The Fire Joe Morgan Treatment

For those of you who aren't familiar with it, the "Fire Joe Morgan" treatment involves taking a piece of writing and breaking it down, bit by bit, usually to show how stupid it is. An example can be found on the since defunct website here. I decided to do it because I've been reading about the Michael Jordan versus LeBron debate, and I thought I'd weigh in. Before diving straight for this TrueHoop post, I would also like to recommend these two articles on the whole thing: Ian Thomson's five things from last Friday and Dan Shaughnessy's take, which is more in line with my views. Check it out, the write back with your thoughts. Without further delay, here is my first (official) F.J.M. post (their comments in black, mine in red):

THE MICHAEL JORDAN VIEW OF LeBRON

Michael Jordan has weighed in on the LeBron James, Dwyane Wade and Chris Bosh "SuperFriends" team in Miami:

"There's no way, with hindsight, I would've ever called up Larry, called up Magic and said, 'Hey, look, let's get together and play on one team,' " Jordan said after playing in a celebrity golf tournament in Nevada. "But that's ... things are different. I can't say that's a bad thing. It's an opportunity these kids have today. In all honesty, I was trying to beat those guys."

We start the article with a simple quote from MJ, telling us what we already knew, which is that he would not have been willing to go play with Magic and Larry Legend because ... wait for it ... he wanted to beat them, not join them. I know this news flash is tremendous, that MJ was hyper competitive, but I'm sure that True Hoop has a good reason for writing an article with this seemingly obvious quote as a starting point.

In so many ways, Michael Jordan is the most appropriate person in the world to comment on LeBron James and his legacy, but not for the reasons you might expect.

I'm sure that you're going to tell us why Michael Jordan is the most appropriate person in the world to comment soon. I must say that I hate this literary device: hint at something, then don't answer it, but instead tap dance around it. Let's see how long it takes them to get to the point.

He is helping to solve one of the biggest mysteries in sports.

Holy Crap Batman, really? One of the biggest mysteries in sports? Let's see: is he helping us solve why the Cubs can't seem to win? No? Then it must be that he is helping us solve the mystery of if Lance Armstrong used P.E.D.'s to help recover from testicular cancer and vault to seven Tour de France titles! No? ... Is he helping us determine what's wrong with Tiger's swing, or if Federer is washed up, or if Jay Cutler is ready to run Mike Martz' offense? Seriously, no?

The question is: When James announced that he was taking his talents to South Beach, why did he instantly become the guy sports fans love to hate? What's so reprehensible about joining a good team?

That's the question? That's the big mystery? I think I already answered that in this post, and I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who came to that conclusion.

He's the man

Michael Jordan was, is, and will always be the man. Yes, in italics.

You don't need me to define that, but just for fun: It means essentially the most aggressive, victorious, macho, indomitable player in the sport. The most feared, and the most fearless.

This utter lack of restraint, in the face of any challenges, is no small part of how Jordan inspires us.

We are in agreement on this point: Jordan was the man, he feared no challenge, and he was the most feared person in the game. Just look at this picture of the Utah crowd as he took the final shot. He was bullet proof.

Hell no I don't need help.

It's a real and valid way to view the game. You have to respect the sheer number of players, former players, executives and coaches who see the game through this lens. The best player is the man. Basically, that's the guy who, of the few superstars who produce in huge numbers and win a lot of games, is most fearless and ferocious.

The list of players who were "the man" in NBA history is extensive: Jordan, Bird, Magic, Young Kareem, young Oscar Robertson, Bill Russell, Wilt Chamberlin, young Elgin Baylor, Jerry West, Kobe, Tim Duncan, John Stockton, and Hakeem Olajuwon to name a few.

This is often measured in terms of being willing to shoot with the game on the line.

Notice the key word here: often. In a moment our fearless writer will attempt to change "often" to "all the time" without telling us. I will agree with the fact that this is often measured in these terms, although it would be then measured incorrectly. Being "the man" simply means that you are the alpha dog on your team. Russell rarely shot the last shot, but nobody on those Celtics teams had any role confusion over who "the man" was. For that matter, neither did Wilt. The league knew it was Russell first, others after him.

When people heard that James was teaming up with Wade and Bosh, though ... wow. You know how men have this reputation as not being willing to pull over and ask for directions?

Hell no I don't need help.

Jordan, Barkley and others are making fun of James -- perhaps the most biting of all of Jordan's words was "kid" -- for getting help. If the whole idea is to show that you're the baddest man on the planet, what do we care about all these SuperFriends? (Similarly, Jordan said the other day that Bryant was the best player in the NBA. He's the most fearless, that's for sure.)

First, I don't sense that they are "making fun" of James, but rather that they are critiquing his move. Which is their right. I did it; they can do it as well. Quite honestly, Barkley and Jordan have more of a right to critique these guys than I do, and even more of a right than the sports writer who wrote this piece. They played the game, they know what it's like.

