always judgement and letting the game come to him and understanding it better at the pro level as he had shown when it started clicking in December/January last year

At that time his defense was actually quite good and he was making smart passing plays

I could see a rotation "upfront" working something like this when everyone is fully fit :

* Starters *

A.Davis - 26 mpg
Fizer - 28mpg
J.Williams - 22 mpg

Ist reserve : Chandler 32 mpg
2nd reserve : Curry 20mpg
3rd reserve : Robinson 16 mpg

As Chandler gets bigger and matures I would have him as our starting Center alongside Fizer perhaps ( if Curry doesn't take his starters job back ) and still with an energy guy/hustler at the 3 like JYD being relieved by ERob or vice versa if ERob can earn the start back 

But for the time being we have a "Captain" of the interior D on the floor at all times in AD/Chandler ... a "Captain" of the post offense in Fizer/ Curry at any one time and ... a "Captain" of the hustle/energy at the 3 ( which wouldn't be a scoring position ) in JYD/ERob

Hinrich and Crawford are your back court playing 36 mpg a night being backed by Kendall Gill/ Scottie Pippen filling the other playing 24 minutes


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Benny the Bull</b>!
> This is my point. Curry still needs time to develop. We have placed expectations on the kid that are too high. I agree Showtyme. Great post. Couldn't have said it better.


Its more about the hustle and intensity than fulfilling expectations, although I agree 100% that he should not be expected to be a franchise player right now.


----------



## ChiBullsFan (May 30, 2002)

If any of you think Fizer is good all of the sudden, you are delusional.

He will show you flashes, enough to excite you, but let's be real here -- the guy flat out sucks. He is literally in the bottom quarter of players in the league.

Do not mistake these performances for actual talent. Fizer is only capable of production when the offense is moving the ball well and has rhythm, which it usually doesn't. Every other time he's in the game he makes their bad offense worse by forcing terrible shots on a regular basis.

I'm sick of the "what have you done for me lately" bandwagoning on these players. They are what they are over the long haul, and Fizer has basically shown nothing except the ability to score a few points. He contributes nothing else and often stifles the offense in his quest to pad his stats. The guy's a loser. Can't we just trade him and end this experiment already?


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

It seems that whenever we beat a good team, Fizer has a good game. He is our X-Factor.


----------



## MichaelOFAZ (Jul 9, 2002)

I don't want to sound like a know-it-all, but check out the posts prior to the beginnng of the season to see who I have said should have started all along. 

JC
Rose
Marshall
Fizer
Curry

Now there's no way I could have predicted the Bulls would have traded Rose and Marshall for Davis and JYD. And I will admit that I never expected Heinrich to be this good. In fact, the area that I thought Heinrich would struggle most, (on defense), is the probably his best attribute. So, I definitely don't know it all. But I did suggest that Fizer should start and I predicted that he would be a decent rebounder, and respectable defender.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ChiBullsFan</b>!
> Do not mistake these performances for actual talent. Fizer is only capable of production when the offense is moving the ball well and has rhythm, which it usually doesn't. Every other time he's in the game he makes their bad offense worse by forcing terrible shots on a regular basis.


Isnt the point of basketball to move the ball and get in a good rhythm? 

Since we're looking to become a good basketball team that plays like a team, I think having a player that plays well on a team would be a good thing? Maybe I'm wrong. 

and in all my posts I've used the phrase "if he keeps it up"...its not for sure that he does, but if he does we should be prepared on what to do to fill our weaker spots and clear the clog at the 4/5


----------



## MichaelOFAZ (Jul 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TripleDouble</b>!
> It seems that whenever we beat a good team, Fizer has a good game. He is our X-Factor.


I agree. However, I think Marcus will be even better if he looks to pass every now and then. Sometimes, I feel that once he gets the ball, there is very little chance that he's passing it. When starts to score down low, he needs to kick the ball out to the perimeter, doing so, will in turn open up the middle for him to get even easier buckets.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

I agree with whoever said that Pax should probably hold off on the major trades for a little bit, at least to give Skiles a chance to see what he has here.

I kind of got the feeling that before Curry got hurt that he was actually on his way to having a monster game. But oh how the tides can turn on you.

