Rob's Decision

I've finally made my decision. A lot of stress went into it. After all, the two extremes of my NBA fandom were cruelly fused together  -- my love of Dwyane Wade, and my pure, complete hatred for LeBron James, together in Miami. The two tore at me. They were the two fat kids. I was the last Oreo (double-stuffed, of course). Which would succumb? The question of the summer was Could I root for the Heat this season, knowing LeBron is on the team?

After months and months of struggling, pondering, cerebrating, if you will, with this choice, I've come to my conclusion: I will root for the Miami Heat this season.

To recap, here was my dilemma:

Ever since his senior year at Marquette, I had been a Dwyane Wade fan. Quiet, lets his game do the talking, not a lot of people talking about him. He got drafted by the Heat, joined by my favorite player at the time, Shaquille O'Neal, and next thing you know, I'm a Heat fan. On the opposite end of the spectrum was James. The second coming was hyped to historic degrees ever since his junior year of high school. He was seemingly already better than Michael Jordan, was going to his hometown Cleveland Cavaliers, and he was going to win them a lot of championships. Spare me. He never got any support, gave a couple of lackluster playoff performances, and when he became a free agent, suddenly it is The Night of the Decision. He chose Miami, and made me angrier than the guy who got hit with Brandon Jacobs' helmet -- and couldn't keep it. How could I possibly root for a team with my second least favorite athlete?

Ultimately, however, I can't root against Dwyane Wade, a guy who donates 10% of his salary to a Chicago church, who's foundation promotes education, health and social skills to children, who bought a house for a family on Christmas Eve 2008, who donated $25,000 to keep a public library open in Illinois. Oh, and he can do this, too. His Wikipedia page has an entire section devoted to his charity work. LeBron? Well, he has one about his tattoos and public image.

So, yeah, I decided to be a Heat fan this year. But that doesn't mean the decision comes without a few provisions. Here is what I decided is going to happen. The Heat will roll to the #1-seed in the Eastern Conference, get home-court advantage, win 65 games, and all that jazz. LeBron will nearly average a triple-double (say, 28 points, 11 rebounds, 8 assists), and finish second in MVP voting behind Kevin Durant. Come the playoffs, though, in a seven-game battle with Boston, James will choke and Wade will come through with a 20-point fourth quarter performance. James will go on to struggle in the NBA Finals as Wade thrives in crunch time. Yeah, the King has a ring (finally) but he gets criticism not because he did it with help (that horse has already been beaten to death and repeatedly hit post-mortem), but because he was ineffective. That's the best I can do. After all, I can't wish for the team to lose, so that would be the second best option (that, or if LeBron got injured and babied it during the playoffs LaDainian Tomlinson-style, but I don't see it happening).

That's my wish, but obviously I don't expect it to come true. But more importantly than my far-fetched hopes and dreams, what will fans do if the team doesn't win a title within two years? To fans, the team appears to be so loaded that the only team with a remote chance to beat them is the Lakers. Realistically, add the Celtics to this list for at least this season, and if Dwight Howard improved his offense even a little bit the Magic could be darkhorse on the list since I don't think Chris Bosh is that good and is not a top-flight forward (seven seasons, one All-NBA Second Team appearance. Not impressed). This is the team everyone loves to hate, and anything short of an NBA title will be seen with the most criticism the sports world has seen since the 18-1 '08 Patriots. There is an enormous amount of pressure if the Larry O'Brien Trophy doesn't take its talents to South Beach multiple times within the next few seasons.

Conversely, if the Heat do go on a title run (consecutive titles, two in three years, per se), then people will be quick to forget all about The Decision, all about the criticism LeBron faced, all about the summer of 2010 in general. When the Yankees spent loads of money but went a decade without a World Series, people were quick to talk. But last year, after spending $423 million on Mark Teixeira, CC Sabathia and AJ Burnett, the critics went away for the most part because the team won a World Series. There is no reason to think an NBA title will be any different for Miami.

The team has two of the three best players in the league, plus an All-Star caliber forward, plus a decent bench full of players who will know and accept their roles. Will the team win a title this year? Who knows. If I were to put money on it, it wouldn't be a terrible bet. And I'm going to be rooting for some to some extent. But if they weren't to win, I wouldn't exactly be heartbroken.

The "What-If?" Game

Tiger Woods. Training camp no-shows/fat lards/issues. Tiger Woods again. Oh yeah, plus some baseball here and there (the Red Sox and Yankees played last weekend. It was the first time all year I actually cared about whether or not the Sox won for more than a microsecond.). Basically, it's a fairly quiet time. Thankfully pre-season football will be over in a few short weeks and the real thing will begin once again. But until then what is there to talk about for someone like me? Each of the last three weeks I'd written about the going-ons in the NFL, so I didn't want to do four consecutive weeks of that. If you want weekly football articles with the occasional sarcastic comment, may I recommend DJ Gallo's Offseason Pigskinpalooza on ESPN's Page 2. However, this week I've decided to play a game that never gets old, has no definitive answers, and never will. It's the "What-If" Game!! I picked a few of my own to discuss and asked my very loyal readers on FaceBook what they would like to hear (I expected at most 4 comments, so I was surprised when I ended up receiving twelve legitimate scenarios and an idiotic one). These have no rhyme or reason to them. They are merely what people wanted to see and whatever else happened to pop into my head.

Reader Questions:

"What if Phil Mickelson wasn't such a choke artist whenever he had a chance to become the world number one in golf?"

Well let's recap first in case you're one of the millions of people who don't follow golf. At the WGC-Bridgestone Invitational last week, world #1 Tiger Woods sucked. Not like a for-Tiger-he-struggled-but-for-everyone-else-it-was-okay performance. It was horrid for 4 days at a tournament he had won 7 times before, topped by a 77 on Sunday to finish +18. Phil Mickelson needed to finish in the Top 4 to overtake Woods' #1 world ranking. He started the day tied for 10th. A 78 later (as in one stroke worse than the abomination that was Tiger's final round), he finished tied for 46th. This marked yet another missed opportunity for fan favorite Mickelson to call himself the best golfer in the world. However, the reasoning behind this is legit. On Tuesday Mickelson admitted he has been battling with a form of arthritis in which the body's immune system attacks the joints and tendons. There were times before and after the US Open where he couldn't move because of the pain. I'm no doctor, but I have a sneaking suspicion this could attribute to the fact that he hasn't played consistently well.

"What if the [Red] Sox didn't have so many injuries?"

The Red Sox this year might have topped last year's Mets in terms of injuries, which is pretty bad. Basically every key member of the Sox has missed significant time. Jacoby Ellsbury just returned in the Yankee series after playing only ten games all year. Dustin Pedroia broke his foot two months ago and hasn't returned. Victor Martinez missed a few weeks with a broken thumb, and during that time Jason Varitek broke his foot. Mike Cameron has appeared in only 48 games, and his season is probably over. Josh Beckett, Clay Buchholz, Dai-suck-e Matsuzaka, Manny Delcarmen and Hideki Okajima have all spent time on the disabled list. And in the biggest blow yet, Kevin Youkilis is out for the year with a freak thumb injury. For die-hard Boston fans the names Daniel Nava, Darnell McDonald, and Eric Patterson are becoming everyday names. That shouldn't be happening. There was a point where I'm pretty sure the team was made up of more PawSox than Red Sox, which considering Pawtucket is 16 games under .500 and 19 games out of first place is bad. Somehow with all this the Sox are only 4.5 games out of first place in both the division and the wild card. That being said, one has got to think if all the pieces were together for 140-150 games, Boston would be first or second in the division. Using the impossible-to-calculate Wins Above Replacement (WAR stat) from baseball-reference.com -- which is pretty accurate here, considering half the Sox lineups are made up of mostly replacement players -- Pedroia, Youk, Ellsbury, Cameron and Martinez combined for a WAR of 3.7 last year. Getting more technical, Youkilis' was 6.4 and Pedroia's was 4.9. Basically the absence of those players alone cost the team 3-6 wins. Add in Beckett and Matsuzaka, who have missed about 18 starts total, and that's another 5 wins. Right there is more than enough to give the Sox the divison title. So, in short, if the Sox didn't have so many injuries, with the way they have played in spite of everything, they probably would have won the division title. I think it is too steep a hill to climb out of now, though.

