benhillboy

Not pretty, but an excellent win nonetheless. This is, by conference standards, the best team in the league, and we dominated them while making a few boneheaded plays in between in the second half, and that is extremely impressive. Mario is a timebomb that should be detonated more often. He is extremely hard to box out, and many teams lazily don't even try, making their effort look embarrassing. As far as defense, he's that specialist reliever who is wild, but throws 101mph and strikes out the side. Our defense and physical play seemed to deplete the Lakers' energy. Joe is clearly aided by live bodies keeping the team fresh, so Woody would be wise to maintain healthy run for Rio and Solomon. Al seems to be tentative when he has good looks inside. He's gonna have to learn to trade those touch, baby jumpers for an extra dribble and stronger, higher percentage attempts. Gameball to Zaza. Flipperachi represented as usual, and seemed to draw a little more attention than expected from Kobe on both ends. It seemed like a Philly thing, and Flip got bragging rights, although Kobe had looks yet shot as poorly as I've seen. Mo has killed his former teams twice this year. Josh preyed upon Odom. For every ten minutes he plays, we need a three from Bibby. Many times, we go as his three goes. Most importantly, they looked like they had a ball holding the Lakers to a season low. The Lakers have to answer questions about their toughness after this one thanks to our exposure. Let's go Hawks.

Nique as an assistant doesn't sound bad at all. Woody is O.K., but the best teams in the league have assistants as good as the head to bounce ideas and diversify things, mainly offensive options.

Quote from Diesel: Now let's talk Sf shop... Paul Pierce. Lebron James Shawn Marion Danny Granger Caron Butler Rashard Lewis Rudy Gay Carmello Anthony Vince Artest GForce Gerald Wallace Durant Josh Howard Maggette Deng Jefferson Moon Dunleavy Jr. Charlie V. Thad Young Al Thornton Tayshun Prince Grant Hill Jeff Green Damn. I usually compare Joe to many of these similarly sized players to illustrate his dreadful lack of power, explosiveness, and aggressiveness at the rack. When comparing Marvin, though, you clearly see that Marvin may have a better career than Moon or Dunleavy. The rest of these guys are pretty much leaps and bounds over Marvin now. If not, their past or future prime is far superior to his projected. Charlie, Thad, and Al give us fits at times to prove that point.

It is clear that the Lakers, Celtics, Spurs, Magic, and Cavs are better than us. I can live with that. But I can't understand how the Wiz, Cats, Minny, OKC, Oaktown, Knickerbockers, Sac, and the other L.A. team can all defeat these same squads that we are 2-11 against (granted, the Celtics took a couple weeks off, but a loss is a loss.) With all of our favorable circumstances at times (depleted opposing lineup, nice home crowd, playing well at the time of meeting a great team), I simply can't fathom how we play nowhere near 48 minutes and edge out wins against great, but still beatable teams who we all match up okay with, except for maybe Dwights dominance down low.

Aside from a couple, quite impressive win streaks, did our most poignant singular win, against upper-crust squads, come on opening night, in Orlando? It seems ancient. I thought we were primed to battle them for the division to the wire, but the back-to-back thrashing nixed those hopes immediately, before the break. The Rockets and Nuggets, who round out the home-bound first rounders, are not great teams, like Orlando. As far as the big dogs, 1 other win against the LeBrons without their starting center, now we lose to two of them in the Phil, and they were only without their heart-and-soul H.O.F. anchors. The Portland win was nice, dominating New Orleans and Detroit the whole season was huge, but a bad loss to L.A. Sunday will be telling for this team. There's something going on, or lack thereof, in the locker room before games against measuring-stick teams. Our wins are defined by defending and pouring it on from 3 (created by balanced offense), the same hallmarks of the top-tier teams. Why does it fail, time after time against them, home or away? I know the teams are better coached, more experienced, led by beasts, etc. But we simply don't play our game when facing them, the same game that beats other teams who may be more experienced, better coached, led by beasts, etc. We should be around .500 against them, all things considered, rather than .153.