I think right the lineup of Fizer/JYD/Davis/Crawford/Hinrich should be the lineup that closes games for now. Let Curry keep his starting spot just so he doesn't cry. But when the game is on the line, until he gets better at rebounding, he shouldn't be in there. Because rebounding is why we won this game tonight, essentially. And considering the injuries we have everywhere, I don't think we can afford to have Curry actually be injured or traded.

And the one thing I like about Curry so far over Chandler, is that he has a body that doesn't break as easily. Chandler is too unreliable right now for him to be in many discussions about this team. At least Curry is there every night. Even if it's not mentally.

Exercise a littttle patience with Curry right now.

I hope fizer starts shooting better by the way. We got away with it tonight. But right now I'm not comfortable with the amount of shots he takes proportional to the amount that go in.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

Even though Fizer shot a low percentage, he shot from so close that it forced Indy to pack in the lane a bit more. This opened up shots for everyone else, and our guards took advantage of it.


----------



## TwinkieTowers (Jul 16, 2002)

How can anyone say that Fizer sucks?!?!?! There was a reason why he was picked at #4 (despite the fact that the 2000 draft sucked, in hindsight). I was a big fan of Fizer ever since I noticed him at Iowa State when they were #3 in the nation. He was not just the leader of that team -- he WAS the team. He looked like the strongest player in the country but also had a perimeter game. I even hoped that the Bulls would draft him -- even with Elton Brand on the team.

You guys are already aware of how dominant Fizer can be in the post; he has shown it many times last season and against all kinds of power forwards. What he lacks in height he makes up for in pure muscle. Those Charles Barkley references made predraft are definitely true even now. You Fizer-haters can't tell me that Kenyon Martin is that much better than Fizer. We all know that Fizer knows how to be a leader, but he also has the talent to play like one. He's not a talent-lacking leader like Mateen Cleaves is.


----------



## XXXCalade (Jul 4, 2003)

i think the bulls are playing fizer to build up his trade value so they can trade him for a small forward


----------



## ryzmah (Aug 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TwinkieTowers</b>!
> How can anyone say that Fizer sucks?!?!?! There was a reason why he was picked at #4 (despite the fact that the 2000 draft sucked, in hindsight). I was a big fan of Fizer ever since I noticed him at Iowa State when they were #3 in the nation. He was not just the leader of that team -- he WAS the team. He looked like the strongest player in the country but also had a perimeter game. I even hoped that the Bulls would draft him -- even with Elton Brand on the team.
> 
> You guys are already aware of how dominant Fizer can be in the post; he has shown it many times last season and against all kinds of power forwards. What he lacks in height he makes up for in pure muscle. Those Charles Barkley references made predraft are definitely true even now. You Fizer-haters can't tell me that Kenyon Martin is that much better than Fizer. We all know that Fizer knows how to be a leader, but he also has the talent to play like one. He's not a talent-lacking leader like Mateen Cleaves is.


Well, he wasn't the whole team - people just didn't appreciate Tinsley until the next year, and Shirley did enough dirty work on the boards to free Fizer up.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

I like the Fizer/JYD combo. Fizer seems capable of being the 3 on offense and the 4 on defense (at least when he's not facing really long/dynamic guys). JYD seems capable of being the 4 on offense and the 3 on defense.

A nice pairing, I think.


----------



## TysEdyKirkrthefuture. (Nov 19, 2003)

Fizer will not take a minute away from Tyson. Tyson is a better rebounder and an under-rated scorer, and much better defender (especially help defense, I know Tyson looks raw sometimes with the ball in his hands but he gets to the line often) Tyson is our best player. Fizer definitly could take time away from Curry, Curry lack of energy and emotion is really starting to scare me. If we got pick one or two in next years draft I would be all for Okafur at this point. Curry's production has been okay but you can tell he has so much more in him than he is putting out on the floor.

Yes, Fizer is for real, he did it before his injury and he's doing it again.

Last night his d and rebounding were more impressive than his offense, this could earn him a starting spot while Crawford out. Last night he outplayed all of our big guys. We really need someone else to start scoring and Fizer is the obvious choice. I would not be surprised if he take's Davis' or Curry's starting spot.


----------



## Chi_Lunatic (Aug 20, 2002)

[email protected] thread

trading curry cuz fizer had a good game? GET REAL....your gonna trade a potiential GREAT center for a average 6th man? the bulls would be more laughed at than they are now when that kid finds his defensive niche and posts 20 & 10 a game....

fizer isn't in the plans for the future of this team...don't get THAT excited over one game man....