"What if Ben Roethlisberger didn't sexually assault that girl and get himself suspended?"

Well firstly, I would like to acknowledge that he allegedly assaulted her (wink-wink) and that no charges were filed due to the fact that the security tapes were mysteriously "taped over". Don't go implying he's a rapist, because while he probably is, according to the laws of our amazing justice system, he isn't. Anyways, had he not been an idiot, the Steelers would be a heck of a lot better off after missing the playoffs last year. It looks as though Big Ben will miss only four games, as opposed to five or six, so that's helpful for Pittsburgh. Weeks 1-4 are at home versus Atlanta, at Tennessee, at Tampa, and home against Baltimore. Without Roethlisberger, the Steelers are going to have to rely heavily on the running game (as seen in last year's game against Baltimore, where Dennis Dixon barely threw the ball), which struggled mightily at times last year. And considering the Falcons, Titans, and Ravens were all top-10 in rushing defense last year, it suddenly puts a helluva lot of pressure on Rashard Mendenhall's shoulders. With him, Pittsburgh would be able to have a balanced running and passing attack, but instead the defenses will most certainly load the box with seven or eight men and make Byron Leftwich, Dennis Dixon, or (shudder) Charlie Batch beat them. Basically, Mendenhall and the defense need to play out of their minds. If Roethlisberger wasn't such an idiot, the Steelers would have started off 3-1 at worst. Now I'd say 2-2 is much more likely.

"What if LeBron James never wins a championship in his career?"

This is probably the question that is most up for debate. There very little doubt that there has ever been a player with the athleticism, strength, size, and speed that James has. He is unstoppable, but could never get over the hump and win a ring by himself in Cleveland. Now he's teamed up with Chris Bosh, Dwyane Wade, and an increasing list of very solid veterans in Miami to form a very scary team on paper. One would guess within five years the team will have won two or three titles. But then there is always the question of whether the egos of James and Wade clash in crunch time, can the team hold it together? However, that isn't the question. If James does not win a title, I would probably cry of joy the day he retires, for there is no one -- absolutely no one -- I hate more in sports. This summer he even managed to surpass A-Rod and Tom Brady. In terms of his legacy, that's an interesting debate. Dan Marino never won a Super Bowl, yet people put him in the discussion of greatest quarterbacks ever. But basketball is different. Bill Russell is a top-5 all-time player because he won so many rings. Michael Jordan is undoubtedly the greatest player ever, and he won six titles. Would we revere his competitive drive as much if he only won once or twice? Magic and Bird won multiple titles, as did Kareem. John Stockton, Karl Malone, Charles Barkley, Elgin Baylor, and Patrick Ewing never won a title, and while they are all Hall of Famers without question, none are in the running for greatest of all-time. In the NBA, championships and legacies go hand in hand. Without at least a few rings, James can be the greatest skilled player of all-time, but it won't matter. He will not surpass the Magics, the Birds, heck, even the Kobes of NBA greatness.

"What if the Mets didn't suck male human reproductive genitalia?" (So I might have edited that one slightly)

Well, quite simply, if the Mets were good, they would probably be third in the NL East, behind Atlanta or Philadelphia, because while they have the parts, they don't seem to have the results to show for them. Theoretically a team with David Wright, Jose Reyes, Carlos Beltran, Ike Davis, Johan Santana, Mike Pelfrey, and Francisco Rodriguez would be very good, yet the Metropolitans had two epic September collapses in '07 and '08, were riddled with injuries last year, and simply aren't very good this year, being 56-56 through Monday and 7.5 out of first place.

"What if the [Red] Sox never traded Jeff Bagwell or Hanley Ramirez?"

This is probably my favorite question. In 1990 the Red Sox traded top prospect Bagwell to Houston for 36-year-old relief pitcher Larry Andersen (whose Phillies' jersey, might I add, I am a proud owner of) in what is considered one of the worst trades in baseball history. Had he stayed a Red Sox player, he wouldn't have even had a chance to play until 1993, when Wade Boggs bolted for the Evil Empire. Then if he transitioned from third base to first, like he did in Houston, he would have had to compete with Mo Vaughn, who from 1993-98 was the most productive first baseman in the American League. He would probably not have hit 449 homers and driven in 1500+ runs. Then there would have been the dark cloud on the Boston organization with Bagwell's association with steroids. Now, there is no proof that Bagpipes ever took steroids, but merely being mentioned can taint everything a player ever did. I don't think he did take them, but perception is everything, and the perception of a few ill-advised souls can change everything.

As for Ramirez, if he isn't traded, the Red Sox do not win the World Series in 2007. He and Anibal Sanchez were traded to Florida in 2006 in return for Josh Beckett, Mike Lowell, and Guillermo Mota. In '07 Beckett went 20-7 with an earned run average of 3.27, and in the postseason he went 4-0 with an ERA around 1.50. Lowell, meanwhile, hit .324 while amassing almost 200 hits and driving in 120 runs. He was also the World Series MVP. As much as I loved Bill Mueller, getting rid of him before the '06 season was best, because Lowell was exponentially more productive than Mueller and his bad knees. As good a player as Ramirez is, Boston would not have been spoiled with another World Series title.

Among other ridiculous questions.... "What if Randy Jackson played in the MLB?" and "What if OJ got back into the NFL? :o"

Randy Jackson would suck as a pitcher or a fielder. Probably not as bad as him or him, but not much better. OJ, on the other hand, would sign with the Redskins and compete with Larry Johnson, Clinton Portis, and Willie Parker for the spot of "least sucky old running back." However, since Mike Shanahan hasn't used a one-back system basically since Terrell Davis retired, all four will get playing time. Simpson will be the 20th-22nd running back taken in ESPN Fantasy Leagues because of this, but he'll be on Matthew Berry's "Hate List" for Weeks 1, 2, and 4 because his opponents were top-10 rushing defenses last year. But look on the bright side -- he'd probably be more effective than LaDainian Tomlinson.

"What if sports never existed?"

Lots of things would change. I would spend all my time on my laptop and watching re-runs of Seinfeld. Brett Favre would spend his summer days mowing his ridiculously huge lawns on his John Deere riding mower in his worn-out Wrangler jeans and dirty cap. Michael Jordan would spend all his time at casinos to feed his competitive drive. Tiger Woods would be a bachelor having sex with every possible woman. Kurt Warner would have spent the '90s bagging at his local grocery store. No one would know who Elmer Flick and George Stone were. And no one would care about the WNBA. See, life as we know it would be drastically different.

"What if [Mark] McGwire gets in the Hall of Fame?"