The problem with the critique is twofold. For one thing, he's not bad as the man. James shoots plenty with the game on the line, already produces like one of the two best players in NBA history (hitting at a better career rate than Bryant), wins a lot of games and even called himself leader of Team USA.

I start to see this article veering to the side here, so let's break it down:

1) James may not be "bad" as the man, but he has proven time and again to not be willing to take the game over himself. Michael passed to a number of teammates at the end of games, but if those teammates hadn't taken the shot or wanted the ball Jordan was not going to hide from it. LeBron has and will. Jordan was willing to let Bill Wennington win the game he scored 55 at Madison Square Garden, or Steve Kerr win the 5th title, or John Paxson the 3rd title, but he wasn't opposed to taking over. James is.

2) The argument that James "called himself leader of Team USA" is kindergarten style: who cares what he called himself? At the end we know Kobe took over and James just watched. In International competition that's fine, but using "he called himself leader of Team USA" carries as much weight as if I call myself leader of Team USA.

3) There is, and always will be, a huge difference between "producing" like one of the two best players in NBA history and being one of the best of all time. This isn't baseball where you can produce at astounding levels and be considered great. Wilt produced unlike anyone ever, and others had stat lines that were far superior to "the greats" but were held back by the fact that they only produced, they didn't win. Karl Malone had amazing stat lines for his entire career, but he fell short when it mattered, and faded in close games: that's why Stockton was "the man" in Utah.

But more importantly, how do we know James' end goal is to be the man?

We don't; in fact, we now know the opposite. James' goal is to win without having to be "the man." Also known as Karl Malone syndrome. It's not as bad as Wilt Chamberlin syndrome (where the player cares more about being "the man" than winning), but it's a heck of a lot worse than Russell-Magic-Larry-Michael syndrome. Also, I'm not quite sure which group Kobe fits in, but that's a post for another day.

It's a team game. Jordan and Bryant are self-reliant types who didn't come naturally to the idea that crunch time ought to be played as a team. Both have had to be coached into passing with the game on the line.

In fairness to Michael, did you SEE the players he was asked to pass to early on? What a craptastic combo! As for Kobe, that is a large part of why I'm not sure if he fits the MJ class, or is more in the Wilt class.

But that they think like that doesn't mean we all have to go along. In your personal life, do you find it true that real men don't pass the ball, or share, or have friends, or smile or all that? The Jordan/Bryant way was one way to do it, but it's hardly the only way to get the job done.

This isn't the real world; this is sports. Of course Michael Jordan's leadership model won't work in my professional or personal life, but then again I don't get paid to play a kids game. This is a silly argument.

When Jordan started passing -- to open teammates like Steve Kerr and John Paxson -- the Bulls started winning titles. Bill Russell owned basketball to the tune of 11 titles and he never thought it was his job to take the last shot. He was a different kind of "man," and won plenty.

Men who pull over and ask for directions may lose hombre points, but we all agree they waste less time driving around, right?

This misses the point: Jordan and Russell had control of their locker rooms equally. Jordan was a far superior offensive player to Russell, but if Bill Russell had thought his team's best chance to win was to score 50 he probably would have done it. He just looked at the talent surrounding him and said "we'll win if I do this." Jordan had no scoring talent around him, but a bunch of tough defenders and passers, along with some great spot up shooters. So he used that in the same way the Russell used Cooz and Tommy.

The man vs. the team

Sometimes you have to ask yourself what your end goal is: To win the individual sport of being the man, or the team sport of basketball? They usually go together. There's a reason Bryant and Jordan have all those championship rings.

I feel obligated to tell you that Jordan and Bryant have all those championships for entirely different reasons. Jordan was the best, Kobe had Shaq for three.

But sometimes the best thing for basketball is to not put everything on your shoulders, and instead get some help.

Think about Kevin Garnett. There are several different really smart analyses to show that when he was in Minnesota losing all those games he was literally the best player in the NBA (the same analysis, over the last two years, would say James is that player now). If you use some kind of smart objective metrics, Garnett's is the name that comes up most from those years. But Garnett had no help! After he grew distraught with the team's endless rebuilding, the Timberwolves found him a home in Boston with some serious help in the form of Ray Allen and Paul Pierce. Even though Garnett did not play his best basketball in Boston, he did his best winning there, and the result has been a profound transformation of both how the world sees Garnett and how the city of Boston feels about basketball in the 2000s. It's a model anyone would want to copy -- a new home with talented teammates became a story of pure, unrestrained basketball joy for all involved who aren't Timberwolves fans.

