Page 7 of 10
Re: Vote players into our alltime top 125, etc.
Posted: Thu Oct 10, 2013 7:21 pm
by Need To Argue
MW00 wrote:
hpanic7342 on RootZoo forums wrote:Also, I need to mention: there was an adjustment made for when a player played. Basically, the earlier his career took place, the more his rating was scaled down. Players in the 50s didn't have to play against blacks, in the 60s they didn't have to play against Southern blacks, and not until the 2000s did they have to play against lots of internationals. I wanted the ratings to reflect that the competition's gotten better.
.
I guess you can say I disagree with this immensely. Black players were playing in the 50's gradually, but had to deal with the whole don't do too well. Guys like Clifton were doing all of the dirty work. The shame is he would be one of the greatest players if he wasn't handcuffed by on style of play. The next few years players were coming in and making everyone adjust to them. Less than a decade later you have Oscar coming in and showing the future. But, for you to say competition is better today, I think you are missing a big point. Today we have 12th men making a million dollars (please no lists proving or disproving) and are more content and not as hungry as a player making ten thousand and fighting to make the team and some more to stay. Today players get cut and go overseas to many more leagues than were ever available or the minor leagues (NBDL and such) which were not options. In those days if guys didn't have other careers (because they had degrees) they ended up selling insurance or working at Sears (or whatever misery you can imagine). Even stars weren't making tons as of yet until possibly Wilt. The physicality of the game was a lot tougher then as well. The officiating was still developing so fouls had to be real fouls (not like if you tip a pinky stuff like today). Where do you think the phrase 'no blood, no foul' came from?
There is a lot of assuming being thrown around. You think getting hit on the hand affects the shooting percentages that we keep mentioning? Remember the other common early phrase 'hand's part of the ball' which is a way of saying play on.
I am not seeing how it is tougher today. Coaches then had players play all out in practice. There was no 'gee you need to rest that' mentality and what about travel? They didn't take 1st class flights; they took all night bus trips, carried their own bags, bought their food...I think we are missing the point by scaling down the era that actually had it harder.
There are more teams today, but there are more bad teams today with more players who aren't NBA caliber. Careers were shorter because being a pro athlete then was more similar to the military than the current country club. I'd scale down today's players if you are to scale down anyone at all.
Re: Vote players into our alltime top 125, etc.
Posted: Thu Oct 10, 2013 7:28 pm
by Need To Argue
Elvin Hayes was guarded by centers and forwards depending on the matchups. Tough forwards like Maurice Lucas (I take over all those guys mentioned earlier) would guard him, but would switch with Walton (when he was around) if he was in foul trouble. Bob Love would try to guard him with quickness (similar to what Carmelo tries with big forwards), but Hayes was a tough matchup and would go through many teams options and draw fouls on multiple players similar to Duncan. I look at matchups, not statistical info that could argue in either direction with ease.
Re: Vote players into our alltime top 125, etc.
Posted: Thu Oct 10, 2013 11:13 pm
by Mike G
Hayes played a lot of minutes, so that speaks in his favor. He was apparently a sufficient challenge for opponents on both ends of the floor.
I wasn't totally convinced by the casual assertion that olden-days players had systematically shorter careers. After all, there are about 4 times as many players as there were in the '50s-60s. Maybe there are also more players with shorter careers?
Complicating the issue is that better players tend to play longer than average ones.
I've separated players by how good they seem to be (arbitrary cutoffs, random stat) and by the era they played in (based on first year in NBA or ABA) from 1954 onward, in 10 year blocks.
Code: Select all
1st yr. Avg years, start to finish
.era greats stars good decent
54-63 11.8 12.4 11.6 10.8
64-73 13.9 11.1 11.3 10.8
74-83 14.7 12.3 12.5 11.9
94-98 15.4 14.3 13.2 13.0
Note: Maurice Stokes (3 yr career) brings the oldest group of 'greats' avg career span down from 12.7 to 11.8 years.
The four 'grades' of players are roughly equal size groups, and the 'decent' ones were still above average (in statistical production).
As implied by 'start to finish', this does not subtract years missed in military service, from injury, temporary retirement, suspension, etc. Just duration of career.
The early guys had shorter tenures, as well as fewer games in the season.
But in the middle decades, a lot of good players had short careers. There was cocaine and I forget what else. League growing pains?