It would be astronomical if McGwire, or any admitted steroid user, got into Cooperstown, seeing as it's not happening anytime soon. The writers, who vote on who gets into the Hall, have made it quite clear they will not vote for anyone who has juiced, which is why McGwire only received 23.7% of votes (75% is required for election) in 2010. That would mean that Sammy Sosa, Rafael Palmeiro, Roger Clemens, Alex Rodriguez and Barry Bonds, among scattered others, would have no shot at getting into the Hall. While I understand the idea that they cheated and should be left out, a huge piece of baseball history is being ignored -- the home run king, two other 600-home run hitters, a 3000-hit member, and a 300-game winner. As long as Pete Rose is left out, no steroid user should ever be allowed in. But if someone like Bonds or McGwire gets in, then it opens up the floodgates for a whole group of juicers that could taint the honor of being in the hallowed grounds of Cooperstown.

My Questions:

"What if David Tyree didn't put a bottle of super glue on his helmet make the ridiculous helmet catch in Super Bowl XLII?"

It is perhaps behind only the Immaculate Reception and "The Catch" in terms of fame (and for New England fans, infamy). David Tyree, the 4th string receiver, making the unbelievable catch against his helmet as Rodney Harrison is taking him down, completing a play where the refs missed about 35 holding calls Eli Manning slithered away from a group of Pats defenders and heaved the ball into the air. A few plays later it was Manning-to-Burress and the mighty Patriots were undefeated no more. If he doesn't catch the ball, it is 4th-and-5 with :59 to go. Manning to that point was 14-for-22 on throws of 10 yards or less, averaging 8.2 yards per reception according to my research. In the 4th quarter he was 5-for-7 and averaged 10 yards a catch. So I believe New York would have gotten the first down and gone into Patriots' territory. From there, however, I think the drive would have stalled, seeing as how Eli was only 1-of-8 on deep throws to that point. The Patriots' defense holds, they go undefeated, Tom Brady is the golden boy (it's disgusting isn't it?), David Tyree ends his career in anonymity, and Mercury Morris finally goes away for good.

(On the note of Tyree retiring, I think it is stupid how he signed a one-day contract to retire a Giant. His career stats (54 receptions, 650 yards) amassed over a five-year season are crappy for a good receiver in one year, let alone half a decade. One-day contracts are meant for Emmitt Smith, Jerry Rice, sure-fire Hall of Famers who are among the greatest at their positions. Robert Horry did not get a one-day contract from the Lakers, Spurs, or Rockets for his numerous clutch playoff shots. Dexter Jackson was the MVP of Super Bowl XXXVII for Tampa Bay, yet he's out of the NFL without a one-day contract. I understand the significance of the Helmet Catch, but I don't think it's grounds for something like a one-day contract, because if he hadn't been so lucky, no one would have known his name. One-day contracts are for established skill players. Sorry)

"What if the Braves or Pirates had scouted Willie Mays?"

That's right. Willie Mays could have been in the same outfield as either Hank Aaron or Roberto Clemente. Scary thought, eh? From James Hirsch's biography Willie Mays: The Life, The Legend:

Some scouts blew their chance for immortality simply because they couldn't judge talent. In 1949, a Pittsburgh Pirate scout... Piper Davis approached [Birmingham Black Barons' owner Tom Hayes] in a hotel lobby in New Orleans.

"Give us $2000 and you can have that kid," [Hayes] said.

"Nah," the scout said. "Even if he got him, we'd make a pitcher out of him"

Could you imagine that outfield? If I were the Pirates manager I would have put Mays in left center, Clemente in right center, and had the third outfielder stand behind second. That would easily be the best outfield in baseball, even with only two out there, and it would be as good or better than Aaron and Eddie Mathews batting-wise. Yikes.

The Boston Braves had an even better shot at The Say Hey Kid. One scout, Bill Maughn, absolutely loved Mays, but could not sign him until he graduated from school. He wrote to the Braves' front office "here is the best standout prospect available in the nation." After waiting a year for Willie to graduate school another scout was sent out, Mays went just 1-for-8 in a doubleheader, and no offer was ever made. As good as Mays and Clemente would have been, Mays and Aaron would have been better. That's 1415 home runs, 7054 hits, and 4200 runs batted in. That's 49 All-Star Game selections and 15 Gold Gloves. Along with Mathews in the lineup and Warren Spahn on the mound, that team would have been damn near unbeatable. The dogfights the Yankees and Braves would have had throughout the '50s would have been ridiculous. And Mays would have more than one World Series ring, while Aaron would have had his. Betcha that scout felt pretty damn stupid, eh?

What if Barry Bonds threw out Sid Bream?

It is one of the more famous baseball plays of the last twenty years. Bottom 9, 1992 NLCS Game 7. The Braves' Francisco Cabrera gets a basehit to left. The tying run scored, and charging around third was Sid Bream, who would score to win the game, and for the third consecutive year the division-winning Pirates were denied a trip to the World Series. But if Bream is out, then what happens? If the Pirates go to the World Series, Bonds and other starters might stay in Pittsburgh (between 1992 and '93 seven starters left). Bonds might not get into steroids, and as Bill Simmons' wrote a few years back, "retire with a respectable 550 home runs and go quietly into Cooperstown". The Pirates might have remained relevant for a few more years instead of being a laughingstock since that fateful night in Atlanta. (Random trivia question: What 25-year-old went 8-1 in 13 starts with a 2.15 ERA for the '92 Pirates? Tim Wakefield)

What if Roberto Clemente's plane was looked at closely?

In one of the most tragic sports stories ever, Roberto Clemente died on New Year's Eve 1972 when his plane crashed going to Nicaragua, with the intention of helping victims of an earthquake. Reading David Maraniss's Clemente, the DC-7 that Clemente boarded that day was in desperate need of engine replacement. A few weeks prior the pilot of the plane, Arthur Rivera, was told by an FAA officer that one was necessary, however the officer "did not issue a condition notice requiring that engine repairs be made before the next flight, instead marking 'satisfactory' and 'no further action required' on the FAA inspection forms." When recommended that he take a test run, there was one problem: Rivera did not know how to fly the plane. It was no wonder the plane went down. But what if that plane does not take off? From a baseball standpoint, Clemente already had 3000 hits (exactly), and at 37 he probably could have added a good 200-300 more. Today he is in the discussion for best ever all-around player. With the extra few years, there would be no doubt -- the best ever players would be Henry Aaron, William Mays, and Roberto Clemente.

'Twas the Night of The Decision

'Twas the night of The Decision, when all through the bar
Not a creature was stirring, they were waiting for their star.
The jerseys were worn as people gathered in prayer,
In hopes that LeBron James would soon return there.

The Clevelandites were nestled all snug on their stools,
While visions of championships came, Oh what fools.
And mamma in her ‘kerchief, her son in his cap,
Had just turned the tube to the King's big trap.

Out in the city there awaited such a clatter,
If James went elsewhere, windows would shatter.
Outside to join them he would fly like a flash,
To tear open garbage and throw up the trash.

The moon on the breast of the down-trodden town,
Gave the lustre to the James poster on the arena down.
When, what to his wondering eyes should appear,
LeBron on TV, what's there to hear?

With a jig in his step, so lively and quick,
The boy knew in a moment it wasn't a trick.
More rapid than eagles his coursers he came,
And he whistled, and shouted, and called Miami by name!

After all this time he made his decision,
It was harsher than anything the boy could ever envision!

He was going to South Beach to play basketball,
Telling Cleveland "F--- you! F--- you! F--- you all!"

As reality set in things started to fly,
People meet with the police, mount to the sky.
So up to the house-top the coursers they flew,
With the boxes full of jerseys, matches and gasoline too.

And then, in a twinkling, the boy heard on the news
That owner Dan Gilbert was blowing his fuse.
As he drew in his head, and was turning around,
Gilbert and his letter came with a bound.

On the Cavaliers' website the tirade was put,
As those jerseys became nothing but ashes and soot.
A bundle of grievances he had on his back,
And he looked like a looney, ready to crack.