I was wondering when we'd get to the Kevin Garnett analogy. By the time Garnett went to Boston nobody could begrudge him because he had tried, and failed, so many times. But there is a large subcontext here: Garnett's biggest failing as a player is the same as LeBron's. Both are the best player in the league, and both are afraid to take over the game at the end to ensure a win. Garnett was roundly, and correctly, criticized for this. It's why he won't crack the top twenty greatest players of all time although he had the talent to be top five. Those Minnesota teams could have gone farther if KG was willing to dominate. He wasn't. The same can be said for Cleveland the last three years.

Similarly, before the Lakers got Pau Gasol, Bryant was among the most unhappiest campers in NBA history and was caught on camera phone talking about the inadequacy of his teammates and his willingness to be traded. When Gasol arrived, Bryant started winning more than ever, and he was proved absolutely right that he could win a lot more with more with help.

As I mentioned before, Kobe straddles a weird place between Wilt and MJ, and so much of this only serves to amplify that. Bryant vacillates frequently between a desire to be "the man" in the way Wilt was (scoring all the time, carrying the team by himself) and a realization that he needs help (Shaq, then Gasol). Jordan didn't have that same uncertainty, certainly not by Kobe's current age.

Imagine if you will, crazy as it may sound, that back in the day, Jordan had somehow charmed Barkley or David Robinson to join the Bulls?

By the metrics of being the man, Jordan would have been a failure. Talk about pulling over to ask for directions. But Jordan would have been a better winner. He'd be more valuable to his team and his fans in every way if somehow he had pulled that off.

He would have been more valuable to his team and fans? How? Robinson was soft and wanted to be a second banana for sure, but Barkley wanted to win one as the alpha dog, and wouldn't have fit well. Either way, how much more valuable could Jordan have been? He won six titles in his last six full years. That's about as valuable as you can be.

Hell no I don't need help.

If refusing help when it's available is the end goal, then in my mind we have cooked up one silly, old-fashioned definition of being the man.

Again, our author is confusing the real world with the sports world. He's also missing another defining point: that the great players stay in one place long enough to win, and that those who need to move to get help are inevitably viewed as lesser. That's why Wade will come out of this smelling better than LeBron: Miami is his town, has been his town, and he's simply getting help to further his legacy. That LeBron had a quick one pulled over on him by Wade is one of the funniest running subplots in this entire deal.

Playing executive is smart

Jordan is affixed in our minds as the portrait of a winner, but take the long view of not just his playing days, but his life to date.

Through all the millions, the TV ads, the golf games and the casino trips, maybe there's nothing to regret.

But something funny happened in Springfield, Mass. Remember his Hall of Fame acceptance speech? Didn't we all come away from that with the news that life inside Jordan's shoes is not all peachy? He's bitter! About a lot of things! With the world's blessing to discuss whatever he wanted, Jordan mostly just spat insults.

I covered this here, and as I said there, what we loved most about Jordan is what we don't feel quite comfortable with now. It's just the way he's built. He is hyper-competitive, but it's what fueled the fire. We can't have our cake and eat it too; Jordan is that guy who we loved in sports but not as much in the real world. That's why this is sports we are talking about, and not a non-for-profit organization.

One of the first things he brought up was the guy who built the Bulls team he won all those titles with, Jerry Krause. "Jerry’s not here," explains Jordan. "I don’t know who’d invite him. I didn’t. ... " All this bitterness, even though they won championships together!

The reason I bring this up is: Jordan proved right there and then that letting someone else build the roster for you can make you a very bitter man, even if you win six titles.

Players have the power of free agency, which, James and Wade have demonstrated, is one new way to solve that problem.

Jordan's career is widely seen as an example of why James and Wade ought not play together. It costs them both points as the man.

But you can also see Jordan's life to date as a textbook case of why building your own roster might be the smartest thing you can do, even if it isn't how things used to be done.

This is an interesting argument in the end: because Michael was bitter and couldn't separate fantasy (Jerry Krause is sticking it to me so I need to win) from reality (Jerry Krause is an idiot, but he got me the talent I needed), now LeBron needs to build his own dynasty? Where's the fun in this? And ... wait a minute. Is that the mystery Michael helped us to understand? This article ends abruptly, but as near as I can tell we are supposed to love LeBron for giving up on Cleveland and running to D-Wade for help, and we are supposed to feel sorry for Michael for doing it on his own and winning in a dominate fashion that only Bill Russell could relate to. I'm totally confused.

Billy Joel: An Album By Album Power Ranking

What better to do with my moments of spare time than write about subjects that most people will feel are arbitrary and odd, but which nevertheless entertain me immensely? So, without further ado, here is my take on Billy Joel’s discography:

Billy Joel, as many of you know, is one of my favorite artists of all time. In fact, in this post in which I tried to determine how good Dave Matthews Band really was, I ranked Billy Joel as my all time favorite music act. So he has that going for him, which is nice.