Just like the Spurs without H.O.F.er Duncan, its the Celtics and no Garnett. It's halftime, and Steph has basically sparked a run, leading to a 10 point lead while posting 10 points. Big Baby dominating? Most teams salivate at the oppurtunity to pressure House when he's controlling near halfcourt, while we casually let him bring it up, dump it off, run off a few screens, and recieve for arguably the hottest long ball stroke in the league. Josh and Joe seem like the only ones with any semblance of fire for this game. Are you serious? At this rate, we lose embarrassingly, and Suday's game is a repeat of last meeting with Kobe and them. This team seems primed for a considerable shake-up at the half, whether it be individual motivation/ tearing into a**es or line-up shift, although I don't know where it's coming from (what exactly do our assistants bring to the table?) Missing Acie seems key tonight, because Bibby is extremely ill-equipped to guard Rodo or Marbury straight up, or House off the ball. As a young squad, we CANNOT be embarrassed by the upper-echelon teams the ENTIRE SEASON!

Whoa, Libid! Testy! It's just a headband, man. Very unneccessary piece of equipment.

That guy on the sideline in a suit and cast shouldn't be spoken of on this blog. Let's keep the discussion to employees who've clocked in and contributed man-hours the past two fiscal years.

The more I see Josh, the more I simply don't care about his play, good or bad. After last season, I thought he was on the fast track to serious All-Star consideration, improved jump shooting, stronger focus, less pouting, more blocks, more boards, more scoring, more of everything good, less of everything bad. I definately didn't expect his free-throw shooting to freefall daily. I cared about nothing going on in sports that didn't pertain to the Hawks re-signing him, and woke up infuriated when no news was reported, and even more pissed when the Hawks dragged their feet and actually had to compete with the Grizz on financial and managerial matters. Now, I see Josh as the least important factor in wins or losses because he is so wildly inconsistent. Missing considerable time due to injury was the worst thing that could've happened to Josh, as he clearly didn't compensate in any way for missing time, thinking that he would return to last year's playoff form automatically. Teams are only afraid of his jumping ability as it pertains to rebounding and defending shots, not his positioning, boxing out, mastery of defensive assignments and strategy, timing on help, or plain defensive savvy. As soon as he bends his knees for a jumper, assistant coaches clap and rejoice at the transition oppurtunity. Four blocks, three steals? "Oh, the Thunder were just careless with the ball." A double-double? "It was against the Pacers." He hit a big, wide-open jumper in crunch-time? "He had a rabbit's foot under his jersey." A double-single? "One of Josh's patented 'struggling' nights, as Woody puts it." Five turnovers? "I'm surprised it wasn't more." Four-for-Ten at the line, and we lose a close one? "Sounds about right." Basically, I am almost numb to whatever he does. It is hard to root for a player who, at one end of the court, can make a play that no other soul in the world can make. A minute later, your face is in your hands because he has done something that should've been fixed in AAU. I attribute none of Josh's struggles to Woody, because a coach can do little to nothing to retard the growth of a player who get's starter's minutes. I'm sure most here would agree that he has waaay too much freedom, that probably regresses his game in a wierd, reverse sort of way. He has as much right to lead breaks and shoot threes as I do. I've learned to take my Josh in small doses, with a grain of salt. If he shows out with 20-12-5-4-4, it's a premium. If he bombs with 10-4-2-1-1, what else is new. I know he's still relatively young and has world-class athleticism, but do you all ever see him "Getting It?"

I agree that it was a very poor loss. Tony Parker will be remebered as an afterthought when discussing great point guards of his era or even discussing the San Antonio team itself. His Finals MVP award was against a skills-challenged team led by a child, albeit a royal child. To allow them to beat us, in Phillips, without arguably the centerpiece of their entire franchises' history is upsetting. Everyone knows that Parker is a mediocre jump shooter at best, at the same time, everyone knows that he is pound-for-pound the best finisher in the NBA. It shouldn't take a rocket scientist to realize how to combat his skills: get the ball out of his hands early in the clock, force him to think and coordinate the offense, and force unneccessary dribbling and his average jumper late in the clock. And if he happens to get to the hole, lay some damn wood! Regardless of any numbers (rings, points in the paint, FG%), Tony Parker is not a great point guard. Passing and defending skills are slightly above average, at best. With the front line that San Antonio ran last night, the Hawks (mainly Josh and Al, then Woody) should be ashamed of themselves. Popovich is exponentially better than Woody, but come on. Popovich knows our dominance at home and probably expected a loss without Duncan and Ginobili at 60%. At the end of the day though, the Hawks are who they should be: They pounce on similarly and lower-level competiton, while they simply do not have the versatility nor experience to find ways to defeat elite or historic squads/ players like Kobe, LeBron, the Spurs, Celtics, and Magic. This murderers row of opponents that we are in the midst of should only sharpen us, though. Can we please beat the Celtics once this year!?