His words how they twinkled! his promises how merry!
The "self-titled former King" fired Coach Brown and Danny Ferry,
But now he's leaving in a "narcissistic" decision,
And thus the thrashing began with quaint precision.

"A heartless and callous action" the bastard lied through his teeth!
And the backlash it encircled James' head like a wreath.
"A shameful display of selfishness and betrayal"

Enemy number one is LeBron's new portrayal.

Gilbert was joyous and determined, a right jolly old elf,
But I laughed when I heard him, in spite of myself!
A title before the Heat! a promise! he said,
With Shaq and Antawn Jamison, I foresee losing instead.

He was talking crazy, while Miami went straight to work,
They had Wade, Bosh, and now LeBron, Pat Riley you jerk!
The King basically laid his finger on the side of his nose,
And with regards to Cleveland, the middle finger it rose!

James fled to the South, to the Cavs gave a whistle,
And away he went, the city recovering from the missile.
But I heard him exclaim, ‘ere he drove out of sight,
"Cleveland you're f---ed on this very night!"

Some More of the Same

The pieces are beginning to fall in the NBA. The Heat are the big winners thus far, as they re-signed Dwyane Wade and added Chris Bosh. Dallas and Atlanta kept their stars in Dirk Nowitzki and Joe Johnson, respectively, so while they didn't improve, they didn't get worse either. And on Thursday night, LeBron James will announce where he's headed. With the amount of coverage it's going to get you would think the president, pope, and Jesus would be there. That will essentially determine the future of many NBA teams. There is the potential that Cleveland becomes a bottom-feeder once again, that New Jersey continues to be a bad team, that Miami could go on superstar overload, or that Chicago could become the best team in the league.

And then there are the Knicks. Oh, the Knicks. For two years they cleared cap space, got rid of talent, did everything short of scoring points for the other team (though Nate Robinson tried his best in that department), all in an effort to get the King. Now with each day I find it harder and harder to believe James will sign with New York, and times are getting desperate. They have $33 million in cap space for this season, and they plan on spending it whether the player is deserving of the money or not. Enter Amar'e Stoudemire, who signed a 5-year, $100 million contract on Sunday. In response to his signing, Stoudemire told reporters "The Knicks are back." Back to what? Sucking? Because this move did absolutely nothing to improve their team. It had to be done because if they didn't land a big-name free agent, there's a 99% chance no one would show up to Madison Square Garden next season, except for Spike Lee, of course. But in terms of basketball, this is just another desperate move that will end in more futility. Does this seem a little familiar?

There's no questioning that Stoudemire is an offensive force to be reckoned with. He has been called one of the most ferocious dunkers in the league. He averaged 23 points last year, and for his career averages 21. But the Knickerbockers don't need an improvement on offense. They were tenth in the league in scoring. Plus, his 23 points isn't that much of an improvement over the 20 points David Lee averaged. To go along with those 20 points, Lee grabbed nearly 12 rebounds a game. His 52 double-doubles were fourth in the league, behind only Dwight Howard, Zach Randolph, and Carlos Boozer. Stoudemire, meanwhile, had only 31 double-doubles, and in the postseason averaged only 6.6 boards a game. He reached double digits in rebounds only three times, and in Games 5 and 6 of the Western Conference Finals against the Lakers he grabbed four boards. That's a pathetic number for a 6-10 power forward. He might occasionally go off for 40 points, and 20 points are pretty guaranteed every night, but then again, Lee is one of the most consistent centers in the league, and a double-double is all but assured. That consistency may not be sexy, but it's still pretty darn good. And look at how Stoudemire got a lot of those points. He would set a screen for 2-time MVP Steve Nash, roll to the basket, get a nice no-look pass, and have an easy dunk. He had the luxury of playing with a Top-3 point guard who averaged 10 assists a game. The Knicks' leading assist man was the now-departed Chris Duhon, who had a mere 5.6 dimes per game. Stoudemire is downgrading by monumental amounts in terms of the skill around him, and now has no one to get the ball from. Hmmm...

Then there is the whole defensive debacle. Stoudemire plays none. Had he played even a little defense, he would have been on the floor when Ron Artest hit his game-winner in Game 5 of the Conference Finals, instead of on the bench. That's right, a proclaimed superstar player in a superstar moment in the team's biggest game of the season, and he's sitting on the bench because he is a defensive liability. New York gave up 106 points a game last year, good for third-worst in the league.

So let's recap: He's not improving their defense (though Lee is just as bad a defender as him, but at least he rebounds), and he's not really improving the offense. For those of you keeping score at home, Stoudemire and Lee are about the same offensively and defensively, and Lee rebounds much better. And I didn't even mention that Lee is a better free throw shooter (81% to Amar'e's 77%), and has a better assist-to-turnover ratio (1.6 compared to Stoudemire's 0.4). Oh, and he did all this without another offensive force or decent point guard. Amar'e had Nash to give him the ball all the time. Now there is no one who is even mediocre, let alone talented, to give him the basketball. How will he score? He's on pace to become just another overpaid player, and replacing David Lee in favor of him seems pretty stupid from a basketball standpoint. It's not as bad as some of the other overpaid players president James Dolan has allowed to come in (like Eddy Curry, Steve Francis, Stephon Marbury, Penny Hardaway, Malik Rose, Jalen Rose, Jerome Williams, and Renaldo Balkman, to name a few), but I foresee more criticism in the coming years as the Knicks do not return to their former glory of the early '70s, or even the semi-success of the Patrick Ewing Era. The team with a winning percentage of .378 since 2003 seems much more likely.

I just spent three paragraphs explaining why David Lee is a better fit for the Knicks than Amar'e. That being said, I can understand why the Knicks needed to sign him. LeBron has been the goal for over two years. That seems more and more like a mere fantasy now, though they are still in the running. Plan B was to get Stoudemire along with Joe Johnson. Well Johnson is no longer available either. That doesn't leave many superstars to go after. Reports say that they are in talks with Carlos Boozer, but that could be quite possibly the dumbest move ever. Having two power forwards, neither big enough to play center, both demanding the ball? That would be a horrible competition, worse than the Redskins signing Brian Westbrook, Larry Johnson, and Willie Parker at running back, worse than the Broncos having Kyle Orton, trading for Brady Quinn, and drafting Tim Tebow at quarterback. I cannot see any conceivable way as to how that would work out for the better in the long run. If they had a Nash or a Chris Paul running the point it would be different, but right now the best New York has is Eddie House, who is a role player at best. That would be detrimental.

It's desperation time in New York. They've been telling fans to suffer through these hard times, because there is a bright future. THE LeBron James is coming! Well the time has finally come, and it looks as though King James could be going elsewhere. If I were a Knick fan I would be irate after putting up with lackluster basketball, then not getting James. Stoudemire at least provides some star power, and next year they can go whole-hog after Carmelo Anthony. But that is only a temporary solution. Eventually results will be expected, and when they don't come, problems will arise that will remind Dolan of the Isiah Thomas ordeal. If this isn't the end of James Dolan, it could at least be the beginning of the end for general manager Donnie Walsh. Everything is riding on James' announcement Thursday night. For someone who thinks there's no chance he signs with New York, I say RIP to the next 5 years in the Big Apple. But by now fans have got to be used to it. And for those who are nostalgic, here you go. I hope you enjoy.