Billy had 12 studio albums which were released from 1971 to 1993. That’s a pretty impressive run which only ended because Joel decided to walk away in Jordan fashion after River of Dreams topped the charts in 1993. Of his 12 studio albums, four reached the top of the charts (River of Dreams, Storm Front, Glass Houses and 52^nd Street), with another (The Stranger) reaching the number two spot. Starting with The Stranger in 1977, Joel also had a streak of eight consecutive albums which topped out between number one and number seven on the charts.

To that end, by anyone’s estimation, Joel has had a stellar music career. When I finally saw him live, in 2007, Billy still had his fastball. Putting on a great show, Joel was able to deliver everything I could have asked for growing up as such a big fan. After finishing the intro songs Joel introduced himself as "Billy's father," noting that "Billy of course is tall, much better looking, and with more hair." He then proceeded to rock the stage for the next few hours, pulling from nearly all of his discography. Using those twelve albums as a springboard, here is my breakdown of the best of Billy Joel, twelve through one:

12. Streetlife Serenade – 1974

Streetlife Serenade reached a high water mark of 35 on the US charts, and was the follow up album to Joel’s breakthrough 1973 album Piano Man. Serenade is likeable enough, with catchy tunes like “Last of the Bigtime Spenders” and the title inspiration “Streetlife Serenader,” as well as the big single from the album, “The Entertainer” in which Joel decries the music industry as a whole. Serenade has a bit of a more folksy feel to it, which is not uncommon throughout Joel’s early catalogue, but it lacks the memorable nature of many of his other early works. In sum, it’s fun to pop in the player once every few years just to refresh a bit, but it’s not worth playing over and over again.

11. Glass Houses – 1980

Glass Houses topped the charts at number one, becoming Joel’s second album to do so. So why do I have it ranked so low? Two reasons jump out, and both are equally legitimate. First, this is how deep Billy Joel’s discography is in my opinion, that one of his best received albums could be his next to worst album. Second, the album just doesn’t have the staying power of some of his other works. Sure, it has a few epic singles (“You May Be Right” and “It’s Still Rock and Roll to Me,” as well as “Don’t Ask Me Why” to a lesser degree), but beyond those three … it just seems lacking. Some Joel fans go crazy over songs like “Sleeping With the Television On” and “C’Etait Toi (You Were the One)” but I am not among them. I do enjoy “Sometimes a Fantasy,” but that song alone isn’t enough to hold this album up. The first four songs of this album are solid, even spectacular at times, but the final five songs are forgettable. Joel did much better.

10. Innocent Man – 1983

Innocent Man, which topped out at number four in the US charts, is a bit of an enigma for me. I look at the track list and think “how can it rank this low?” and so I then review the next few albums, and I find that for whatever reason I just like them more. Innocent Man had a plethora of radio singles, ranging from the top ten singles (“Tell Her About it” (#1), “Uptown Girl” (#3) and “Innocent Man” (#10)) to the complementary singles (“The Longest Time,” “Leave a Tender Moment Alone,” “Keeping The Faith” and “This Night”).

Upon further reflection, this album just doesn’t fit right to me; it feels, rather, like at least two albums which were forced together into one. It doesn’t have a sense of continuity, or building towards something as a completed work of art. On the one had you have the soulful ballad “Innocent Man” which, I suspect, would be in my top five favorite Joel songs. After all, it is the song I chose to sing as my Senior solo in high school. Then it has a great rock/pop song in “Keeping The Faith,” as well as “Leave a Tender Moment Alone.” On the flip side, the more poppy “Uptown Girl,” “Tell Her About It” and “The Longest Time” feel out of place to me, and, particularly with “Uptown Girl,” borderline annoying after a few listens. I understand where Joel was going with this album, using it as a homage to a variety of styles of music, but as great of an album as it was, it only has the place of #10 on this list.

9. The Bridge – 1986

Honoring my birth year, The Bridge reached a peak position of number seven on the charts. This album lacks the single power of Innocent Man, but it plays as a much better album front to back. It has a number of songs that, while not hits, I enjoy immensely. “Running on Ice” has a pace and beat that I find infectious, and that always gets me going. “Temptation” is a beautiful song written, surprisingly, about his daughter. The crown jewel of the album, however, is not these, nor the album’s top radio singles (including “This is the Time,” and “A Matter of Trust”). Working with Ray Charles on the song “Baby Grand,” Joel successfully made a song that can transcend generations, and also showcases two of the greatest American musicians of all time. The Bridge was solid, if unspectacular, whereas Innocent Man was spectacular, but not solid.

8. The Nylon Curtain – 1982

Also reaching number seven on the US charts, The Nylon Curtain had one of the iconic songs of the early 1980s in “Allentown.” Joel’s ability to bring attention to a social situation was showcased here, and the song stayed in the top 20 for six weeks in 1983. Again, what makes this album is not the singles, but instead the songs which complement the singles (singles which also include “Pressure,” and the epic “Goodnight Saigon.”) The songs like “Laura,” “She’s Right On Time” and “A Room of Our Own” are catchy, and still play very well to this day. “Scandinavian Skies” is a fascinating listen, which uses an almost detached voice of Joel through violent musical movements to paint an uneasy picture. All in all The Nylon Curtain remains a solid album which delivers on a variety of levels.

