NBA Roster Pages Complete

[Real Deal]

Triple post FTW...

 

I'll make these changes later. I'm having trouble accessing the FTP, so I'll need to figure that out after dinner.

 

EDIT: There's no way Fulks is going on the GSW all-time roster. He was horrible. Don't care what era he was in...he shot a career 30%.

 

I'd rather put Larry Smith or Antawn Jamison there. Probably Jamison.

 

Also, I'm inclined to stick Arizin at the two, even if it means bye-bye to Mullin (who played half of his time at the two-guard, half at the three). Barry stays at the three.

[Built Ford Tough]

Your Raptor information is a bit out of date/inaccurate in a couple of ownership/coaching areas.

 

First off, Richard Freddie should be Richard Peddie, and even then he isn't exactly the owner of the team. Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment are actually the owners (majority at least, as Larry Tanenbaum is also part owner) of the team and Peddie is just the CEO of that company. Listing him as the owner is a bit false, though, since it really is MLSE who owns the team and if Peddie was replaced as CEO of MLSE, it wouldn't make any difference in their majority share of the Raptors.

 

Secondly, the coaching staff is a bit out of date as Casey made some changes when he came over. Alvin Williams hasn't been an assistaint coach for the past season or two as he now has a front office job (Director of Basketball Development I believe), PJ Carlesimo and Alex English were let go after Casey's hiring and they were replaced by Johnny Davis, who is now the lead assistaint taking over for Carlesimo, and Tom Stenner. Eric Hughes, Mica Nori and Scott Roth were the three holdovers from Triano's old staff.

 

Lastly, Francesco Cuzzolin isn't with the team anymore as he went back to Italy after this past season. The Raptors hired Alex McKechnie, who worked with the Lakers for 8 years, as their Sports Medicine head. I'm not sure if he falls into the catagory of Strength and Conditioning Coach exactly, but I know that Cuzzolin isn't with the team anymore.

 

The Toronto Raptors announced Thursday the hiring of Alex McKechnie as their director of sports science. He will oversee all athletic training, rehabilitation and strength and conditioning.

 

McKechnie worked for eight seasons as the athletic performance coordinator of the Los Angeles Lakers. He is regarded as a leader in core training and movement integration.

 

“I am delighted to be a part of such a quality organization and look forward to working with the Raptors, as well as living in a great city like Toronto,” said McKechnie.

 

http://www.nba.com/raptors/News/mckechnie_072111.html

 

Other than those three things, everything else seems to be in order. Great job with all of these. They are very impressive.

[Real Deal]

Your Raptor information is a bit out of date/inaccurate in a couple of ownership/coaching areas.

 

First off, Richard Freddie should be Richard Peddie, and even then he isn't exactly the owner of the team. Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment are actually the owners (majority at least, as Larry Tanenbaum is also part owner) of the team and Peddie is just the CEO of that company. Listing him as the owner is a bit false, though, since it really is MLSE who owns the team and if Peddie was replaced as CEO of MLSE, it wouldn't make any difference in their majority share of the Raptors.

 

Secondly, the coaching staff is a bit out of date as Casey made some changes when he came over. Alvin Williams hasn't been an assistaint coach for the past season or two as he now has a front office job (Director of Basketball Development I believe), PJ Carlesimo and Alex English were let go after Casey's hiring and they were replaced by Johnny Davis, who is now the lead assistaint taking over for Carlesimo, and Tom Stenner. Eric Hughes, Mica Nori and Scott Roth were the three holdovers from Triano's old staff.

 

Lastly, Francesco Cuzzolin isn't with the team anymore as he went back to Italy after this past season. The Raptors hired Alex McKechnie, who worked with the Lakers for 8 years, as their Sports Medicine head. I'm not sure if he falls into the catagory of Strength and Conditioning Coach exactly, but I know that Cuzzolin isn't with the team anymore.

 

Other than those three things, everything else seems to be in order. Great job with all of these. They are very impressive.

Spelled Peddie's name wrong...that's all on me.

 

But blame NBA.com for not updating their coaching staff. I guess this has been a problem with a few other teams as well...blah.

 

http://www.nba.com/raptors/roster

 

Thanks for the heads up. I'll get it changed ASAP.

[Built Ford Tough]

Spelled Peddie's name wrong...that's all on me.

 

But blame NBA.com for not updating their coaching staff. I guess this has been a problem with a few other teams as well...blah.

 

http://www.nba.com/raptors/roster

 

Thanks for the heads up. I'll get it changed ASAP.