Showtime to Show Up

It's not exactly Russell vs. Chamberlain, and certainly not Magic vs. Bird. But for the twelfth time -- and second time in the past three seasons -- the Celtics and Lakers will meet in the NBA Finals. When comparing both teams to the 2008 versions, the major players are the same, but the attitudes have changed. The Lakers are the defending champions with one of the best player in the world in Kobe Bryant and Boston is an older, slower team at the tail end of the all-too-brief "Big Three" era. And because of this, I don't expect the same outcome that '08 brought us (Celtics in 6). No, I am picking Los Angeles to run away with the series in five games, and hang up banner number fifteen next season at the Staples Center.

Now, I may be picking LA to win the series, but the outcome will be in the hands of the C's. I really, really wanted to put Rasheed Wallace as the key to the series merely for my own amusement. I mean c'mon! The man threatened Tim Donaghy back in 2003. Just think about that for a second: Rasheed Wallace, the goon of all goons, almost could have saved the league years of embarrassment had he acted upon these threats. Lucky for Donaghy that Wallace is so lazy he makes Tim Thomas look like Charlie Hustle both on and off the court. So, no, Sheed isn't the X-factor to this series. Paul Pierce, Ray Allen, and superstar-in-the-making Rajon Rondo are, however, and ultimately their performance will decide how the series plays out. Bryant is an 8-time All-Defensive First Teamer, and it is likely that Phil Jackson will let him decide who he guards. He has the ability to guard any of those three players. Unfortunately for the Zen Master, he can only guard one person at a time. This is where things could potentially become problematic for LA. Rondo is no longer the semi-underachieving, second-tiered player. This is his team now, and he is the 2nd or 3rd best point guard in the league. He's been on a tear this postseason, and I expect him to continue that this series. If he doesn't, the Celtics stand no chance. Just look at the Magic series. In Game 4, Pierce and Allen combined for 54 points, while Rondo chipped in only 9 of his own. Orlando won by four in overtime. In Game 3, however, Pierce had 28, Rondo had 25, and Allen had just 4 points on 1-for-9 shooting. The end result was a three-point Boston win. Rondo needs to bring his best, because it gives the Celts their best shot at victory. Meanwhile Pierce and Allen have to step up. They may not be the stars on most nights anymore, but their performance and winning go hand-in-hand. Here are the three possible scenarios I've narrowed it down to for Boston:

• Rondo plays well, as do Pierce and/or Allen. Kobe can only guard one of them, which leaves the question of: Do you give Walter Ray wide-open threes, leave Pierce room to create shots, or have Rondo drive to the hoop to dish it off or put up that masterful up-and-under scoop shot? It's a pick-your-poison scenario, and it gives the Celtics their best shot at winning.
• Rondo doesn't play well, but Pierce and/or Allen do, or vice versa. Either way the Celtics can't overcome the one-dimensional offense, and Kobe will be too much to handle.
• None of the three play well, and the Lakers pile-drive Boston into the ground.

3 games ago, I would have chosen the former. But after seeing the re-emergence of the old, slow Celtics team that played for most of the season in Games 4 and 5 of the Magic series, now the middle or last choice seems more logical. Because of the nursing-home appearance, I'm not too optimistic on Boston's chances. (Notice the absence of Kevin Garnett here. I think KG will not do too much offensively).

A big reason for my pessimism is because the Lakers have Kobe, who can single-handedly shut down one of the three offensively. That would mean that Doc Rivers might actually have to coach (Gasp!). And let's be serious: is there a sane Celtics fan that wants a game, and potentially the series, to come down to a Glenn Anton Rivers coaching decision? Kobe's defensive prowess could be the factor. But of course, #24 hasn't always been a team-first player (which is why he will take 30 shots a game on random nights to show off his greatness, even though Pau Gasol has a clear mismatch in the post), and he knows the personal rewards that could come from winning this series. Over the course of his career he has gone from the "Can't-win-without-Shaq" level, graduated last year to the "Don't-doubt-my-greatness" phase, and with another title could see the beginning stages of a "Kobe vs. Jordan" comparison. Personally, I don't think anyone now, and quite possibly ever, will deserve to be considered in the same breath as His Airness, because no one had his combination of skill, competitive drive, and leadership, period. But with a fifth ring, and second in the post-Shaq era, Bryant would have to seriously be considered one of the ten or fifteen greatest players of all-time. And Kobe knows this, too. His ego is big enough that he can put the entire team on his back and win merely for the sake of his own legacy, even if Gasol or Lamar Odom struggle. With 1200 regular season and playoff games under his belt, with nagging back, ankle, and finger injuries to boot, Kobe knows there won't be five or six more tries for rings. This probably won't be his last trip to the Finals, but the opportunities are becoming fewer, and for someone who wants to go down as one of the greatest ever to lace up the sneakers, he will want, he will need, another title. Anyone who has seen his performance this postseason, especially in the Suns series, knows he is playing with a chip on his shoulder. Offensively he is as good as ever. And say what you want about Boston's stingy defense, but look objectively at their playoff opponents thus far. They shut down Miami as a team, but Dwyane Wade averaged 32 points per game. Quite frankly, the rest of the Heat suck, and if the Celtics gave up a lot of points to the rest of the team, it would be bad. Then in Round 2 they took on another one-man show in LeBron James and the Cavs. The Magic have Dwight Howard, who is no offensive force by any stretch of the imagination, and no one else decided to give a damn on offense for Orlando. Kobe is as good as Flash and LBJ, and unlike them he has a supporting cast. The Boston defense is good, but is it good enough to stop Kobe and Gasol and Odom and maybe Derek Fisher? They could be. But they could also finally have met their match.

Expect another classic battle between the NBA's fiercest rivals. But for those who have enjoyed the Celtics' success against the Lakers (9-2 series lead all-time), they might be a little disappointed in a few weeks, as it will be Los Angeles who should come out on top this time and repeat as champions. The Black Mamba simply won't have it any other way.

Could the King De-Throne Cleveland?

Another day, another season, another early exit for the Cleveland Cavaliers? While I am certainly enjoying the Cavs being on the verge of elimination yet again (quite thoroughly mind you), I am also a little saddened by what could possibly happen should Boston pull out a win in Game 6 or 7. Come July 1, the most talented -- and hyped -- free agency class ever gets to set sail and roam freely in the NBA waters. King James leads this class, and ever since 2008 teams have been licking their chops waiting to get their hands on him any way possible, even if it means throwing away a few games here or there (see: Knicks, New York). I never really thought LeBron would actually leave Cleveland, considering he grew up in Ohio, is adored beyond belief, wants a championship for the city, all while receiving a maximum contract. However, now I'm not so sure. Looking at the cast around him, there is no reason to believe that the Cavs will be any better next year. If the Celtics advance, I think it will be the last time LeBron James will don the maroon and gold.