7. Cold Spring Harbor – 1971

This is where a cursory Joel fan would start screaming at me. His first album, Cold Spring Harbor was mixed poorly, recorded poorly, made Joel sound like a chipmunk, and had no singles of any consequence (and therefore, no radio play). Add all that together, and the album reached no higher than 158 on the US Charts. That said, this album is pure gold. “She’s Got a Way” has become a solid fan favorite for its simplicity and beauty, but the album is a ten for ten in my opinion. In other words, I can listen to it front to back and love every track. My personal favorites include “Everybody Loves You Now,” “Falling of the Rain,” “Nocturne” which is piano only, and “Got to Begin Again.” This album is stripped of all the pomp and circumstance of later albums, and is a simple example of how talented a musician Joel really is. All of 22 years old at this point, it is fresh and exciting, particularly if your only experience with Joel is his pop hits. I highly recommend it.

6. Turnstiles – 1976

How this album only made it to number 122 on the US charts is simply beyond me. It has single power (“New York State of Mind” and “Say Goodbye to Hollywood” as two prime examples), but many of these songs didn’t really catch on until well after the fact. In reality, most of them didn’t catch on until they were re-released as live versions on 1981’s Songs in the Attic, which featured some of Joel’s favorite songs which he felt were underappreciated. This album had only eight songs, but in addition to the two mentioned above it also had songs such as “James,” “Miami 2017” and “Angry Young Man” which are stellar. “I’ve Loved These Days” found its way into my senior commencement speech for its ability to put things in perspective. In sum, I can understand how this album was stuck so low, but for a true Joel fan it should rank pretty high.

5. Storm Front – 1989

Now into the top five, and leading off is Storm Front, which hit the top of the charts at number one. “We Didn’t Start The Fire” became a number one hit, and other singles from the album (including “Leningrad,” “I Go To Extremes,” “And So It Goes,” and “The Downeaster ‘Alexa”) give this album a loaded feel, much like the New York Yankees lineup. All of these songs are catchy and worth listening to again and again, but other songs like “Shameless” and “Stormfront” continue to add to the album’s attractiveness. With this album it is easy to see why it reached the top of the charts.

4. River of Dreams – 1993

Topping the charts at number one, River of Dreams was the album Joel released which I first jumped into, and was also the last album he made. Far from being singles drive, the album has an impressive flow to it, starting with “No Man’s Land” and ending with the prophetic final track “Famous Last Words.” Joel’s ability to show perspective was rarely as succinct as in the song “Two Thousand Years,” where he takes a philosophical viewpoint to the world:

"Sometimes I wonder 'why are we so blind to fate?' Without compassion there can be no end to hate, no end to sorry caused by the same endless fears. Why can't we learn from all we've been through after two thousand years? There will be miracles after the last war is won. Science and poetry rule in the new world to come. Prophets and angels gave us the power to see what an amazing future there will be."

A gift to his fans, Joel’s last album became his living will and testament, illustrating his worldview and his philosophical and theological beliefs, and giving us something deep to ponder on. Beyond all of that, however, is one heck of a catchy album.

3. Piano Man – 1973

At a high point of number 27 on the US charts, it would seem that this album is out of place, and it might be. It lacks the deep introspection of Joel’s later albums, as well as the massive pop success of his intermediate albums. But it has the folksy nature of a fresh, un-jaded upstart, and it hits the ball out of the park on two songs. The title track, “Piano Man,” has, of course, become an absolute epic, although it never reached higher than number twenty five itself in the moment. Go into any bar, any frat house, and concert in America and play “Piano Man” and I guarantee you that everyone will know it. The song itself is a strong reason why the album ranks this high. But the title track is also counterbalanced by another fan favorite, and epic track: “Captain Jack.” An outright anti-drug song, “Captain Jack” talks about something close to Joel’s heart, as he noted in Songs in the Attic that if Vietnam didn’t kill his friends, drugs often did. Beyond the two heavyweights of the album, the rest of the songs have the fresh feel of Cold Spring Harbor, and they include another huge fan favorite in the historically inaccurate “The Ballad of Billy the Kid.” All in all, Piano Man laid many of the ground roots for what Joel was to become, and the album has stood the test of time.