The bottom line (rookies in '94 thru '98) shows the most uniform increase in career length; and some of those aren't done playing.
Re: Vote players into our alltime top 125, etc.
Posted: Fri Oct 11, 2013 9:36 am
by Mike G
Need To Argue wrote:..Today we have 12th men making a million dollars (please no lists proving or disproving) and are more content and not as hungry as a player making ten thousand and fighting to make the team and some more to stay. ...
I'd scale down today's players if you are to scale down anyone at all.
Lots of perfectly sound arguments up there, but I think the pay scale, like the rest of them (roughness of play, etc) cuts both ways. The pay scale has to be competitive with other sports, and other walks of life generally, to attract athletes into the profession, and to keep them there. Before the early 50s at least, salaries were so weak that some better players just didn't bother to play for a living.
Just because every argument can be used both ways, I don't scale anyone up or down according to era. I actually adjust early players up to the totals they'd have gotten in an 82-game season. This doesn't quite compensate those who lost a year or 2 to military service, but it helps.
The shorter careers are not 'fair', perhaps; but as we've seen, playoffs were a bigger share of total minutes for the old-timers. So that's a bit of compensation, too, if you put more weight on playoffs.
I might take a harsher view of the 'talent pool' the early players were in, but for the fact that white Americans have almost abandoned the game in recent decades. Have overseas players made up for that talent drain? I doubt it.
Re: Vote players into our alltime top 125, etc.
Posted: Fri Oct 11, 2013 4:18 pm
by Mike G
My highest-ranked guy who is not currently headed for promotion is Terry Cummings. He's got 2 of 5 possible votes, with 20-some votes being withheld.
He's one of 20 players with 19,000 points and 8500 rebounds (RS). Of these, TC has more assists than Parish or Moses; more steals (since 1974) than those 2 or Kareem, Ewing, Nowitzki, Duncan, Hayes, Lanier, or Shaq; fewer turnovers than all but Dirk.
The 6 players with more points, rebounds, and (known) steals: Olajuwon, Malone (Karl), Garnett, Barkley, Bird, Robinson.
He got into just about his fair share of playoffs, and his PO/RS ratio is .99 -- 18th best among the 54 names in this round.
Of course, there were 2 stages in his career: The twice-all-NBA TC before a major knee injury (10 years), and the role player afterward (7 more yrs.)
Cummings has 77 Win Shares in those first 10 years and 14 thereafter.
He's 76th in minutes played. Of the top 100 in minutes, he ranks 69th in Win Shares; 62nd in WS/48; 44th in PER; 34th in TReb%; 38th in Stl%; 40th in Blk%; 17th best in TO%
He not only played a lot of minutes, his per-minute rates were above average in most categories, among those with many minutes.
And his teams were winners. Between 2 years in SD and his 2 final years in GS, he made the playoffs in 13 of 14 seasons. Past the first round 7 of those times.
Re: Vote players into our alltime top 125, etc.
Posted: Fri Oct 11, 2013 6:31 pm
by Mike G
Carmelo Anthony has been in 6 All-Star games. A handful in this round have been in more, but not since 1975 or so.
'Melo has also made 6 all-NBA teams. That's more than Archibald, Drexler, Cunningham, TBug, Hill, KJ, Johnston, J Lucas, Moncrief, Paul, Reed, Isiah, Ben Wallace, Webber (all with 5); it's twice as many as Billups, Bing, Cowens, Dumars, English, Gasol, Penny, Marques, Sam Jones, Kemp, Reggie, Mutombo, Jermaine, Parker, Westbrook.
He's not LeBron, and he's not even Durant; then again, nobody else is, either.
Since 2004, there are 53 players with at least 20,000 minutes. Of these, only LeBron and Kobe have scored as many points, total or per game.
Carmelo is 18th in Reb/G and 28th (median) in Ast/G. He's above the median in Stl and Blk per game.
Among all player careers (at least 10,000 minutes), he's 9th in 'standardized' scoring rate -- 25.9 points per 36, per 100 pts/team/game. This will likely drop as he slows down; but that's truly elite company.
Of the top 20 'scorers' alltime, he's 13th in equivalent rebounding rate -- ahead of Jordan, Pierce, Dantley, Wade, Kobe, West, and Iverson.
He's also 13th in Assist rate, ahead of Pettit, Dantley, Shaq, Dirk, 'Nique, Yao, and Amar'e.