Watch the highlights from Game 5 on Monday night. There were times where James was nowhere to be found. For a team with Mo Williams, Antawn Jamison, 38-year-old Shaq, and Anderson Varejao, that equates to bad things. There was one sequence where a Cavalier drove as LeBron stood in the far corner, a non-factor in the play. After not charging in for an offensive rebound, he lackadaisically jogged back on defense, didn't know who he was guarding (he asked to guard Rajon Rondo before the game, but didn't here), and stood there as a shot was missed. He started to jog back in anticipation of a teammate getting the rebound, although the ball was right where he was standing, which allowed the C's to grab the ball and swing it to Ray Allen for an open 3-pointer. It was like that for 48 minutes. There was no ferocity, no will to drive to the hoop, nothing. His shot selection was poor, the form was lazy, and he just looked dazed. His first field goal didn't come until the 3rd quarter. In retrospect, how this performance could affect the league is mind-blowing. Now there's a good chance he'll leave Cleveland for a max contract somewhere else. The entire landscape of the league just changed, and it could have happened in one night, because I honestly do not believe he would have left before Monday night. I can't say I would blame him for leaving, but I don't want it to happen (more on that later). But a good question to ask is, was that performance essentially writing his own ticket out of Cleveland?I mean, he has been THE guy since he was drafted 1st overall in 2003. He has had no Pippen to his Jordan in his seven years there -- not even a Derek Fisher to his Kobe, for that matter. Except for that two-game stretch in the 2007 Eastern Conference Finals when Daniel Gibson played out of his mind, it has been all LeBron all the time. Shaq was supposed to be the force down low to replace Zydranas Ilgauskas, give it his all for another season and go out on top, winning one for the King. He missed almost 30 games, averaged 12 points during the season, and is grabbing only 5.7 rebounds a game this postseason. Then Antawn Jamison was supposed to be the guy to catapult the Cavs into the Finals, a sweet-shooting #2 scorer. But he has disappointed, too, being streaky at best and shooting only 29% from long range in the playoffs. Having to play an entire regular season, then get all hyped up for another 20+ games for the playoffs does get tiring.

(Ok, that was my rational argument. Truly, I think his performance Monday was unacceptable for a player of his caliber. He rested at the end of the regular season just for this, and probably could have more efficiently expended his energy to be fresh for now considering they clinched their division on March 17. Does Kobe ever take a night off like that? Sure, he has nights where he'll jack up 30 shots because he can, but he doesn't take games off in crunch time. Jordan would never in a hundred million years have done that in the playoffs. If he had lost a playoff series like James did last year to the Magic, he would have averaged 45 a night the next playoffs without a doubt. Dwyane Wade has had to go 100% every game for the past 4 years because, like LeBron, he is the only one on his team with any talent. After a grueling, non-stop regular season in which he had to fight every game, what did Wade do in Round 1? He single-handedly kept the Celtics from winning all 4 games by 35 points by averaging 33.2 points per game. That drive is partly the reason Flash has a ring, Kobe has 4, and Jordan has 6. The best player on the planet needs to go into that game with the mindset of "I'm taking over this game from the opening tip" and rip their hearts out. The other reason the players I mentioned all have rings, by the way, is the fact that all them had at least one other person who could either play or at least had the drive to show up when it mattered.)

But, like I said before, while I am enjoying this more than A-Rod when he looks at himself in the mirror, I am still a little saddened by what is likely to now happen. If the Akron Hammer leaves Cleveland, that means there is a very real chance he will sign with a team with enough money to get a Joe Johnson, Chris Bosh or Amar'e Stoudamire, too. That means a real possibility of LeBron James winning an NBA Championship. To me that would be nearly as bad as when A-Rod won a World Series last year, and the only reason that was worse was because it was with the Yankees. I want James to stay in Cleveland, keep playing with a bunch of nobodies and one or two "it" guys who never come through, continue to do his thing, all without ever winning a ring. I'm not sure why exactly I hate him, but I'm not too concerned with finding the root of the issue. I am perfectly content with my deep, passionate hatred for him, and will be as he continues his climb up the ladder of NBA greatness without the hardware all the others have.

It's bad enough Wade is probably going to leave Miami for somewhere else this summer. Can I at least get LeBron James to stay in Cleveland. I don't ask for much (in my mind I don't, at least). It would please me greatly if I had the honor -- no, no, the privilege -- of witnessing another few historic performances like the one King James gave on Monday. In terms of basketball, nothing would please me more.

You Can't Fix Stupid

College football is wacky, wild, and unpredictable. Unfortunately, so is the NCAA. In fact, the NCAA might be among the dumbest organizations in sports. Remember, this is the same group that brought you the BCS a dozen years ago, and look at how well that's worked out! But because there isn't enough stupidity already, they had to go and add to it by making rule changes that included taking back touchdowns for taunting. So for all those who love to high-step into the endzone in the Madden or NCAA Football video game series, you probably won't like this. This is not referring to endzone celebrations. That will remain a dead-ball foul, a penalty assessed on the following kick-off. No, this is a spot foul. Starting in 2011, if a player taunts his opponent before the goal line, a flag will be thrown, the TD is taken away, and it is 15-yards from the spot of the foul. Are you kidding me? These players make the NCAA and the schools millions upon millions of dollars each year, and never see a penny of it. They are 18 to 22 year old kids. Let them have some fun! What's the harm in it? Are they making the game look bad? It's not like it happens every game to the point where it is out of control.

This got me thinking. Where else in sports are there rules and regulations that drive me crazy? I found 8:

The NBA timeout rule: In the last 2 minutes of the 4th quarter and overtime, when a team calls a timeout they can either 1) inbound the ball from the dead-ball spot or 2) inbound the ball from the 28' mark in the frontcourt. So basically if a team gives up a basket with a second to go, no magical Grant Hill to Christian Laettner prayers will be needed. Simply call a timeout, get the ball outside the 3-point arc, and get a good look. The fact that it takes 25 minutes to play out the last 70 seconds aside, I hate that there is seemingly no punishment for playing crappy defense. If a defensive stand goes for naught, the Kobes, LeBrons, or D-Wades of the league still have a legitimate shot to win. If a team can muster a basket in a key situation, make their opponent go all 94-feet please.

Shootouts: They say a tie is like kissing your sister. Not having a sister myself, I have never experienced such a thing (and for those of you who do, I hope you haven't either... that would be quite creepy). However, in a case of the NHL's shootouts, I would take a tie over the current format. With ties, both teams would receive 1 point. With shootouts, the winners get 2 points and the losers 1. I would like it better if the losers received no points. Maybe that would change my mind a little. But probably not. All I can say is thank goodness they don't do it in the playoffs. Ruining the best postseason in sports would be more than I could take.

Women's Hockey: That's right, an entire sport is one big, idiotic rule. No hitting is allowed. No hitting in hockey? I texted my buddy Zack, who hates hockey with pretty much all his heart, and when I asked him why he would watch, he merely said, "Fights". The physicality is why most people watch hockey. While I am a fan for other reasons, like how awesome it is, the vast majority in America want violence. Taking away hitting would be like taking away bumping in NASCAR or collisions at the plate in baseball -- they happen.

NFL Pre-Season Games: The stars won't play more than a series or two, yet season-ticket holders are forced to go. Basically people are paying half of their salary to watch perennial backups like Kevin O'Connell, Dan Orlovsky, and, in 4 years, Tim Tebow. Call me crazy, but people don't care about them. (What's that? I actually love Dan Orlovsky and would pay good money to see him play? Whoops.) The only reason there are 4 games is because of the revenue that comes in from them. Because the billions they get already isn't enough. Change it to 2 games and get over it.

All-Star Games: I love the idea of having the best players from each sport play in the same game, but the execution in every league is pathetic. In the MLB it decides who gets home-field advantage in the World Series. How about you alternate it each year? Or have the team with the better record have it? The NFL is doubly bad. If it is the week after the Super Bowl, no one cares. If it is the week before the Super Bowl, players from the participating teams won't play, and, still, no one cares. That includes players. This past Pro Bowl Vince Young was the AFC quarterback because Phillip Rivers, Tom Brady, Matt Schaub, and Ben Roethlisberger didn't want to play and Peyton Manning was in the Super Bowl. At this rate JaMarcus Russell will become a perennial Pro Bowler. In the NBA no one tries, but at least there all of the stars play. The NHL doesn't even have an All-Star Game in Olympic years, but when it is played, it gets worse ratings than reruns of According to Jim and, so help me God, Everybody Loves Raymond. WOO!

BCS: No explanation necessary.