2. 52^nd Street – 1978

Topping the charts at number one, 52^nd street was the first album of Joel’s to accomplish that feat. And, as the second best of his albums, it was deserving of that crown. With three top forty singles (“Big Shot,” “My Life” and “Honesty”) the album had popularity, and the rest the album has a catchy feel to it that draws you in and won’t let you out. This album screams about youth and the potential of any night, as well as the potential downfalls. From the “don’t tell me what to do” aspects of “My Life,” through the “anything can happen” described in “Half a Mile Away,” through the descriptions in “Zanzibar” and “Until the Night,” and ending with the end result in “Big Shot,” this album is a good fit for the time period in Joel’s life.

1. The Stranger – 1977

Reaching number two in the US charts, The Stranger was Joel’s big breakthrough (he had never been higher than 27 before, and was coming off of Turnstiles which clocked in at 122). The Stranger is still Joel’s best selling non-compilation album to date, and has been re-released a number of times to make good on its popularity. With a murderers row of hits (“Movin’ Out,” “She’s Always a Woman,” “Scenes From an Italian Restaurant,” “Just the way You Are,” “Only the Good Die Young” and “The Stranger”) the album is a work of art. It is backed up with “Vienna” and “Everybody has a Dream,” as well as “Get it Right the First Time.” The album is a work of art, and is generally accepted as Joel’s epic. I agree.

The "King's" Decision

Driving home from class tonight I got a text message from an acquaintance who I knew was mass texting everyone announcing where LeBron James had decided to go. I mulled over viewing it because, as a Bulls fan, I knew that the split second I had left was the last split second I'd have to dream about our team landing either Wade (preferably) or James. I looked, and it read as such:

"King James! Going to Miami!!!"

This news wasn't much of a shock really; in today's 24 hour news cycle it is increasingly rare when a broken story isn't true, and this story has been broke for awhile. No, James to Miami had become common knowledge, and anyone who didn't feel that way in the last few days was simply in denial. But there are a few things that need to be said about the choice Mr. James made, and the way he made it. And, of course, I'm willing to take that challenge. Without further delay, here are the top story lines of LeBron's decision 2010 (and don't kid yourself, there will be another round of this the next time he's a free agent):

1. LeBron decides he doesn't have the fortitude to be Michael, and chooses instead to be Scottie

Let's be clear on one thing: the Miami Heat have been, and will continue to be Dwyane Wade's team. Wade is the alpha dog, and Wade has already won the title. Wade was the person who Pat Riley sent out before the free agent period started to talk people into coming to play with him. Moreover, Wade has proven that he has the fortitude, that when the game is on the line he wants to ball, and that his team will live and die with him. Call this the "Jordan quality" if you want, but it really predates Jordan. Bird had it, and so did West, any number of Celtic greats, and even Kobe Bryant today. These players wanted the rock in their hands when the game was on the line. This quality is what separates the greats from those who are really, really good. It creates a differentiation between the Batmans and the Robins of the world.

We all know that Kobe has it today, even if he isn't quite good enough to capitalize on it as often as Jordan or Bird did. But that's missing the point: nobody has done it better than MJ or Larry Legend, not in the history of the game. Watch tapes of the Celtics before Bird's back went out, or watch Jordan between 1990 and 1998: they didn't miss too often when they took over. Time tends to help us forget what has happened, so feel free to watch the following clip to refresh your memory; it comes from game 6 of the 1998 NBA finals:



Jordan's ability to take over a game was unprecedented, but the final 40 seconds was something that only the most elite ever could hope to accomplish. In the ultimate team sport, Michael Jordan won the game by himself through sheer force of will.

Wade has shown this desire, as well as the ability to finish. Look at the 2006 NBA Finals: the referees might have been bailing him out with all kinds of foul calls, but Wade was smart enough and fearless enough to keep going at it. And since that time, since he won an NBA championship with a pretty talentless team, the fortunes of the Heat have ebbed and flowed with him. Wade and Kobe, that's the list in the league right now of players who are capable of being all time greats. Maybe Kevin Durant gets there; I think he will, others are less certain. But there is one things we know: LeBron isn't there, nor does he even want to be.

Consider games five and six of this year's playoff series with Boston. Not only did LeBron crap the bed with one of the worst games of his career in game five, but he followed it up by turning the ball over NINE TIMES in game six. His season, and perhaps his legacy, was on the line in that game and he failed. But even that isn't the ultimate statement of LeBron's lack of fortitude. After turning the ball over at the 8:30 mark in the fourth quarter, LeBron basically disappeared, and he stood by passively and allowed his teammates to let the Celtics run the clock out on his season. There have been many times in Kobe's career when he has shot his team out of games, but he has always wanted the ball. LeBron almost hides from it.