Just a handful are better in all 3: LeBron, Mikan, Malone, and Durant.
His Playoff/Regular Season production ratio is .95, which is above average for all players, slightly below avg for top-100 types.
Re: Vote players into our alltime top 125, etc.
Posted: Fri Oct 11, 2013 8:33 pm
by MW00
Mike G wrote:My highest-ranked guy who is not currently headed for promotion is Terry Cummings. He's got 2 of 5 possible votes, with 20-some votes being withheld.
He's one of 20 players with 19,000 points and 8500 rebounds (RS). Of these, TC has more assists than Parish or Moses; more steals (since 1974) than those 2 or Kareem, Ewing, Nowitzki, Duncan, Hayes, Lanier, or Shaq; fewer turnovers than all but Dirk.
The 6 players with more points, rebounds, and (known) steals: Olajuwon, Malone (Karl), Garnett, Barkley, Bird, Robinson.
He got into just about his fair share of playoffs, and his PO/RS ratio is .99 -- 18th best among the 54 names in this round.
Of course, there were 2 stages in his career: The twice-all-NBA TC before a major knee injury (10 years), and the role player afterward (7 more yrs.)
Cummings has 77 Win Shares in those first 10 years and 14 thereafter.
He's 76th in minutes played. Of the top 100 in minutes, he ranks 69th in Win Shares; 62nd in WS/48; 44th in PER; 34th in TReb%; 38th in Stl%; 40th in Blk%; 17th best in TO%
He not only played a lot of minutes, his per-minute rates were above average in most categories, among those with many minutes.
And his teams were winners. Between 2 years in SD and his 2 final years in GS, he made the playoffs in 13 of 14 seasons. Past the first round 7 of those times.
As above Cummings is 2nd on WS/fauxEWA list. My concern is he was considered a poor/lazy defender for most of his peak, I seem to recall Larry Brown improved him on this end. As such he's close to the opposite of what I was looking for (i.e. a big, a poor defender, a recent player, longevity rather than peak). Still he's certainly on my radar.
Mike G wrote:Carmelo Anthony has been in 6 All-Star games. A handful in this round have been in more, but not since 1975 or so.
'Melo has also made 6 all-NBA teams. That's more than Archibald, Drexler, Cunningham, TBug, Hill, KJ, Johnston, J Lucas, Moncrief, Paul, Reed, Isiah, Ben Wallace, Webber (all with 5); it's twice as many as Billups, Bing, Cowens, Dumars, English, Gasol, Penny, Marques, Sam Jones, Kemp, Reggie, Mutombo, Jermaine, Parker, Westbrook.
He's not LeBron, and he's not even Durant; then again, nobody else is, either.
Since 2004, there are 53 players with at least 20,000 minutes. Of these, only LeBron and Kobe have scored as many points, total or per game.
Carmelo is 18th in Reb/G and 28th (median) in Ast/G. He's above the median in Stl and Blk per game.
Among all player careers (at least 10,000 minutes), he's 9th in 'standardized' scoring rate -- 25.9 points per 36, per 100 pts/team/game. This will likely drop as he slows down; but that's truly elite company.
Of the top 20 'scorers' alltime, he's 13th in equivalent rebounding rate -- ahead of Jordan, Pierce, Dantley, Wade, Kobe, West, and Iverson.
He's also 13th in Assist rate, ahead of Pettit, Dantley, Shaq, Dirk, 'Nique, Yao, and Amar'e.
Just a handful are better in all 3: LeBron, Mikan, Malone, and Durant.
His Playoff/Regular Season production ratio is .95, which is above average for all players, slightly below avg for top-100 types.
Part of the problem may be the LeBron comparison and the media insistance on pushing him as a superstar, elite, MVP type level player. Because the metrics are clear that whilst good, he wasn't close to that until last year (he was 4th in PER, 9th in OWS, the first time he'd finished in the top 10 of any of these bkb-ref all-in-one metrics). Though again his typically poor defense means he's worse than his numbers. His manner of leaving Denver might count against him too.
Both might be disadvantaged by a perception that you're just good enough to lose with them, i.e. their best, most useful role is as the leading scorer, but with them in that role your team's upside is (without some luck) low 50s wins and out in the 2nd round, on real contender they'd probably have to be 2nd option (unless perhaps it was one of those deep, defensive, ensemble champions)
Re: Vote players into our alltime top 125, etc.