I'm diggin' Sund. Why does everybody hate Diesel? Everyone here has respectable opinions and views, no matter how outlandish they may be in your eyes. Peoriabird needs a hug.

I didn't know Flip was a playground legend, but I can see it clearly. His hanging short-range jumper probably sent many a streetballer home mad. His edge and "No-one-on-your-team-can-check-me" approach is invaluable to the third/ fourth? youngest team in the league. I think as long as Joe is on this team, Flip is almost indespensible. An NBA team should not be without a guard who can finish STRONG (like dunking on Kirilenko, something Joe wouldn't dream of doing.) There was a play were he was isolated against Parker after he had been torching Al (why?), and it seemed as if Parker wanted no part of Flip's crab-stance and focus on the possession, as he gave the ball up to reset. I agree with Flip probably not thriving under a more focused coach as far as running sets and having a cohesive, balanced, and systematic offense, though, because he wasn't heard from in Detroit and clearly, he didn't mesh with LeBron, Mike Brown, or both. As a fan, there is no one on the squad I'd rather see consistently. While Josh can make a play that no one else in the league can make, he comes down 12 seconds later and makes a mistake that no player in the league should make, and while Al can be entertaining at times, I don't see him dropping 30 with ease, and style, like Ron AKA Flipperachi AKA Flipper AKA Flip-the-Switch. He has become a fan favorite, as in the few fans who do show up to the Phil. To the Spirit Moron Group: "Pay the man."

I never noticed Flip sweating profusely, but it is more than many. I am glad he lost the headband, though. Why you would want something squeezing, putting pressure on your head, and getting knocked into your eyes and face is beyond me when you can just wipe the sweat off. It seems that the condition is most visible on darker-skinned players. Patrick Ewing and K.G. set the standard for sweat.

If it takes our backcourt 15 minutes to heat up, we lose. If not, we win. Mo Williams cannot be left alone to spot up. Box out, Josh! I think we will miss Marvin the most this game, as he is one of ther few defenders in the league who has frustrated LeBron multiple games somewhat with size and lateral movement. Using fouls wisely (and hard) will be key, becaue LeBron's and-1's will kill you if he's hitting at the stripe. I'm sure we can lockdown the fourth quarter. Let's go Hawks.

They make it look so artistic with the black and white. Kobe's is a gem, too.

How did he not get a hip bruise on that fall against the Kings? I thought for sure he'd miss a couple. The guy is tough. It doesn't hurt when the ladies love you, too. It seems impossible to predict numbers for him for any time frame, whether it be a game or a season. I just know he's gonna play winning basketball every second the clock ticks.

I am getting tired of 'Nique with each passing game. Probably the least insightful, educational, and grammatically correct analyst you can find. Aside from Stinger's voice, I'd much rather have him calling the games, as Rathburn would probably agree. All things considered, I am indifferent towards Shareef. I wouldn't discuss him negatively nor positively.

