MManal...it's a new day now, so i wanted to just say before you think i am completely against your vision; I am not. Yes, we definitely need to start running plays through a big man. I prefer them in the high post not low post for next year, because that is more suitable to the playbook and chemistry already established. I definitely want a scoring power forward for the future. We will never win the whole thing, otherwise. I totally agree. Next time we talk, let's remember that we agree on that 100%. I think everyone on this bbs agrees. This threads reminds me of why I like talking about games more than speculating on the future.
partner-the question is, where are you going to get this young Mutumbo, and Theo Ratliff clone (perhaps you think that Cato is a young Ratliff? Do you plan on going into the draft, getting the top pick and grabbing Loren Woods? Were you one of the people who didn't think Olajuwon-Cato would work? Then why would "Mutumbo Clone"-Cato work? Also, who said the "superstar PF" would take minutes away from the guards? There are plenty of Carlos Rogers/Kenny Thomas' minutes to go around, along with Walt's (continual deterioration), and it really wouldn't screw with Francis-Mobley-Shandon's minutes at all. Right now, we have no low post threat, and no low post toughness. Is that gonna stop the Lakers/Shaq? Indiana IMO had the right idea, they just didn't have the bodies to pull it off. When Smits was in the game, they went right at Shaq, and forced him to play D. Is the most recent Cato we know (the disinterested one) gonna be able to do that? Can we even find a defensive player that has an offensive game? 5 players don't win championships, and we'd still have the starting SF spot to fill (how about a Bo Outlaw clone? or will it go to Langhi?) and the rest of the big man rotation? Will that be for the Collier types? ------------------ The Serious Police are watching. Follow the rules or be assimilated. Shandon is underrated.
ugh...NIKE, what's with the 20 questions? I want out of this conversation. somehow my points got polarized by MManal. I do not take the position he is arguing against. We will continue this another time. Till then, remember that I do indeed want a scoring power forward on this team, and even a young unproven one. There are subtle differences in MManal's vision and mine. But we are not polar opposites. I think the main difference is you guys think more like CD (future vision and player acquisition), and I think more like Rudy (game plan and player rotation with the players you have now). Both conversations are fun. This board has far fewer game day threads than GM threads. Hopefully this year, you guys are going to let me try to inject game plan threads concerning the present players we have this year without telling me this can't win a championship...? Can I be allowed that, please? So, to answer your 20 questions NIKE, find someone else to answer them, you won't be getting GM answers from me. [This message has been edited by heypartner (edited August 06, 2000).]
Actually, it was only 9. I have an idea what your position is, and you have an idea what my position is. Anyhow, I came back to this thread to throw in another PF into the mix, Jerome Williams. Jerome would make a nice little piece up front to this team (and the current frontline in particular.) And here's a little segment from bskball on why he's on the block: JYD took exception to the lack luster efforts put forth by his teammates during the Miami playoff series. He got to the point with a few guys were his criticisms turned more personal than professional, and from there it became a tense situation that ruined any chance of winning the series. Some players have said they did not think they could play with JYD now, knowing how he could be. Dumars understands that JYD has the most value of any of his remaining players, and that he could be the chip that gets hefty contract unloaded, and clears some room for next summer. I personally like some people that are vocal like that, and he would light a fire under Cato, we don't have enough (or any) blue collar type of players on this team, and he'd be a welcome addition to my Rockets. ------------------ The Serious Police are watching. Follow the rules or be assimilated. Shandon is underrated.
Cato, may well be our center of the future, if, he continues to work as hard as Rudy indicated he has. KT went to the RMR to work on his game, not to showcase it. How much will his game improve? Can Jason develope into more than a backup? We need to answer these questions before we through more players into the mix. If we must get an upgrade at PF, let's not settle for a nice fit or just a banger. But, we need to know what we have first. ------------------ "Never give a sucker an even break. Nor wisen up a chump."
Eeeek! Someone mentioned acquiring Marcus Fizer! Alright, let me explain briefly why I think this would be a HORRIBLE idea. 1. Cato isn't a great rebounder... we definitely need one at the 4-spot, then. Fizer wasn't even a great rebounder in college. In the pro game, he'll be less than that. 2. Lack of athleticism. Yes, Fizer has decent moves towards the basket, but I don't think his game will translate well to the NBA . It seems to me that he often scored on raw determination and strength alone. When he plays in a league where other players are just as strong and faster, I don't think this will happen. That said, I'm not COMPLETELY averse to acquiring Fizer, actually, but if we do, I think we should find a new center as well. I just think that Fizer and Cato would be a NEGATIVE tandem. ------------------ The lottery sucks. Playoffs 2001.