All this adds up to one thing that makes perfect sense: of course LeBron wants to go to Miami to play with Wade and Chris Bosh, because in that scenario he won't be asked to be "the man." He can take over the game in the first three quarters and look great, but when the going gets tough it'll be on D-Wade. And that's what LeBron wants. He has actively decided to become Scottie Pippen, rather than trying to be Michael Jordan. When he announced last year that he was going to be changing his number from 23 little did we know that it was because he had decided that he no longer was up to the challenge of taking on MJ's legacy. And you can take this to the bank: if the Heat win a title or two (and that is a much bigger if than you think) it will be more glowing on Wade's resume than LeBron's. LeBron is going to be remembered as the coward who couldn't come through when he needed to. Wade will be remembered as the visionary who went and got himself a supporting cast.

2. The Three Biggest Free Agents Choose Insane Pressure To Win Over Better Chances To Win.

Let me ask you this: which roster would be better set up to win next year? Chicago with a starting lineup of Derrick Rose, LeBron James, Luol Deng, Carlos Boozer and Joakim Noah, Miami with a starting lineup of D-Wade, LeBron, Chris Bosh and two veteran minimum signings, or New Jersey with Devin Harris, LeBron, Brooke Lopez and young talent around them? I point this out only because it is far from a sure thing that these three will win in Miami, but if they fail to win the pressure will be even greater than if they had gone their separate ways. By choosing Miami and assuming they will win, they are assuming the following:

A) LeBron, Wade and Bosh will all be willing to see a noticeable drop in their statistics
B) Quality talent is going to be willing to take the league minimum to play with them, when they could make four or five times more playing elsewhere
C) Orlando, Boston and Chicago will fail to improve their rosters significantly
D) The Los Angeles Lakers won't be able to beat them, nor will Dallas, Utah, Portland, Oklahoma City, or any of the other potential Western Conference foes
E) All three "stars" will stay healthy

If you ask me, these are a bunch of crazy assumptions. First, NEVER in NBA history has a team with three alpha dog stars won an NBA title. All NBA teams have a hierarchy, and this team won't have one easily because my bet is that LeBron won't like playing the Pippen role as much as he thinks he will, and that Bosh will HATE the Horace Grant/Lamar Odom/Otis Thorpe role. These guys have egos; look at how they've handled this entire process. Furthermore, they won't have any talent around them except, maybe, Michael Beasley (who, for what it's worth, is an enigma who will hate being the fourth banana when he was supposed to be number two). They won't have the Steve Kerr or John Paxson type. They won't have any of that. They will have the big three, and little else.

The second part of this lack of logic is that they assume other teams will roll over and die. I don't, for one, believe that. What if the Bulls manage to be smart, keep their cap space, and sign Carmelo Anthony next offseason? A team of Rose, Anthony, Boozer and Noah with better role players around them would easily be able to compete with Wade, James and Bosh. Can you count the Celtics out after what we saw this year? I don't think so. And Orlando is also dangerous. All of that is also completely ignoring the Western Conference, and the Lakers in particular, because you know Kobe is foaming at the mouth dreaming of beating these guys in the finals next year so he can continue building his "Greatest of All Time" case. The target these guys just put on their back is tremendous, and the first three game losing streak they have will lead the media to go into a slew of "what's wrong in Miami" story lines. They will be expected to break the record for wins in a year. They won't come close. This strategy of piling up superstars in their prime has never worked, and it has rarely worked even when the players are older and wiser. I've got no reason to believe it'll start now.

3. LeBron Just Put Himself In Contention With Tiger For Most Impressive Character Suicide Of The Decade

Before the start of the playoffs, as I've recounted here, I debated with my friends that LeBron wouldn't even be the best player of his generation, that Durant would be. I was laughed at then, but I hit the nail on the head thus far, especially if you factor in likeability, which is a huge part of being a superstar. Durant quietly accepts and extension in OK City, while LeBron has an hour long TV special to announce what?

That he is stabbing Cleveland in the back.

If you're going to leave your hometown, you do it with more class than this. LeBron just mailed the entire city a veritable turd sandwich, then stabbed them in the back while they were vomiting from the smell. His move was that of a villain, not a superstar. And, for a young man who has been savvy thus far, it was remarkably stupid from a marketing standpoint. Let's get it out there: I don't have any love lost for Cleveland or their whining fanbase. All they do is complain, talk down Jordan and Payton, and generally over glorify their own. It's their own fault as much as anyone that LeBron has this big of a head because they immortalized him for doing jack. Maybe they felt they had to do this in order to keep him happy, but all the "Witness" crap didn't amount to anything when the chips fell. LeBron was just gone.

All that said, I now feel bad for the city. The poor schmucks actually thought he was staying. Bryan Bucher, my favorite Cleveland fan, actually spent his time writing this about how LeBron was staying. He believed it. So did most Cleveland fans. They thought they had a chance, but I promise you they were only ahead of the Clippers in this race. He was never coming back. You could see it in his face when he quite on the team in game 6 this year. He was done with the city. He'll tell you that it's okay because he's donating money to the Akron, OH Boy's and Girl's Club. I hope he sees his "fans" who he is asking to follow him to Miami now burning his jerseys. Much like he burned his own chance at being a global icon.