Cleveland suffers their second home loss Saturday. Let's go, backcourt. (Did 'yall see LeBron stealing Joe's runner/ floater twice in the lane to secure a win? Beastly.) Now that's out the way, does anybody have any insight or interesting facts about our mute GM? The way this team is coming together reflects very favorably on his managerial skills, seeing that we've missed starters for a great chunk of the season, yet will most likely jump 4 spots in the playoffs with the addition of two bench players in an improved Conference (albeit very professional, veteran players.) All I know is he's very soft-spoken, nice, and he tends to take Flip wherever he goes. The guy built a Seattle squad that had an epic semi-final series against the Spurs a few years back with very limited talent around Ray Allen other than Rashard Lewis and Flip. GM's have always intrigued me because they are regarded many times as the most cerebral member of a professional franchise. Many are the direct opposite. They also control how much publicity they recieve, with some mentioned everyday in the sports news, and some go unheard of for years. Juxtaposed with the boy-genius Dimitroff and the widely-hated Wren, Sund is exceptionally hidden, quiet, and mysterious. What is his philosophy on building a team? He must have a candid, if not controversial view on his employers' court debacle. While 26 teams felt the need to make roster moves before the deadline, he didn't, shrewdly. What sold him on Woody? How does he like the "A"? How does he feel about the poor attendance for one of the most exciting teams in the league? Hopefully he'll come from under his rock, talk basketball and maybe a little more with a reputable, interesting, and insightful media source here (not the AJC.)

I wonder how much sleep Rick Sund is getting. I'm sure he is being bombarded by film, stats, and testimony on what to do with Marvin this summer. I'm sure Marvin is having odd feelings about his team rolling without him and how it factors into his free agency. In his defense, we were at full strength with him starting at the beginning of the season when we looked like title contenders, record-wise anyway. This was without Solo, Acie, and Rio getting considerable run. This isn't a science experiment where you can matter-of-factly say that we're better off without him or worse with him. What I do know is that Marvin is a good, not great player. Good players change teams about 4 or 5 times in a career, and usually, the franchise that showed him the door won't miss him much in hopes of improving their team.

I'm not one to rely on a small sample of numbers. Anyone who has seen most of the Hawks' home games, as I and surely most of the good folks here have, know that we are a juggernaunt at home on defense, feeding performance on the other side. Numbers don't account for Mario sprinting through the lane, causing havoc on both glasses without posting a board or block, or Al's patented, hard-step, double-team-show in the circle, or Acie fighting through screens, or Marvin's exceptional center of gravity when guarding the post, or Joe's imposing defensive stance, or Bibby's oppurtunistic, blind-side ball swipes/ pokes, or Mo's scrappiness on loose balls, Zaza's fearlessness on tipping battles, Flip's lateral quickness (when he wants to show it), Solomon's length challenging shots, etc, etc. These are the type of factors that lead to so many demoralizing :24 violations for opposing teams, many coming with momentum on our side. Josh is the only player whose numbers come close to illustrating his defensive effectiveness. I feel where you're coming from Diesel, but numbers only back up or illustrate facts, they don't define or set them in stone. With so many different variables in an NBA game (who's injured, who's not, who's guarding whom, etc), to take numbers and base your point or argument on them is basically to turn the game off and look at the box score to report. Those impressive performances are no different than our domination of Orlando on opening night. Numbers suggest that the Lakers are a tough, defensive juggernaunt. The Celtics would laugh at that assertion.

I'm elated we didn't take L.J. Smith. He is very average, at best. Not particularly tough, dependable, and has injury concerns. I'm also glad we had nothing to do with Haynesworth and Peppers. Same problems as the above player, not to mention both are wildly overpriced. Good pickup in Peterson, though. His reputation is solid around the league. After last season's decisions, whatever Dimitroff says or does, I'll co-sign. The players at tight end and corner that the Falcons are projected to be interested in (I know absolutely nothing about collegiate sports) looked good in the film clips. Now that the overpriced, overrated busts are taken or we have no need for their position, I'm confident Dimitroff and Smith will fill in the holes we have, although unlike most, I hold great promise for Fudge, Grimes, Jackson, and Houston, if not quite this upcoming season, definately 2010. With big-name recievers available left and right (Holt is the best of his era in my opinion, although he may be losing a little), does anyone think we'd take the slightest look at a veteran reciever, because I am not satisfied with Jenkins' mediocrity, Robinson's injuries, and Finneran's limitations.