 

Go to Raptors.com and instead of clicking on Roster from the Team dropdown bar, click Management. That is completely up to date in terms of coaching staff and management, aside from McKenchie, at least as far as I can tell.

 

Or, just click here:

 

http://www.nba.com/raptors/News/management.html

 

lol.

[Real Deal]

Should be good to go.

 

http://otrbasketball.com/raptors/roster.php

 

Tom Sterner, by the way.

[Oliver P]

"I know he played just two years, but..."

 

"He only played two years for them, so..."

 

Well I explained myself about this when I said this :

 

You definitely can be mentioned in an All Time roster if you played with a team for a short amount of time like 3 or four years though, but then you have to have accomplished some amazing things with that team.

 

I usually do not like to mention players who played for less than five years with a same team in an All Time roster but it's impossible to generalize and make it a rule at the same time. I mean, as I said, if a player achieved great things with a team during a short period, it can be enough to put him in an All Time roster. Which is exactly the case with Rodman in Chicago or Sam Cassell in Minnesota for example. But in some other cases, like Kiki in Portland it's less evident in my opinion.

 

 

The worst part about doing these is trying to stick to a criteria. I've bent it a bit, but not to the point where I'm recklessly adding players in wrong positions, never basing it on tenure, just to fit the top five players in that team's history.

 

A great example of why this is such a problem is, last night, I asked my brother (who loves Iverson more than I do Kobe) who the greatest PG in Sixers history was. He sat and thought about it, and then said Mo Cheeks. He didn't consider Iverson.

 

I want people to look at the roster and identify these players as the greatest at that position, and for that franchise. I'm not putting together the five greatest overall, or a team of players that would do well on the court together. If I asked someone who the greatest PF in Laker history was, and they told me Kareem, I'd slap the shit out of them, and I think you would too.

 

I would indeed lol, and I did not talk about Kareem in my last post anyway. I understand your criteria and I'm fine with it, even if I personally would do otherwise.

 

I talked about mentioning AI as the PG in my last post because in that case it seems to me that it's a bit different. Kareem never played PF, but Iverson played PG for two years. That's why that I thought that you might eventually want to start him at PG. Especially that you agreed to mention Tracy at SF in Houston despite the fact that he only played SF for two years as well.

 

But anyway I'm fine with Mo as the starting PG though, it's true that he is the best pure PG that they ever had, so I understand your choice.

 

 

???

 

Regardless of that, I'll probably add Rodman.

 

Yeah Rodman is one of my favorite players and I sometimes tend to let myself getting carried away when I talk about him lol.. I meant that Rodman had the biggest achievement of his career with the Bulls, when he could (should ?) have been Finals MVP in 1996. But overall his best years were in Detroit. My bad.

 

 

I can't do that to Allen. The difference between Ray and DJ was that Ray Allen was the primary scoring option, one of the greatest shooters of all-time (to combat your argument about DJ's defense) and he actually led the team almost every season he was with them.

 

The Finals MVP can't sway my decision. Tony Parker won a Finals MVP when Duncan was leading the team. If they both played the same position, there'd be no way on Earth I'd stick Parker over Duncan.

 

Ray Allen was Seattle, at one point. Dennis Johnson wasn't. That 1979 team was Gus' team. He took the shots and ran the offense, and it was Gus that basically turned into a superstar during the playoffs, averaged almost 27 a game and shot a sky-high FG percentage.

 

Yes the Finals MVP is not always the best player of the team, that's definitely true. Duncan was better than Parker just like Bird was better than Maxwell. But in DJ's case it's different, cause he was truly the best player of the team. Gus was very good as well, I certainly do not deny that, but being the leading scorer and the best player are sometimes two different things. Billups was never the leading scorer in Detroit for example, but he was clearly the best player of the team.

 

In fact not only DJ was the Finals MVP but he was also All Star that year, contrary to Gus. Actually the three years they played in Seattle together Gus was not All Star once. While DJ was All Star twice. And the two players are both guards..

The fact is that Gus was only better than DJ at scoring, and Johnson was just the better overall player. And by far the team's best defender.

 

This said I'm fine with the pick of Ray Allen though. I think that I would personally rather have DJ, but I admit that it's arguable and it's impossible to say that Ray does not deserve to be in that lineup at the same time.

 

 

But he should've been. He averaged 27 a game and shot 52% from the floor in one of those seasons (averaged 25 the previous season with Portland as well), and yet he didn't make the ASG? That's a big reason why I'm not looking at achievements like that.