Posted: Fri Oct 11, 2013 9:31 pm
by Mike G
Carmelo Anthony's career is already as big as these guys' --
Code: Select all
diff career equiv. ePts eReb eAst PF Stl TO Blk
.00 Carmelo Anthony 20,474 5386 2310 2451 878 2357 365
.18 Glen Rice 20,179 4893 2202 2496 1010 1833 279
.29 Bernard King 19,438 5174 2745 2983 895 2867 238
.29 Mark Aguirre 19,227 5232 2935 2886 763 2530 321
.33 Dale Ellis 20,297 4716 1788 2732 1039 1913 200
.34 Eddie Johnson 18,885 5335 2455 3178 794 2202 197
.41 James Worthy 18,795 5655 3018 2328 1223 2159 721
.47 Chet Walker 20,117 6533 2254 3038 1107 2394 938
.48 Rashard Lewis 18,093 6171 1853 2528 1142 1698 578
.48 Michael Finley 19,911 5629 3654 2112 1146 1828 367
.50 Mitch Richmond 20,405 3982 3353 2581 1242 2656 263
These all took longer than 10 years to get here.
In per minute rates, he looks more like these:
Code: Select all
diff career per36 Sco Reb Ast PF Stl TO Blk
.00 Carmelo Anthony 25.9 6.8 2.9 3.1 1.1 3.0 .5
.13 Paul Pierce 24.4 6.4 3.9 2.9 1.4 3.0 .6
.14 Adrian Dantley 24.7 5.9 2.8 2.8 1.0 3.0 .2
.15 Bernard King 23.4 6.2 3.3 3.6 1.1 3.4 .3
.19 Dominique Wilkins 24.7 7.0 2.5 2.0 1.3 2.6 .6
.21 Mark Aguirre 22.2 6.0 3.4 3.3 .9 2.9 .4
.25 Paul Arizin 23.2 6.3 2.3 3.7 1.1 2.6 .9
.25 George Gervin 24.3 5.5 2.6 3.3 1.3 3.2 1.1
.28 Kevin Durant 27.4 7.0 3.0 1.9 1.2 3.0 1.0
.28 Glenn Robinson 21.1 6.6 2.8 2.7 1.2 3.1 .6
.29 Vince Carter 23.5 5.6 4.0 3.1 1.2 2.2 .7
Pierce was leading scorer on a team that won a title. Arizin awhile back. Worthy, too.
It's not bad to have had a career as big and good as King or Aguirre, before age 30.
Cummings, after 18 years, had rates like these:
Code: Select all
diff career per36 Sco Reb Ast PF Stl TO Blk
.00 Terry Cummings 19.3 9.3 2.2 4.0 1.3 2.3 .7
.09 Cliff Robinson 18.2 9.9 2.2 3.5 1.2 2.9 .8
.10 Dan Issel 20.7 8.5 2.2 3.1 1.1 2.3 .6
.11 Luis Scola 18.4 10.0 2.2 3.9 .9 2.2 .4
.12 Keith Van Horn 18.7 8.1 1.9 3.4 .9 2.5 .6
.14 Xavier McDaniel 18.0 7.7 2.4 3.6 1.1 2.6 .6
.14 Bailey Howell 19.1 8.2 2.0 4.2 1.0 2.4 1.3
.15 Paul Millsap 17.6 10.0 2.2 4.3 1.4 2.0 1.2
.16 Nene Hilario 16.5 9.0 2.3 4.1 1.5 2.4 1.0
.16 Shareef AbdurRahim 20.1 8.5 2.8 3.0 1.1 2.7 .8
.17 David West 19.5 8.8 2.3 2.8 .9 2.0 .9
That's the Cliff R who played in the early '80s and not very long.