I have nothing but praises for Joe after that one. His penetration opened the floor and he was draining tough and contested shots. He finished strong and boarded strong. Team D was sparkling throughout. All the jumpers Roy and Aldridge drained were of no consequence: the rest of their squad was in maximum jail. Josh seemed loose and "smoove" from the opening intros, and he played like it, even hitting his two jumpers that hung in the air for an eternity. Mario is a wild animal. Who knows the numbers on forcing :24 violations? I'm willing to bet we're in the top 3. Easily one of the best wins of the season . The Blazers have the best record against the East of any Western Conference squad, and we controlled or dominated throughout. I felt priviledged to watch that performance were we played solid fundamentally, rarely turned over (Acie has none in increased run), and turned in a fair share of "Top Plays" to get you off the couch. Lets go, Hawks.

'Ole Acie Law The Fourth! I admit, I usually laughed or threw a cursing fit whenever Acie appeared in games depending on the situation. I apologize, for he has shown flashes the past week. This was a guy who, a few months ago, couldn't operate off a screen correctly. Now it seems a light has been turned on, and he is showing signs of promise. There was a split-dribble that led to a foul against the Pacers that was beautiful. He's pressing the hole consistently. Fighting through screens and being an active defender. The accuracy, timing, and style-choice of his passes is impressive. He's also more judicious with his shot selection from the perimeter. I've never been concerned with the rift between he and coach, because we don't know what goes on behind the scenes. I rarely find the AJC's coverage of the Hawks interesting, anyway. I hope that Acie and Woody have put their differences aside, and both have the singular mindset to allow the development of his game to progress. Although I would never call us better off minus an active body, it isn't like we have to go 4 on 5. Marvin's injury seems to have opened up oppurtunity for everyone to log a few more minutes, and they are making the best of them, as NBA players' efficiency generally increases with extended run. I haven't checked the numbers, but as in the Pacers game, I believe Acie has been on the plus side for the most part during his increased action. We fortified a run after being down seven when he was inserted, and his energy was a large part. 5-7 points, a few boards, a few dimes, good man D (Lord knows Bib can barely move his feet), and his improved ball security could go a long way and be the difference in a game in the playoffs. Do yall think he's ready to play signifigant minutes when the intensity is revved up a few notchces?

Hollinger is a stat geek, and not much else. Although I found the power rankings and PER to be interesting and informative, never would I base my outlook of a player or team based on numbers, as he rarely can find a medium to discuss or come up with some equation to detail individual defensive stats, as if defense is some afterthought. I was through with the guy when he actually figured the Bucks to be the fifth most efficient/ powerful team in the league for a week a few months back. I understand he was just reporting the numbers, but come on. I couldn't take it and totally disregarded his basketball savvy, knowledge, or lack thereof from then on.