 

Look at the defensive-minded players that have been robbed of a Defensive 1st or 2nd team over the years. Why do Shaq and Kobe have a combined two MVP's? It's the same thing.

 

And, sure, the Blazers were better with Cliff...because they had Drexler, Williams, Kersey, Porter, and a well-rounded team that could go all the way to the Finals.

 

Yes that's a good point. And I agree with you these kinds of achievements are not everything. I'm not obsessed with it either. I actually said many times myself that Rodman should have been All Star every year during the 90's, or that Nash should not really have been MVP (despite the fact that he's one of my fav players, was even my fav PG when he was a Maverick).

But I can't totally bypass those achievements at the same time though.

 

Well anyhow it's true that a case can be made for Kiki. I did not say that I strongly disagreed with it anyhow. Just said that I was not sure.. And that I would personally put Clifford over him, but it's arguable. And I didn't only mention the fact that some Blazers teams were better with Cliff. Also that Clifford was more versatile (could play SF, PF and C) and a better defender than Kiki. Besides Kiki was surrounded by good players too, he played with Drexler, Thompson, Paxson, Kersey, Porter or Steve Johnson.

 

But anyway I think that a case can be made for Clifford but I can't say that Kiki is a bad choice at the same time, so I guess that I'm fine with it.

 

 

EDIT: There's no way Fulks is going on the GSW all-time roster. He was horrible. Don't care what era he was in...he shot a career 30%.

 

I'd rather put Larry Smith or Antawn Jamison there. Probably Jamison.

 

Also, I'm inclined to stick Arizin at the two, even if it means bye-bye to Mullin (who played half of his time at the two-guard, half at the three). Barry stays at the three.

 

Horrible ?? Fulks was the first true star of the league, the first great scorer ever. He set new game scoring records, breaking his own record every time, over and over again until he scored 63 points, record that lasted for ten years until Elgin Baylor scored 64 in 1959. He was the pioneer of today's jump shot.

And yes he shot at 30 % in career, but at this time everybody shot at 30 %. The FG% leaders shot at between 30 and 40 % in the first years of the league. I know that you said that you don't care about the era, but it just has to be taken in consideration. And on top of all that he led his Warriors to the first ring ever.

Saying that he was horrible is just wrong.

 

EDIT : By the way I think that Jamison would be a good choice indeed but according to your critera I do not think that you can put Jamison at PF cause he started at SF for most of his Warriors days if I am not mistaken. Well I think that he started at PF for some games, but I don't think that he did for an entire season. Not totally sure about it though.

Edited August 4, 2011 by Oliver P

[Real Deal]

My problem with Joe Fulks' shooting (and everyone else's) is really explained in the numbers. I can't sit here and say he would've done any better shooting the ball. Would Joe Fulks even make an NBA team in this era? How many guys, in the 40's, would be on teams in the 90's?

 

When these guys first started playing, there were no mechanics on their jumpshots. They weren't great on the defensive end because, truthfully, they lacked the defensive IQ that players like Gary Payton and Dennis Rodman had.

 

Plus, while FG% continued to rise (slowly, but surely), Fulks never improved his shot. Even near the end of his career, guys like Ed Macauley, Bill Sharman and Neil Johnston were shooting 45-49% from the floor, and Fulks never reached above 35%.

 

I really didn't want to put Jamison, either. He did start at PF for almost an entire season (the only season I looked at, didn't have the time), but I'm sure he didn't do it the entire time he was there.

 

I'm almost inclined to put Larry Smith. He didn't put up big numbers, but he was Mr. Mean, and probably the best rugged PF the Warriors have had, and an excellent rebounder.

[Nitro]

A great example of why this is such a problem is, last night, I asked my brother (who loves Iverson more than I do Kobe) who the greatest PG in Sixers history was. He sat and thought about it, and then said Mo Cheeks. He didn't consider Iverson.

 

Eh, I think AI could fairly be placed at either position. The last 2 seasons he was on the Sixers he played 100% of his minutes at PG, according to 82games.com. I do agree SG is more appropriate, but placing him at PG is ok if you feel there is a clearly better player than Mo Cheeks that should be placed in the starting lineup.

[Real Deal]

Eh, I think AI could fairly be placed at either position. The last 2 seasons he was on the Sixers he played 100% of his minutes at PG, according to 82games.com. I do agree SG is more appropriate, but placing him at PG is ok if you feel there is a clearly better player than Mo Cheeks that should be placed in the starting lineup.

LOL, I saw your post right when you made it, but it was on the other server.