By playing so long, TC racked up totals like these:
Code: Select all
diff career equiv. ePts eReb eAst PF Stl TO Blk
.00 Terry Cummings 20,324 9763 2277 4180 1374 2415 729
.35 Rasheed Wallace 20,471 9373 2426 3931 1250 1955 1712
.45 Otis Thorpe 18,833 11293 2820 4378 881 2916 518
.49 Tom Chambers 20,356 7539 2282 4112 957 2801 701
.50 Shawn Kemp 17,963 10603 1925 4189 1301 3092 1440
.50 Walt Bellamy 20,467 12083 2521 3733 835 2762 770
.57 Bob Lanier 19,702 9882 3124 3276 1103 2853 1596
.57 Antawn Jamison 20,525 8851 1756 2743 1099 1821 453
.58 Sam Perkins 17,310 9058 2165 3618 1236 1822 1077
.62 Shawn Marion 19,184 10746 2210 2688 1822 1810 1333
.63 Bailey Howell 18,452 7894 1937 4038 947 2264 1170
Howell is in both groups.
Re: Vote players into our alltime top 125, etc.
Posted: Sat Oct 12, 2013 10:24 am
by Mike G
In my big player list of 685 'significant' careers, the average number of rings (NBA or ABA titles) per player is 0.68
(463 rings accounted for)
The avg career span is 12.0 years
Because some players seem to hoard the rings, just .33 of players have any. Just 14% have more than one.
"The 1%" -- 7 or more rings: Russell, Sam Jones, Heinsohn, Havlicek, Sanders, KC Jones, Cousy, and Horry -- own 15% of all rings held by these 685 players.
[My counts could be off.]
The top 4.4% of ring-winners hold 36% of the rings. These are players with 4 or more.
On average, a player puts in 38,000 minutes per ring. Almost 18 seasons.
Outside the blessed 4.4%, it's 26.4 seasons, or 56,000 minutes per ring. Elvin Hayes territory.
Of course, in a 30-team league, you'd expect one ring per 30 player-seasons. Scrubs and guys who barely play also get a ring.
Re: Vote players into our alltime top 125, etc.
Posted: Sun Oct 13, 2013 11:59 am
by Mike G
Amar'e Stoudemire has a career roughly the size of these players:
Code: Select all
diff career equiv. ePts eReb eAst PF Stl TO Blk
.00 Amare Stoudemire 17,431 6576 974 2573 641 1957 1078
.41 Chris Bosh 16,586 7544 1551 2011 641 1656 883
.42 Spencer Haywood 16,028 7954 1517 2517 591 2419 1065
.47 Clyde Lovellette 14,892 6738 1414 3029 608 1673 878
.48 Neil Johnston 15,615 6800 1812 2313 649 1595 817
.56 Paul Arizin 17,781 5011 1782 2937 782 1850 647
.56 Rik Smits 14,761 6208 1341 3421 422 1768 1195
.57 Rashard Lewis 18,093 6171 1853 2528 1142 1698 578
.63 Shareef AbdurRahim 15,740 6661 2203 2391 826 2122 613
.63 Zelmo Beaty 16,249 8636 1502 3736 808 2143 1343
.64 Jermaine O'Neal 14,862 8096 1473 3056 496 1995 1945
He's also gotten his totals in a rather short time. His per 36 minute rates look like these, once standardized:
Code: Select all
diff career per36 Sco Reb Ast PF Stl TO Blk
.00 Amare Stoudemire 25.1 9.5 1.4 3.7 .9 2.8 1.6
.18 Clyde Lovellette 21.8 9.4 2.0 4.2 1.0 2.8 1.5
.22 Bob McAdoo 22.5 9.9 2.3 3.6 1.1 3.3 1.7
.23 Yao Ming 25.6 11.1 1.8 3.7 .4 3.0 2.1
.30 George Yardley 21.9 7.7 2.0 3.3 1.0 2.6 1.2
.30 Neil Johnston 23.8 10.2 2.8 3.4 1.3 3.1 1.6
.31 Patrick Ewing 23.0 11.0 2.0 3.7 1.0 3.1 2.6
.32 Brook Lopez 20.9 8.7 1.4 3.1 .6 2.3 2.0
.41 Kevin McHale 20.8 8.6 1.8 3.3 .4 2.2 2.0
.43 Spencer Haywood 19.6 9.6 1.8 3.0 .7 2.9 1.3
.43 Chris Bosh 21.0 9.5 2.0 2.5 .8 2.1 1.1
Amar'e is in elite territory as a Scorer. He also rebounds and blocks some shots.
Among 405 players with at least 20,000 RS NBA minutes, he's 43rd in WS/48
http://bkref.com/tiny/2pOMh
From the top 100 in WS/48, he's 24th in PER; 14th in TS%; 18th in eFG%; 24th in OReb%; 35th in DReb%; 20th in Blk%; better than the median in TO%; 36th in ORtg
For those of you who like Peak value, Amare's 2007-08 WS/48 of .262 is 42nd highest all-time. His PER that year (27.6) is 44th.