Although I was pretty young, I remember Jordan distinctly due to all the games that came on WGN, most of which Mike and Scottie were on the sideline in the fourth quarter gambling or something. But I wasn't exactly studying what he did, although I remember instances of him throwing a chest pass from half court with dead aim accuracy, leaning and beating on guys around the perimeter with as much if not more intensity than his offensive exploits (a habit that would be non-existent in today's game), absorbing and feeding off of the beatings he took through the lane, and basically always displaying a level of energy that no one could dream of equaling. His 18 footer in his later years was beyond automatic, and as much as Kobe experiments, he embarrasses himself when trying the turnaround fade-away that was also automatic for Mike. I am glad someone brought up Mike, though. I don't want to sound blasphemous, but I wonder if Mike's legacy is considerably overrated. Note: I would never discount the numbers Jordan posted with the Wizards. He fully expected to dominate no matter his age, and was embarrased when he couldn't. 38 min/ game .497 % shooter (.54 in 90-91) 6.2 boards a game (8 in 88-89) 5.3 assists per game (8 in 88-89) 2.35 steals per game (3.16 in 87-88) .8 blocks a game 30.1 points a game (37 in 86-87, damn) 2.73 TO a game (does that seem high?) 3 point and free throw numbers are average at .327 and .835, respectively (I would've sworn his free throw numbers were .875.) All of these numbers are VERY comparable to Kobe and LeBron now, and projecting what they will probably end up with. Of course, Jordan is a step above Kobe and a couple above LeBron in terms of forcing the ball into the basket at any and all costs. Shooting .497 for a career with the whole leagues' target on your back for most of it is nothing short of Godly. Kobe is and will retire a better 3 point and free throw shooter. I think both Kobe and Mike leave a little to be desired in terms of blocks and rebounding given their peak jumping ability (see Dwayne Wade.) One would also think that he averaged more than 5 assists a game. LeBron will definately trump Michael's assist and rebounding numbers. Wade is actually posting a season that is very comparable to Jordan's bests statistically, with the foundation of however many points are needed that night to win will be scored with 7+ assists and rebounds with 2 or 3 swats and steals. I know many of you are thinking that LeBron shouldn't be compared to Mike due to size and position, but face it, LeBron fits into any category while being arguably the most unique player of all time, allowing him to be compared to any and every 2 and 3. MVP and DPoY in the same year? Stupid. Played 82 games 8 times? Ridiculous. Scoring average will be tested, but never surpassed. The Flu game in the Finals was probably the most impressive sporting event that I've witnessed, considering I could barely talk the last time I had it. He looked half dead, yet willed his team to a win on the road against 2 Hall of Famers. I think Jerry West said his most impressive trait is routinely converting not crunch time jumpers, but lay-ups. Second in steals behind Stockton. The best player ever? Of course, for now. Look at the competition Mike played against, mainly at the 2. Not many guys to be mentioned in a historical sense of the NBA: Reggie, Mitch, Joe D, Clyde, Sidney Moncrief. Great players, but check Kobe's contemporaries: Vince, T-Mac (when his body worked), A.I., Ray Allen, Wade, Manu, Joe J. Collectively, an entire step above Mike's counterparts. Not to mention the outstanding 3's that Kobe guards and shuts down. Hopefully Kobe will be able to add many meaningful battles against Roy and Durant, who seems impossible to guard. On the flip side, and correct me if I'm wrong, but Mike salivated at swallowing 1's on the perimeter while Scottie locked up the best scorer on the team at 2 or 3. Forearms digging into sides and hips, constant slapping of the hands and arms when trying to steal, outright pushing, and just much more contact overall was allowed back then. Watching those NBATV games against the Celtics and Lakers in the late 80's look like a totally different game, with about 3 fouls occuring by today's standards on 1 sequence under the basket, and the referee is just looking like "Stop it with the love taps." Face it: Michael bullied guys defensively due to a contact-related officiating style or lack thereof that defined the late 80's and early-mid nineties in the East. I am considerably convinced that Michael would not show more defensive consistency that Kobe shows given the rules today and the type of players they guard. I also think that Kobe wanted to be a great defender earlier in his career than Mike, as evidenced by him being the youngest ever to be named to the All-Defensive First Squad. Secondly, although I don't really see the marketablility of his personality, "Air Jordan" was conceptualized, created, and milked for every penny, masterfully by Nike. It is impossible for someone to be as good as his commercial persona would suggest. The shoe phenomenon extended as far beyond the court as it could possibly go. The non-stop hoopla over his character, with the bald head, the toungue, the walk, the scowl, the rocket propulsion off the floor, was simply bigger than he was. Most outlets that cover his legacy place as much emphasis on his media machine than his actual basketball skill, and it causes almost everyone to overrate the man. Like I said, he is clearly the best ever and his numbers are etched in stone. But