While Fizer isn't a leaping type of athlete in the Garnett type mold, he gets up and down the floor very well. He's a lot more fluid/athletic/faster than KT going up and down. ------------------ The Serious Police are watching. Follow the rules or be assimilated. Shandon is underrated.
I have to argue with the fact that a 3-guard line up can't win a championship. If you are good enough at what you do then you can win a championship. The Rockets proved that you can win a championship without rebounding. The Bulls proved that you can win a championship without shot blocking or a point guard. The Spurs proved you can win a championship without a scoring backcourt. The Lakers proved you can win a championship without a point guard or a power forward. A three guard lineup may not get quite as many fast breaks in the playoffs as they do in the regular season, but they can still get their fair share. A good fast break is almost as necessary to winning a championship as a post up game so that a team can get easy points. Due to the changes in the game, as it was mentioned before, the 3-guard line up doesn't harm the half court offense. Our guys will have plenty of opportunities to take slower players off the dribble. ------------------
Nikestrad: he still can't board well. I'd actually rather have the Brian Grant type, IF we keep Cato. Someone has to get the rebounds, and neither Fizer or Cato are going to do that. I also have some questions about Fizer's defense, but I'm not sure enough about that to really comment. ------------------ The lottery sucks. Playoffs 2001.
One thing haven, are you basing Fizer's rebounding on just his stats that you saw last yr or are you actually basing it on watching the Cyclones play? Marcus was in the most peculiar situation out of any of the top selections in this draft. Fizer was in a starting lineup where the next tallest guy was 6-4. They had Tinsley, Horton, Nurse all three 6-3 or less starting on the perimeter and a 6-4 PF in Steve Johnson. Other teams would be all over Fizer with multiple players boxing him out and could do that b/c zones are allowed in college so it was extremely tough for him to consistently board. When you have such a small team around you, its pretty obvious what is going to happen. The reason I think Fizer will be a good rebounder in the NBA is b/c he really works hard around the basket, boxes out very well and most important has an EXCELLENT set of hands. This guy has no problem catching difficult passes in transition, receives the ball in the post w/o a problem, etc. As far as the athleticism comment. Fizer is very mobile for a 265 pounder. The guy has very good lateral movement and runs the floor well. The thing that impressed me so much was how explosive and quick his post game is. Also, when he faces up, he handles the ball very well. I think his game meshes very well with the guards and think he would fit in well with the Rockets. If the Cato/Fizer deal is available, they need to pounce on it and fast. ------------------ Check out the Best Source for Draft Info Draftsource.net
I'm sorry, but Fizer looked really small in the RMR and he looked slow laterally.... ...moving right along - I agree with heypartner in that we need to make additions to the team that will actually benefit our style of play. I'm also in agreement that we need a presence in the post, but we need to make sure that first and foremost whoever we get to score in the post will NOT shut down our offense. No not because they demand the ball in there, but because their lack of range would prohibit them from drawing out the oppostition big men, hence clogging the lane and allowing a "stopper" to be there when Mobley/ Francis drives. I was all for getting a quality big man when reports were saying Mobley might go, but now he's definitely staying I think we need to concentrate on our 3 strike weapons (that is the guards) for our success. In terms of 1/2 court sets, well we could always run iso plays - it got the Pacers to the finals and they were unlucky not to get to 7 games... I see no reason that we can't win a championship without an all star frontcourt - it has been done before. And sure Francis is not Jordan/Thomas - but Tim Duncan is not Olajuwon and the spurs still managed to win without a backcourt... ------------------
MManal: I couldn't disagree more. When Fizer wanted to drive to the basket, I agree he was explosive... but he didn't react very well on defense, that I saw.... and yes, I did see a few Iowa St. games (2-3 regular season games and then a couple more in the tourney). It seemed to me that other big men were beating him to rebounds. ------------------ The lottery sucks. Playoffs 2001.
