# Jimmer Fredette



## mvP to the Wee (Jul 14, 2007)

Apparently both sides are interested. Thoughts?


----------



## Tom (Jul 15, 2002)

Hard to say how a guy like him fits in great. He could be great or not. I suppose the guy is worth signing for a heat check every once in a while. If he is hot keep him in...otherwise yank that scrub.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

*Bulls close in on Jimmer Fredette*

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/10525785/chicago-bulls-cleveland-cavs-interested-jimmer-fredette-sources-say


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

There will be shots for him to take on this team, but he's going to need to defend well enough to get big minutes.

I think long term, playing more into the hypothetical, he could be a very interesting third guard on a winning team with Derrick Rose.


----------



## PD (Sep 10, 2004)

Does it mean that we lost out on Granger? Was hoping that Granger would consider us.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

I've been interested in Jimmer for a while as a buy-low type of player we might get from the Kings for little to nothing, so I'm happy to see him likely coming here for a cheap signing. Sacramento was about the worst situation for him to get drafted into. In Chicago I can see him being sort of what John Lucas and Jannero Pargo were for us. 3rd stringer who can be a heat check guy you bring in to spark offense. Guy can definitely shoot the ball, and Thibs has proven time and again that he knows how to utilize this type of player in the Bulls' system.

Only thing is, just like DJ Augustin, if he works out I am concerned we might not be able to keep him next year. But I guess having him here now improves the chances of having him next year, that is assuming he is worth keeping as a backup/3rd string guard.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

40% from 3 for his career, shooting 49% from deep this year, I think he's worth a roll of the dice. I always saw his upside as a Ben Gordon type (smaller combo guard, shooter, not much D) and his floor to be about Jannero Pargo.

Apparently he got hot at MSG the other night:


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

I love this potential signing. This is another classic hot-shooting guard that can be a Thibs reclamation project. Of course, Thibs has been so effective at this sort of thing that you often can't hang on to the player long-term, but it still ends up being mutually beneficial. And boy, the Bulls could sure use some more shooting.


----------



## mvP to the Wee (Jul 14, 2007)

I definitely would like this move. Sign him for multiple years too. I don't necessarily think he's a scorer, but definitely a good shooter who can get hot in seconds. Could be useful for us next season off the bench.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Can't hurt, that's for sure. 

This could end up being better for the Bulls than the majority of deadline moves that were made by other teams.


----------



## transplant (Jul 31, 2002)

Fredette is all kinds of intriguing. I mean, here's a guy making nearly 50% of his 3s, and he ain't shy about tryin' one, yet he can only get 11 minutes of burn per game for the lowly Sacto Kings.

The Bulls, of course, need scoring, and specifically, outside scoring.

The thing I like most about Fredette is that, his whole life he's been the guy that everyone in the stands knew was going to take "the shot," yet he's made a remarkable % of those shots. That's a gift, man.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

*Jimmer Fredette to join Bulls*

It's official


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

i think its a great move for jimmer .

a meh move for the bulls.

long term i dont see him as a guy who will fit with rose 

short term he may provide a boost just to up his value and move on and seeing as they already have a reclamation product in DJ at point guard i look at this as so-so.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

I actually really like Jimmer. I just don't know if Chicago's offense is the best for him. He ran some really good pick and roll offense against the bulls in the past. If the Bulls run more p&r with Jimmer, I can see him shine here.

I really want the guy to succeed and to be honest, he at the very least makes the bulls a bit more watchable.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Really fun debut game for Jimmer today. I was surprised to see the whole arena buzzing about him already. Guess I don't give our casual fans enough credit. Even more surprised at our other players' reactions...they looked genuinely excited about Jimmer being on the court, and not in the sarcastic Scalabrine sort of way. IMO, they know how well this kid can shoot the ball. I'm hoping he will get some consistent burn for us as a Nate Robinson lite. This team needs the shooting.


----------



## Tom (Jul 15, 2002)

The reactions are probably cool with Jimmer, but kind of sad because I don't think anyone takes him seriously. Oh, we like him because he is a great guy....but not in the way he wants.


----------



## mvP to the Wee (Jul 14, 2007)

Tom said:


> The reactions are probably cool with Jimmer, but kind of sad because I don't think anyone takes him seriously. Oh, we like him because he is a great guy....but not in the way he wants.