I feel that many Michael worshippers, in worshipping him, discount the type of teams he played on. True, at his peak in his first three championship years, there wasn't much after Scottie, with Horace Grant playing well above his head because Mike demanded it. B.J. should be mentioned. They seemingly breezed through the Finals against Magic, James, Clyde, Terry, Chuck, and Kevin at 12-5. Then came the Jordan years where he "lost a step, didn't glide as far or high, and most importantly, he's in his thirties." Enter Ron Harper (one of the most underrated 2-way players of his era) and Dennis Rodman, the rebounding freak, for Will Perdue. Throw in Tony Kucoc, who was basically an afterthought, Hedo Turkoglu-type player who could score 20 whenever asked. Scottie was good enough to lead his own team through those years. How can you possibly over-exalt a guy with that much firepower on a team with arguably the greatest coach of all time? Again, Michael was always the most beastly of beasts, but he was just 1 man on the GREATEST TEAM EVER WHO WON 72 GAMES. Again, 12-6 when disposing of Gary, Kemp, Detlef (the true German baller, sorry Dirk) Karl, and Stockton. He had more help than anyone has ever given credit for, and I just wanted to put that out there. Certainly, getting through the conference may have been tougher for both the Bulls and Lakers championship runs (the Nets, Pacers, and Sixers weren't worthy), but you get my point. Kobe's and Lebron's run to eminent future titles (If Timmy gives his blessings) will come on teams who pale in comparison to Mike's. Kobe had Shaq. That's a whole 'nother story that I won't get in to, but I'll just say that Shaq's dominance was not the result of great basketball skills nor otherwordly desire or competitiveness. One of the greatest athletes in the history of man in my opinion, but basketball player extrodanaire, nah. Rodman, Harper, and Pippen all had exceptional skills in one area (Rodman's rebounding) or many (Scottie and Harp's all around games on both ends.) People infuriate me when they say "You can't compare Kobe or LeBron or Wade to Jordan because he has six rings," as if he went 1 on 5. (Side note: Is Phil Jackson learning more about basketball and psycology, as if it were possible?) Man, I'm just rambling. I love basketball history. I think Bill Russell and Wilt, may he rest in peace, were hugely overrated given their numbers, film clips, and eras. Larry Bird and many of the great Celtics seem overrated, for obvious reasons, and some not so obvious. I just would like everyone to take it down a peg when exalting Mike as some God without flaw. 2.73 TO to 5.3 assists seems a bit poor ratio-wise for the "Best Ever." Never mastered the three-pointer, while Ray Allen seems to have invented it. 6 rebounds and 5 assists nightly seem common among today's All-Stars. And my biggest inquiry for those who may remember better or even have video library on Mike: Was his left hand dribble, finish, and pass weak? I seem to remember him guarding heavily against exposing his left hand or using it as much as many ambidexterous guards today. Also, many will tell you that palming a basketball at his size was simply not fair. Mike abused this ability in more ways than most people could even think of, mainly by holding the ball behind his back or above his head as he made his first, lightning-quick step, totally killing any hopes of the defender even seeing the rock, let alone defending it when he made his move. Precious nanoseconds and wasted motion was shaved off his one-handed passes and his arm motion radius of securing the ball in traffic without using his off hand to brace the ball are inquantifiable. Phil routinely points to this fact as a big difference between Kobe and Mike, not fire, will, or skill. If Kobe could palm, he could probably bump his average up 2-4 points because he wouldn't lose and fumble the ball on fouls and contact as much as he does, similar to LeBron's vice grip and total control of the ball after being hacksawed. Evidently though, it seems to even out because Kobe's smaller hands allow for a better free throw and three-point touch. Can Dwayne Wade palm a ball? It seems as if he can, but I'm not sure. Basically, with each passing game, week, month, year, Michael's legacy dims just a little bit, in my eyes anyway. Hell, there are kids walking around in Jordans who probably don't even know who the man is. I'm sure he's laughing all the way to the bank (how fly is the marble effect on the sole of the new J's?) I just wanted to get that off my chest and get the older heads to thinking about the things that aren't discussed when talking about the "Mighty Mike." I used to hate Dwayne Wade and thought that he'd be a better football player than basketball one. He is in the midst of a season extremely similar to Mike's earlier, most prolific one's with poor teams, except he has a ring already. All he needs to do now is sign with Nike and frown all game. Not saying that Michael couldn't frustrate Carmelo or LeBron on defense: I'm sure he could. But Kobe does, and loves to do so. I don't remember Jordan pestering The Mailman, Charles Barkley, Larry, or 'Nique for signifigant minutes or down the stretch. And as explosive as Michael was, you're kidding yourself if you think he's more explosive than LeBron, not to mention shooting a lower percentage, boarding, and dishing less on a nightly basis. That's enough. I'm gone. Jordan for Tree Rollins? Stop playin. Who was the GM? Doctor J also thought he would play for the Hawks, but the franchise muffed it. What luck we have.