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Chi_Lunatic</b>!
> [email protected] thread
> 
> trading curry cuz fizer had a good game? GET REAL....your gonna trade a potiential GREAT center for a average 6th man? the bulls would be more laughed at than they are now when that kid finds his defensive niche and posts 20 & 10 a game....
> ...


i've been hearing fizer isn't part of the bulls plans for 4 years now isn't about time some of you admit you were wrong 

he is a player and he's good and with he bulls needing his offense he's more valuable to us then he is worth in a trade


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TwinkieTowers</b>!Those Charles Barkley references made predraft are definitely true even now. You Fizer-haters can't tell me that Kenyon Martin is that much better than Fizer.


Kenyon Martin is much, much better than Fizer.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>johnston797</b>!
> Kenyon Martin is much, much better than Fizer.


I dont think "better" is the right word. I think the right word is "proven"...

Kenyon Martin is much more proven than Fizer. Fizer at his best is equal to or better than Martin at his best. Its just that Martin is at his best way more consistently than Fizer is.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>John The Cool Kid</b>!
> I dont think "better" is the right word. I think the right word is "proven"...
> 
> Kenyon Martin is much more proven than Fizer. Fizer at his best is equal to or better than Martin at his best. Its just that Martin is at his best way more consistently than Fizer is.


If 2 players have the same level of skill and one is able to perform to that level of skill much more consistantly, then that player is "better".


----------



## FJ_of _Rockaway (May 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>johnston797</b>!
> 
> 
> Kenyon Martin is much, much better than Fizer.


Depends on your point of view

I actually think Martin is a limited player. Take Kidd away from him and put him with a Marbury or a Davis and he struggles . 

Can't get his own shot and is a very average shooter . Not dominant on the glass but his rebounding has improved over the last 12 months - Nice aggressive defender and a guy that cann trigger transition but all in a all a nice piece to a team that is built around someone else which renders him an above average role player

Fizer has not been in the right situation but I actually think Fizer will be the more rounded pro - definately like his skill set better than Martin's but Martin overcompensates with his aggro demeanor

But Stromile will wind up the best out of the 3 ( IMO )


----------



## jimmy (Aug 20, 2002)

The title of this thread makes me laugh. Is Fizer for real? It's not like this guy who's in his 4th year in the league hasn't done anything in the past to make his last two games look for real. He's not a fluke.

Last season, up until the injury, Fizer was playing his best basketball and was arguably the best 6th man in the league. I was upset about how he hardly played in the beginning of this year because I knew what he could do.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>JAF311</b>!
> The title of this thread makes me laugh. Is Fizer for real? It's not like this guy who's in his 4th year in the league hasn't done anything in the past to make his last two games look for real. He's not a fluke.
> 
> Last season, up until the injury, Fizer was playing his best basketball and was arguably the best 6th man in the league. I was upset about how he hardly played in the beginning of this year because I knew what he could do.



I do agree that his play last year between Cartwright's "F'n embarassment" comment and his ACL tear was very strong and should have us prepared to see him playing the way he has in the last couple of games. I'd like to see him continue this type of play over the full course of a season. To a certain extent, he just hasn't had the opportunity yet this year. Since the trade, we need his offense and hopefully he can be effective.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>FJ_of _Rockaway</b>!
> Fizer has not been in the right situation but I actually think Fizer will be the more rounded pro - definately like his skill set better than Martin's but Martin overcompensates with his aggro demeanor
> 
> But Stromile will wind up the best out of the 3 ( IMO )


Well, your analysis ignores D and, even if it didn't, we completely disagree. 

Conveniently, we can see what happens this summer as all 3 are RFAs. We can let the free market run by real GMs determine who's right. I bet Martin gets more scratch then the other two combined.


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>johnston797</b>!
> 
> 
> If 2 players have the same level of skill and one is able to perform to that level of skill much more consistantly, then that player is "better".