Not from the fans, I genuinely think the fans think Fredette can be an important player for the Bulls in the playoffs, similar to that of Nate Robinson.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

I kinda lost interest in the NBA this season, but I might just have to watch a few more games now to see what Jimmer can do with the Bulls. In college I was intrigued, and hoping the Bulls could land him for the Paxson/Kerr role, but he went way too early for that. This situation is ideal though. So far so good. 3 minutes, 50% shooting, 2 points, 2 rebounds. Prorate that to more minutes, and quite nice. I'm sure he still plays no defense though. In an article I just read, it sounds like his 3 pointers from either side, especially the right, it just unbelievable.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Tom said:


> The reactions are probably cool with Jimmer, but kind of sad because I don't think anyone takes him seriously. Oh, we like him because he is a great guy....but not in the way he wants.


Maybe, but that seems kinda strange if true. This is a guy who was NCAA player of the year, only 3 years ago...and has a legit elite NBA skill. Not really comparable to other fan favorite bench warmers who are just novelty victory cigar players (Scalabrine, Jud Buechler, etc).


----------



## transplant (Jul 31, 2002)

Tom said:


> The reactions are probably cool with Jimmer, but kind of sad because I don't think anyone takes him seriously. Oh, we like him because he is a great guy....but not in the way he wants.


Why would anyone not take Fredette seriously?


----------



## Tom (Jul 15, 2002)

His value is pretty low right now...that is why. His game hasn't translated. He isn't gifted enough to be ball dominant like in college and I think he needs to be to be Jimmer. In his mind he is the man (which is sorta cool) but in reality he isn't.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Tom said:


> His value is pretty low right now...that is why. His game hasn't translated. He isn't gifted enough to be ball dominant like in college and I think he needs to be to be Jimmer. In his mind he is the man (which is sorta cool) but in reality he isn't.


I would think at a minimum his shooting should translate just fine, at the very least as a spot-up 3-pt threat. He didn't get many of these opportunities in Sacramento b/c they are so bad at ball movement and full of selfish one on one players. On a team like the Bulls where the whole offense is predicated on ball movement, Jimmer could definitely find his niche. I'd say the same thing if he went to San Antonio or Indianapolis which have similar systems and philosophies.

Not to go into bad white guy comparisons here, but couldn't Jimmer be a Steve Kerr type of player? Steve was a very sub-par athlete by NBA standards, and while he could handle the ball OK, he could struggle when facing traps and full court pressure. That reads like something right from Jimmer's scouting report. Steve found a great role on the Bulls and Spurs for the same reasons Jimmer could.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

yodurk said:


> I would think at a minimum his shooting should translate just fine, at the very least as a spot-up 3-pt threat. He didn't get many of these opportunities in Sacramento b/c they are so bad at ball movement and full of selfish one on one players. On a team like the Bulls where the whole offense is predicated on ball movement, Jimmer could definitely find his niche. I'd say the same thing if he went to San Antonio or Indianapolis which have similar systems and philosophies.
> 
> Not to go into bad white guy comparisons here, but couldn't Jimmer be a Steve Kerr type of player? Steve was a very sub-par athlete by NBA standards, and while he could handle the ball OK, he could struggle when facing traps and full court pressure. That reads like something right from Jimmer's scouting report. Steve found a great role on the Bulls and Spurs for the same reasons Jimmer could.



Jimmer is going to be fine in the right setup. If a guy can hit 40% from 3, especially in an NBA that finally grasps the value of the 3-ball from an expected value standpoint, he is going to be able to carve out a role for himself. What we don't know is whether Jimmer will simply be a Korver-esque sharpshooter that needs others to set him up, or if his ability to set himself up as he did in college will translate. Either model can and does work, however.


----------



## transplant (Jul 31, 2002)

jnrjr79 said:


> What we don't know is whether Jimmer will simply be a Korver-esque sharpshooter that needs others to set him up, or if his ability to set himself up as he did in college will translate. Either model can and does work, however.


Though it's still early in Fredette's career, I've seen enough to say that Fredette is way, way better at getting off his own shot. According to 82.games.com, over the past 3 seasons, Korver has been assisted on 93%, 96% and 95% of his made baskets. That is the definition of a catch-and-shoot marksman. In contrast, Fredette has been assisted on 47%, 49% and 32% of his made baskets. 40+% three-point shooters are almost never assisted on less than 50% of their made baskets...it just doesn't happen. It's Fredette's special gift.


----------