The Brady Rule: There is hitting in football. As a result, injuries occur. But because Bernard Pollard hit the golden boy Tom Brady and tore his ACL to open the 2008-09 season, the NFL instituted a rule where quarterbacks cannot be hit below the knee. As sad as it is that stars have this kind of power in the NFL, it's more upsetting that it has essentially become two-hand touch when it comes to QBs. You are asking defensive lineman to find ways to get around 350-lb monsters, locate the quarterback, read his eyes, but slow down to make sure he isn't hit below the knee. All lineman have to do is get their defenders to the ground. Reggie White probably vomited in his grave. Steelers' safety Troy Polamalu was right, the NFL is becoming soft.

The NBA age limit: There is no point in making an 18-year-old go to college for a year before he enters the NBA Draft. None. Be serious here. The kid doesn't care about classes. He misses class during the season, and once the season ends, there is no point in him showing up. The school isn't going to make him do the work during the season because that's the world of college basketball today. He isn't there for the education, and everyone knows it. The schools get horrid graduation rates and are wasting money. The NBA loses potential superstars for a year, and we all know money is the only thing that matters to the league. Either let the kids enter the Association right out of high school or make them attend college for at least 3 years. Don't be in-between, because no one benefits from it. It isn't helping the kid, it isn't helping the schools, it isn't helping the NBA.

None of these are the athletes faults. There is really not much they can do about it. People are stubborn. Stupid people are even more stubborn. It's why you simply can't fix stupid. But I can complain about it, that's for sure.

Coming February 14th: The NBA All-Used-to-be-All-Stars Game!

Sorry for the delay. Work/life/exams got in the way this weekend (Derivatives, functions, and tangent lines better be key parts of broadcasting sporting events, otherwise my calculus exam will pretty much go to waste in the future...). Since last Monday lots has happened in the sports world. The Jets shocked everyone by beating the Chargers in San Diego to advance to their first AFC Championship Game since 1998. Nate Kaeding better be receiving a cut of the players' bonuses should New York make it to the Super Bowl. In tennis the Australian Open began in Melbourne. I know all of you anxiously wait all day for the tape-delayed reruns on ESPN. And in the NBA, LeBron James announced he won't participate in this year's Slam Dunk Contest, reneging on his promise last year that he would give it a go. But this week I'm concentrating on an interesting quote said by Celtics guard Ray Allen on fans getting all the say in who participates in the All-Star Game:

I like the fact that the fans get the opportunity to vote and pick who they'd like to see in the All-Star Game, but I don't think it should be 100 percent," said Allen.

The way he suggested to do it was have fans account for 50% of the votes, and players and the media each have 25% of the vote. This comes in light of the results released by the NBA which, to put it lightly, are not a reflection of this season. Yeah, some obvious names top the list, and deservedly so. Kobe, D-Wade, Melo, and LeBron are the top four vote-getters, which makes sense since they are the league's four best players. But some other names ridiculous, especially Allen Iverson and Tracy McGrady. AI is actually starting for the Eastern Conference, even after playing in only 18 games, averaging 14.7 points for the 76ers. McGrady received over 1,000,000 votes, yet has played in 6 games this year, averaging a whopping 3 points, and is now refusing to play for the Rockets because of a lack of playing time. Iverson.I wholeheartedly agree with Allen: it's time to stop leaving All-Star voting entirely in the hands of fans in all sports, not just basketball. The All-Star Game is supposed to highlight all of the best players in the league. T-Mac and AI are by no means among the league's top players anymore, and to have them nearly be starting is ludicrous. But this issue goes far beyond the NBA. In every sport the All-Star Game is a popularity contest where the most recognizable names get in, not the best players. In the MLB last year Manny Ramirez was suspended just 29 games into the season for trying really, really hard to get pregnant testing positive for hCG, a women's fertility drug. Even with the suspension, though, he came awfully close to starting in the All-Star Game in St. Louis. On May 27th he was the 4th in votes in terms of outfielders, and he ended up 7th when voting ended on July 2nd. He finished ahead of Andre Ethier, the most clutch player in the majors last year with 6 walk-off hits, and Jayson Werth of the Phillies, who had a career year with 36 homers, 99 RBIs and 98 runs scored, to name a few. Clearly leaving this power in the hands of the fans is a mistake. If the powers that be were to give the media and players some say, those deserving of an All-Star nod would be the ones participating. Iverson (with 163,976 votes through Dec. 10th) would not have more votes than the Celtics' Rajon Rondo (113,371 votes), who is more important to his team than anyone else in the league. The Knicks David Lee, the most consistent 20-point-15-rebound-a-night guy in the league, would be second among centers in the Eastern Conference, not even coming close to getting the nod.

I realize that the leagues are a business, and the players are the products they are selling. If the fans want to see certain players, the league will more than oblige to it. But it's not fair to the players who don't trash talk or scored 50 points a night four years ago before injuries and an ego got in the way, yet are far more deserving than the McGradys and Iversons of the world. I know I would much rather want to watch Rondo and Lee play basketball the right way than McGrady and Iverson throw up fadeaway jumpers and not play defense. Baseball games are long enough. Basketball games are long enough. If I'm going to watch a meaningless, long-winded All-Star Game, at least give me the best players, instead of the most popular.

Everything 2000s Part I

As the 2000s wind down and we enter a new decade, every sports outlet imaginable has made and debated over all-decade teams. Silly? Yes. Do I love every minute of it? Of course! Therefore, I'll take it one step further, and create an all-decade team for the NBA, NHL, and women's college basketball. (Men's college bball is left out because the best players left early for the NBA, and there's no college football because it was way too ridiculously difficult to choose between so many different positions with so many good players, and with unlimited factors) The NFL and MLB all-decade teams will come in a few days. I'll also name the team of the decade for each sport. Just remember, all the stats are from the '00s only. Some choices are obvious, others, maybe not so much. But nonetheless here they are! Part one of my all-decade teams:

NBA (yes, it is the same as Sports Illustrated's all-decade team. I realized this after I made the list): PG - Steve Nash (Dallas, Phoenix): The man one two MVP awards, probably should have won a third, was named to 6 All-NBA teams (3x first team, 1x second team, 2x third team), and was a 6-time All-Star. Led the league in assists from 2005-07. He has that X-factor that won't show up in the box score and can't be taught. Other considerations: Jason Kidd, Tony Parker, Chauncey Billups

SG - Kobe Bryant (Los Angeles Lakers): Flat out the greatest player in the NBA this decade, and one of the best ever. Period. He won 4 titles, including last year, and has averaged 28.6 points per game this decade. Was an All-Star every season, named MVP in 2008, made 7 All-NBA and All-Defensive first teams, and won back to back scoring titles in 2006 and 2007. Also won a gold medal on the Redeem Team. The most obvious choice on this list. Other considerations: Allen Iverson, Dwyane Wade

SF - LeBron James (Cleveland Cavaliers): Being the #1 overall pick in the 2003 Draft, he didn't even play the first three years of the decade. Still, he was another obvious choice. Arguably the greatest combination of pure speed, strength, and athleticism ever, King James already has an MVP (2008), 5 All-Star selections, 3 All-NBA first teams, and a gold medal to his name. He has also vastly improved his defense, and is now one of the best defenders in the game. When he's on, he simply is not possible to stop. Oh, and he turns 25 on the 30th, so expect him to show up on this list next decade. Other considerations: Paul Pierce, Carmelo Anthony

PF - Tim Duncan (San Antonio): Duncan did not put up record-breaking numbers. But 2 MVP awards, 3 titles, and 2 Finals MVP awards in the 2000s, plus being an All-NBA/All-Defensive first or second teamer every year is enough to get him on the list. Like Nash, he has natural leadership that can't be taught. Put it this way... without Duncan, the Spurs aren't very good. Other considerations: Kevin Garnett

C - Shaquille O'Neal (LA Lakers, Miami, Phoenix): From 2000-2006, there was absolutely no doubt that Shaq was the most dominant center since the days of Chamberlain and Russell. Think about it: of 18,991 career shots, 18,969 have been inside the 3-point arc (99.9983%). He has missed over 5000 free throws. Yet he is still 5th on the all-time scoring list. That is how dominant The Big Aristotle was in his heyday. Over the last few years, time and injuries have slowed down his Hall of Fame career, but 4 titles, 3 Finals MVPs, an MVP award, and countless other honors puts him among the greatest ever. Other considerations: Dwight Howard

Team of the Decade: Los Angeles Lakers - They won back-to-back-to-back titles from '00-'02, added another last year, and appeared in one other Final, in which they lost to Boston. Finished first in the Western Conference five times, and never finished below fourth. No contest here.