While this encompasses a lot of the factors in comparing players, things like playing time, team chemistry, coaching (things that Fizer has been completely devoid of for his first three years in the league, mind you) will ultimately make a huge difference.  I've been on a tear about how coaching can affect players dramatically, both at the collegiate and NBA levels. Fizer was on his way to becoming the only shining star of the 2001 draft (K-Mart with the leg, Swift with the unpolishedness, Miller is just Miller, and Miles is, well, see for yourself). Fizer had as solid a college career as any of those guys, and was pretty well coached (Tim Floyd? Well coached?! You have to admit, the guy is a very decent skills coach for the college game... and btw, the Hornets are at 17-7, a game back from first place in the East and arguably a top four team in the league).

Fizer is a different player than Martin. I think they look kind of similar, physically, and they like to bang it inside on offense, but honestly, they couldn't be more different players. Martin likes the speed and plays like a SF/PF type. Fizer isn't nearly as fast in the open court, although he doesn't have Jason Kidd running next to him, but he's got a dribble move that is quick and a fairly tough to beat move. Watch Pau Gasol's game; he has one driving move to the hoop where he just takes big strides, brings the ball far back like he's going to dunk it, and occasionally he does. Fizer's move is similar to that.

He also gets it done in the low post.

Fizer is a more natural rebounder, although both of them had to work on it when they got to the NBA.

Martin is a more athletic leaper, although I've seen Fizer dunk on KG before and it was as much athleticism as you'll need in this league. But Fizer won't go up for oops like Martin (wow, again, maybe if we had a Jason Kidd type...).

All in all, I think Fizer might be better rounded because his defense is improving and his game in general continues to progress, while Martin is just doing what he's been doing except a little better and a little cleaner.

But in general, they are pretty different PF's in my eyes.


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>johnston797</b>!
> 
> 
> Well, your analysis ignores D and, even if it didn't, we completely disagree.
> ...


Martin might get twice the money Ben Wallace is making this year. Who's the better PF?


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

I ain't buying this situation arguement.

Put Martin instead of Fizer on the Bulls for the last 4 years and the Bulls are much better.

Put Fizer instead of Martin on the Nets for the last 4 years and the Nets are much worse.



> Originally posted by <b>Showtyme</b>!
> Martin might get twice the money Ben Wallace is making this year. Who's the better PF?


Wallace signed a long-term contract before he emerged. Fizer, Martin and Swift are all RFAs this summer. 

Small difference, eh?


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

Wow. Some here still think Fizer should be starting and that he's even in the same class as KMart. That really surprises me.

Is there a more loved 6th man in the league than Marcus Fizer? He's an undersized 4 who can score with semi-consistency when given the chance. I've seen a few good rebounding games out of him in his career, like Indiana the other night. But call me skeptical that this will be a long term trend.

Fizer still lacks good defensive skills and he is undersized for a rebounder. That is what will keep him a 6th man in his career. Whereby the Kenny Thomas' of the world can defend/board/bang with larger 4's, Marcus has always had his troubles with larger frontcourt players. A wide girth and lack big explosiveness doesn't help much either.

I don't buy the 'KMart is only good b/c of JKidd' argument at all. I've heard that hackneyed on this board for RJeff as well. SO JKidd is really what is making KMart get 10 boards, 3 assists, 1.5 steals, and 2 blocks a night?


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

i think its very debateable whether k-mart is much better than fizer and that the nets would be better with martin as opposed to fizer 

for one the nets big weakness is their lack of a consistent post up player (martin is supposed to be one ,but he isn't)

from that standpoint alone fizer would help them 

martin is a better defender ...both are pretty equal as rebounders

i personally would rather have fizer for the bulls and thats all i really care about


----------



## Machinehead (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>johnston797</b>!
> I ain't buying this situation arguement.
> 
> Put Martin instead of Fizer on the Bulls for the last 4 years and the Bulls are much better.



More so than how good we were with Elton Brand ?


----------



## Machinehead (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>johnston797</b>!
> 
> 
> Well, your analysis ignores D and, even if it didn't, we completely disagree.
> ...


That would put Kenyon at around $10M

Not that many teams with that kind of cheddar.. Nugz, Utah and Clipz 

The Nets didn't want to extend him last summer at the top of this range which means there would need to be a sign and trade deal for Kenyon to get his money if someone wanted to pay him this and the Nets are not obliged to sign and trade 

You know I'd be tempted to take your money if you want to put it where your mouth is


----------



## Machinehead (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>superdave</b>!
> 
> I don't buy the 'KMart is only good b/c of JKidd' argument at all. I've heard that hackneyed on this board for RJeff as well. SO JKidd is really what is making KMart get 10 boards, 3 assists, 1.5 steals, and 2 blocks a night?