Only 16 players with higher PER in a year: Wilt, LeBron, Jordan, Robinson, Shaq, McGrady, Paul, Kareem, Garnett, Karl Malone, Mikan, Durant, Pettit, Nowitzki, Bird, and Oscar.
Some players who have never reached this level in PER for a season : Barkley, Wade, Magic, Duncan, ... well, everyone else.
In WS/48, the list would be similar. His betters are Kareem, Wilt, LeBron, Jordan, Robinson, Paul, Durant, Shaq, Dirk, Oscar, Garnett, Magic, Barkley, Malone, Johnston, Schayes, Mikan, and McGrady.
[ I may have missed someone; b-r.com is acting mighty funny of late]
In his "Thru 11 years" Similarity Score at b-r.com, his season WS resemble (among forwards) -- Brand, Hill, Baylor, McGrady, Mikkelsen, Hagan, Peja, Cedric Maxwell, Ben Wallace, Marques Johnson.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... dam01.html
He's a 6-time allstar and
5 times all-NBA 1st or 2nd team. I count just 30 others in the 3-pt era who have done that.
Re: Vote players into our alltime top 125, etc.
Posted: Mon Oct 14, 2013 11:20 pm
by Mike G
Voting for this round closes in the morning, and we have had just 5 voters casting a total of 99 votes, plus a couple of write-ins.
Only 16 players have as many as 3 votes. With 2 or more votes are 30 players.
With such low participation, I'm not excited about the prospect of advancing players with just 2 of 5 votes. That's like a .400 team (32-50 W-L) getting into the playoffs, isn't it?
Re: Vote players into our alltime top 125, etc.
Posted: Tue Oct 15, 2013 1:54 pm
by MW00
Write in: Frank Ramsey, Terrell Brandon, Yao Ming, Mark Price, Joe Dumars
Re: Vote players into our alltime top 125, etc.
Posted: Tue Oct 15, 2013 2:55 pm
by Mike G
final tallies for round 5 of the voting:
5 - Bailey Howell
4 - Maurice Lucas, Mark Jackson, Bill Laimbeer, Chet Walker
3 - Alvan Adams, Horace Grant, Bob Dandridge, Gus Williams, Mark Aguirre, Willis Reed, Lenny Wilkens, Bobby Jones, Hal Greer, Nate Archibald
2 - Terry Cummings, Carmelo Anthony, Baron Davis, Sam Cassell, Rod Strickland, Larry Foust, Jermaine O'Neal, Detlef Schrempf, Maurice Cheeks, Andre Miller, Charles Oakley, Bernard King, Tom Chambers, Mel Daniels, Johnny Kerr
1 - Boozer, Odom, Stoudemire, Hamilton, Antoine Walker, Coleman, Penny Hardaway, Rondo, Josh Smith, Thorpe, Walter Davis, Camby, Yao, Bridges, Smits, Haywood, Eddie Jones, Brandon, Price, Kirilenko, Dumars, Maravich, Gus Johnson, Ramsey
0 - Daugherty, Westbrook
The 15 players with 3 or more votes will be promoted to the 'tentative top 115'. The others in the list will again be available for votes in the next round, with the exception of those who were 'write-ins' in the previous round and also failed to be promoted in this round.
Bernard King, Walter Davis, Eddie Jones, and Kirilenko fall into that category. King and Davis are up for selection through the normal process. Jones is on deck, and AK is still out there.
EDIT: Eddie Jones just barely got in, on his own statistical merits.
Re: Vote players into our alltime top 140, etc.
Posted: Tue Oct 15, 2013 7:05 pm
by mark kieffer
I don't get how Rondo or Westbrook or D-Will could even be considered as an alltime great at this point. Definitely on the path, but too early in their career to tell.
Re: Vote players into our alltime top 140, etc.
Posted: Tue Oct 15, 2013 7:09 pm
by mark kieffer
I went with:
Camby, Cassell, Chambers, Cheeks, Cummings, Jamison, Jones, Macualey, Mikkelsen, Andre Miller, Oakley, Perkins, Schrempf, Amar'e, Strickland, Terry, Thorpe, and Williams.