NHL: G - Martin Brodeur (New Jersey): The all-time leader in wins, shutouts, most 40-win seasons, and virtually every other major record, this one is a no brainer. No one has been nearly as consistent or dependable as Brodeur. He won 4 Vezina Trophies for best goaltender, 2 Stanley Cups, and a gold medal. His performance in the 2003 playoffs, where he recorded 7 shutouts, 3 in the Finals, was the greatest postseason performance ever by a goaltender. Other considerations: Miikka Kiprusoff, J.S. Giguere, Evgeni Nabakov

D - Nicklas Lidstrom (Detroit): One of the best defenseman ever. Won 6 Norris Trophies for best all-around defensive player, 2 Stanley Cups, and was named to 8 All-Star Games, and was on 7 All-NHL first teams. Was the Conn Smythe Trophy recipient in 2002 as playoff MVP. He was named "Player of the Decade" by the Sporting News, and is widely considered one of the greatest European-born players in history.

D - Chris Pronger (St. Louis, Edmonton, Anaheim): At 6'6", Pronger is big and powerful. Combined with the ability to score, it makes Pronger a force to be reckoned with. In 2000 he won the Hart Trophy for league MVP, the first defenseman since Bobby Orr to win the award. He has never won a Norris Trophy, but that's largely because of Lidstrom's dominance. Led the Ducks to a Stanley Cup in 2007. A sure fire Hall of Famer. Other considerations: Scott Neidermeyer, Ed Jovanowski

F - Peter Forsberg (Colorado, Philadelphia, Nashville): My, oh, my what could have been. Riddled by injuries throughout his career, Forsberg was the best player on the ice. The only problem is, he couldn't stay on the ice. Still, the impact he had when he played cannot be ignored. He never scored more than 30 goals in a season in the '00s, but his point production was through the roof. In every season, he averaged more than a point per game. Had it not been for his aggressive style of play, we can only wonder just how much better he could have been. Other considerations: Ilya Kovalchuk, Jarome Iginla, Jaromir Jagr

F - Alexander Ovechkin (Washington)/Sidney Crosby (Pittsburgh): It's simply not possible to mention one without the other. Sid the Kid is the golden boy who is going to save hockey. Alexander the Great scores the highlight-reel goals that drive fans wild. The impact each player has had on the game post-lockout is similar to what Magic Johnson and Larry Bird did to save the NBA. Crosby was the youngest player ever to lead the league in points and win MVP in any North American sport, and is the youngest captain ever. Ovechkin has won the Rocket Richard, Art Ross, Hart, and Lester B. Pearson Trophies, all in his first 4 seasons. They will be the face of the league for years to come.

C - Joe Sakic (Colorado): The consummate teammate and captain. Could score, play defense, and was the leader of all leaders. He is 8th on the all-time scoring list, and at 37 became the 2nd-oldest player ever to record 100 points in a season. And in one of the classiest moves a player can do, after winning the 2001 Stanley Cup, Sakic's 2nd title, he accepted Lord Stanley's Cup from commissioner Gary Bettman. But instead of traditionally skating around with the Cup first, he immediately gave it to teammate Ray Bourque, who for 21 years was the NHL's best player to never win a title. He's on this list not only because of his stats. His leadership is his best quality. Other considerations: Joe Thornton

Team of the decade: Detroit Red Wings - It only seems fitting that HockeyTown is the home of the team of the decade. They won 2 Stanley Cups (2002, 2008), lost in the Finals in 2009 to Pittsburgh, and simply dominated the Western Conference. They won their division every season, led the league in wins 3 times, and total points 4 times. There's no question that the train going towards a championship runs through Detroit.


Women's College Basketball: PG - Sue Bird (UConn 1998-2002): All-time great Nancy Lieberman once said that no one meant more to their team than Sue Bird. At UConn, Bird led the greatest senior class in women's basketball history to a perfect 39-0 season and a national championship in 2002 and was named Player of the Year. She also won a title in 2000 with the Huskies, was a 3x winner of the Nancy Lieberman Award for best point guard, was the 2002 Sportswoman of the Year, and is 2nd in UConn history in assists. Finished her college career with a 144-4 record. Other considerations: Kara Lawson, Renee Montgomery

SG - Kristi Toliver (Maryland 2005-2009): Toliver started 128 of the 139 games she played in as a Terrapin. Her freshman year she burst onto the scene after hitting the game-tying 3-pointer in the NCAA Title Game against Duke. The Terps would go onto win in overtime to win the school's first ever title. She was a 2x AP All-American, Player of the Year finalist three times, and a Nancy Lieberman Award finalist three times, winning the award in 2008.

G/F - Diana Taurasi (UConn 2000-2004): Simply put, UConn had Diana, and you didn't. A two-time Player of the Year, Taurasi is one of the greatest in the game's history. Geno Auriemma said she plays like a guy, bringing an attitude and intensity that couldn't be matched. She won 3-straight NCAA titles to end her career, helped the Huskies win 70 consecutive games from '02-'04, and won 139 games in her career, compared to just 8 losses. D has done more for the women's game than perhaps anyone else, and it all started in Storrs.

F - Candace Parker (Tennessee 2005-2008): In only three years, Parker was one of the most dominant forwards ever. With the ability to dunk and hit the 3, she was stronger than guards and faster than forwards. Helped win the Lady Vols win back-to-back national titles in '07 and '08, and was Player of the Year twice. Among all the greats that came from Knoxville, Parker is second only to Chamique Holdsclaw.

F - Seimone Augustus (LSU 2002-2006): The only person on the list who didn't cut down the nets in April, Augustus was still one of the more dominant forwards of the decade. Consensus Player of the Year in '05 and '06, she led LSU to three consecutive Final Fours (they would go on to two more after she graduated), but never made it to the title game. A career average of 19.6 ppg, Augustus could beat you by aggression or finesse. LSU athletic director Skip Bertman called her, "the most important recruit in the history of LSU." Good enough for me.

Other considerations: Courtney Paris, Tina Charles, Ruth Riley

Team of the decade: Connecticut - 5 national titles ('00, '02-'04, '09). Two perfect seasons ('02 and '09). Four National Players of the Year (Bird, Taurasi x2, Maya Moore). Two other Final Four appearances. A record 70-game winning streak from 2002-2004, which which is being threatened with a 50+ game winning streak by - of course - the current Huskies. Challenging Tennessee as the most storied program in the women's game, here's how successful the decade was for Coach Auriemma and Co. After not winning a championship in 4 seasons, and a 3-year absence from the Final Four, the Husky faithful complained. Should we refer to '05-'08 as the Dark Ages of UConn basketball then?