Martin is a good defender .. always has been 

Cinci bad boy 

His rebounding has only been consistently better the last 12 months 

But remember Kenyon when he had a scoring point guard in Starbury?

Or how ineffective he was when he played with Baron Davis in Team USA ?

The guy has a VERY limited offensive game of his own and even though his 12 to 15ft J has improved some over the last 12 months also ... he is an ordinary post player and you don't want to see him putting the ball on the floor and driving

He is energetic and he cuts looking for the guy who is looking for him and he does play nicely off the ball .. but seriously the guy is overrated and he ain't all that 

I do like his defense though 

If I got to pay Kenyon $10M or JYD $6M .. I say gimme JYD

Afterall Kenyon is an energy player who defends .. but then again so is JYD 

I just wouldn't want to base my team around a guy like that 

He is a piece if you have the right platform ( Kidd ) but that's about it


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>johnston797</b>!
> I ain't buying this situation arguement.
> 
> Put Martin instead of Fizer on the Bulls for the last 4 years and the Bulls are much better.
> ...


I disagree. But you do speak exactly to the heart of the argument.



> Wallace signed a long-term contract before he emerged. Fizer, Martin and Swift are all RFAs this summer.
> 
> Small difference, eh?


Also speaking to the heart of the argument. Fizer is also looking to sign a long-term contract, and to me, it is before he emerges. Wallace averaged about 25 mpg before he signed the contract. Fizer is averaging close to 20.

Martin has never averaged less than 33 a game, and has always had the proper attention surrounding the #1 overall pick.

And you really don't buy into the situation argument? I mean, imagine if Tim Floyd coached Kenyon Martin and tried to convert him into a small forward. "Kenyon," he'd say. "I need you to lose about fifteen pounds. Just stop eating altogether, if you can. Also, work on that jump shot and see if you can defend guys on the perimeter. Thanks, man."

I'm not saying that Kenyon is a worse player than Fizer. I'm just saying, like grinch, that it is pretty debateable. I think K-Mart still has the edge, but it's not a huge edge.

Don't let the numbers fool you. Brad Miller's got better overall numbers than K-Mart and he's playing on a better team. Nobody calls Brad Miller a premier power forward in this league, while Kenyon is supposedly on the edge of that echelon.


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> I like the Fizer/JYD combo. Fizer seems capable of being the 3 on offense and the 4 on defense (at least when he's not facing really long/dynamic guys). JYD seems capable of being the 4 on offense and the 3 on defense.
> 
> A nice pairing, I think.


Very good observation !

:yes:


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>F.Jerzy</b>!
> 
> More so than how good we were with Elton Brand ?


Martin can guard 3's at times so Martin and Brand would have complemented each other much better than Fizer and Brand.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

I am still astonished that some would compare Fizer to Martin. Wow. Showtyme even got a poke in a Brad Miller, who contrary to what he may think, is having an All-Star season (again) this year in the West.

I really think the Jason Kidd argument is overused and abused on these boards. So RJeff is trash and so is Martin simply b/c Kidd is so good. Uh-huh. Yeah I think James Worthy sucks because he played with Magic. Scottie was a role player living off MJ's coattails too.

I would give a slight edge in all around scoring skills to Fizer. He can shoot outside, put the ball on the floor, and post smallish forwards. But I'd give an edge in defense, passing, rebounding, blocks, floor game, energy, athleticism, heart, and consistency to Martin. SO yeah... hmm.... I'd call KMart the finer player.


----------



## Bullhawk (Sep 8, 2003)

SD I agree I can't believe some think Fizer is better than KMart. WOW! Imagine this for a second we get KMart in that draft instead of Fizer then trade Brand for a SF instead of Chandler along with the #4 pick and wow a very nice team.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

How many people would argue that Fizer is better than Chandler?

Because to me, Martin is basically Chandler plus development in all around skill levels (which is why KMart is a better scorer and man defender) and some quickness (which is why KMart can defend most perimeter guys) but minus Tyson's length (which, coupled with playing in the post less, is why KMart is not the rebounding machine Tyson is).

So would Fizer be better than a slightly smaller, quicker version of Tyson?


----------