Yes, we definitely need to start running plays through a big man. I prefer them in the high post not low post for next year, because that is more suitable to the playbook and chemistry already established. Ok this is good, then we actually agree a good bit. The only difference I have is that I want a big man that can play the high/low game. I want a guy that can play high post like you are talking about KT doing along with being able to become a go-to type option in the low blocks. I am very big on mixing in the 50+% baskets along with the guard sets. Along with that, he needs to be able to atleast hold his position well on defense. To get a player with this level of qualifications is near to impossible in already established NBA players. However, that is why you have to look at players that havent played an NBA game yet. I know you are very skeptical of taking on rookies in trades and such b/c there is a chance they could bust, but Marcus Fizer fits all those specifications and right now appears to be going at the lowest cost he will of his entire career. ------------------ Check out the Best Source for Draft Info Draftsource.net [This message has been edited by MManal (edited August 06, 2000).]
I'm sorry, but Fizer looked really small in the RMR and he looked slow laterally.... Ok so your basing your entire evaluation on Fizer based on that one summer league game that was aired on ESPN against Utah? That was the worst I've seen Fizer play of all the times I've seen him. He just looked totally and completely out of sync that day, happens to the best of them some days. The whole idea of what I want is an inside/outside threat at the 4 spot. Marcus does not lack range as you insinuate in your post. When you have a player like that who can play both with his back to the basket and on the perimeter, you can mesh him with the guards AND add a low post threat to the halfcourt offense. Indiana did not completely run guard iso sets as you insinuated, not even close. They had plenty of posting up action as Jalen Rose and Austin Croshere along with Rik Smits provided them high pct post looks to go with their guard plays. The reason Rose could post up so much is b/c he is a very complete 6-8 SF. I dont see our three guard lineup having size advantages like that. Guard isos are nice, but other plays like big men post ups need to be mixed in with that. If we had a guard like Michael Jordan that could consistently hit 50% from the floor and post his defender up at will, I wouldnt be concerned, but the fact of the matter is that we do not. Also, no Fizer is not slow, he runs the court well and has nice lateral movement, which is something I am impressed by. Haven, I did not see what your referring to, Fizer getting beat out etc. He was labelled "a man among boys". The guy really works hard under the glass and has an excellent set of hands; I think he'll do just fine in the NBA. ------------------ Check out the Best Source for Draft Info Draftsource.net
MManal, I watched 3 bulls games from the RMR - I agree that Fizer looked really bad in the Utah game - but I'm more concerned with him defensively. I think offensively he's just what we need (I never insinuated that he didn't have an inside/outside game) - but like I said he looked really small (or should I say short) and slow laterally. He didn't stop too many people who came his way. Admittedly he was guarding 3's most of the time - I question that, he's no 3... but having never seen him guard a "real" 4 I'm skeptical of his ability to do that. I'm not ever going to say that I would like Fizer in a rockets uniform until he has shown that at his size he can play in the NBA and succeed on both ends. I know that you really believe that he'll be a star MManal - just understand that I can't see him suceeding (and I've seen him play a fair bit). Obviously in 6 months time (Fizer is definitely a player who will have success right away, if he's going to at all...) we will know one way or the other. I just don't see the point of trading Cato away for a player who may or may not work out.... ------------------
I question that, he's no 3... but having never seen him guard a "real" 4 I'm skeptical of his ability to do that. This is one big issue I had with the way the Bulls were playing him and this is why I think they need to deal him. Fizer is not a SF and this is why they need to trade him. I suppose that was just an experiment to see if he could play the 3 spot. My whole premise for talking about this trade is that Fizer cannot play the 3 spot, he is a 4. I was not sure about the size question until he started taking measurements pre-draft. He measured 6-9 in shoes so Im not concerned about that. When I watched him in college, I liked his game a lot, but my only concern was his height. It turned out that all those rumors of him being 6-6 and 6-7 were completely bogus. He is in the 6-9 neighborhood, something I am completely ok with. If he had measured at 6-6 and 6-7, I would be concerned but he's taller than that. The fact of the matter is that the Rockets have zero featured offensive options on the frontline and their frontline is pathetically soft. They need help, and if moving Cato will get them the player they need, I am all for it. ------------------ Check out the Best Source for Draft Info Draftsource.net