4. The Sickest Part Of This? The NBA Will Be Done Next Year.

They say that those who don't learn from history are prone to repeat the same mistakes. The NBA just had a spending frenzy (sadly, it's not over) akin to the mid to late 1990s when Shawn Kemp, Shaq and others took down huge contracts. The NBA reacted to their own overspending by locking the players out during the 1999 season. Now they reach the same bridge again, and because of the way they handled it they are set to ruin another generation of NBA fans much like they did me. Growing up the NBA was my favorite sport, now it's lodged in a heated battle for my third favorite with Hockey. I'm not special; this will happen again.

And, to that end, all I can say is that I will now root against the Heat, and for any team they play. Not because of Wade or Bosh, because what they did actually made sense for each of them, and the league. The Association is better off with Wade and Bosh teamed together. No, I'll root against the Heat because LeBron James has decided to become the biggest villain in all of sports. And that's saying a lot. Because we all know how I feel about this guy:

The Internet Is Like Crack

Yesterday, after weeks without internet, and nearly a year without TV, I got both in one swoop. And holy-information overload batman, let me tell you that it's almost hard to sleep I've got so much going on now. Back to email. Back to fantasy baseball. ESPN for the first time in nearly a year! (For those of you who have known me for some time you know that at many points in my life you wouldn't have believed I could go half a day without ESPN ... I went 11 months, so what now? :-) The funny thing is that in the moment I couldn't tell that I was missing any of this, but within twenty four hours I can't remember how I was living without it ... crazy.

Anyway, now that I'm back up and running, here are a couple of quick hits:

• The NBA draft is tonight, and the story isn't "who's being drafted," but, rather, who's going to be traded to continue the preparation for the "summer of LeBron." It's an amazing thing that right now as many as eight team (or over one quarter of the league) are maneuvering to make a run at LeBron, but in seven days it's at least somewhat likely that we will find out that LeBron is going nowhere. I wrote about the likely destinations for LeBron a few weeks back, and I'll generally stick by those percentages (although Dallas seems like a less likely destination now than it did then), but it's amazing that all of this might be for naught in no time.
• This oil spill, meanwhile, continues to make me sick. I was sitting at work the other day as a co-worker spouted the "you can't blame Obama for the oil spill" tag line, which I quickly agreed is true. But what people don't get is that it's not the spill itself that sane people are blaming the administration for. Less than two years into this "new era" of politics we are in the same place we were in 2005, and that's the thing that people should be frustrated about. A president who is hit by a massive natural disaster that was out of his control. The president is too slow to respond forcefully, and seems to be contemplative when the circumstances call for rapid response. Before you know it, the American people are blown away by the inaction of the administration, and are frustrated while suddenly questioning the intelligence of the man they put in power. The oil spill is to Obama what Katrina was to Bush. And it's not a good thing that this parallel is so clear. I'm a big fan of Obama's pragmatism, and the fact that he doesn't rush to decisions that don't need to be rushed to. That said, there are times when as the President of the United States you need to be able to act quickly and decisively. This was one of those times, and Obama has failed brilliantly.
  
• As for Obama's decision to remove General McChrystal from command in Afghanistan, and to instead put General David Petraeus in, these things will happen. Anyone knows that you don't choose to criticize the captain of the ship without acknowledging that you risk being thrown overboard. While McChrystal's comments weren't so overboard that this move was a no-brainer, they were still inflammatory enough that this move was probably the logical next step.
  
• And, finally, congratulations to the Chicago Blackhawks! I proudly wear my jersey and shirts, and have for a number of years. It's nice to have one of my teams actually pay off my devotion. Yes, I'm calling you out Bears, Cubs and Hoosiers.
  

The Nine ... Plus The Wizard

"So who would be your top five college coaches of all time? Beyond Wooden it's got to be a close race, right?" - Luke R.

It is close, and thanks for asking! I don't have a ton of time to go deep in depth with this today, but I will even one up your question; here are my top ten college coaches of all time. Again, always remember that as much as I try to consider all of history, it is difficult having not "been there" to determine what was 100% legit and what wasn't. Also, we are considering men's basketball coaches only (sorry Geno and Patty Summit ... you're great, but you also coach a vastly different sport). Finally, the honorable mention: Henry Iba, Pete Newell, Brach McCraken, Phil Woolpert and if Billy Donovan can prove that those two national titles at Florida weren't flukes, he'll find his way on here soon. Also, Tom Izzo continues to build a pretty impressive resume, and could mount a challenge as well.

10. Rick Pitino - Coached at Boston U, Providence, Kentucky, Louisville; Career record: 521-191; .732 winning percentage; 1 National Title (1996 at Kentucky); led three different teams to the final four (Providence, Kentucky and Louisville)

When considering Coach Pitino one needs to throw out his two failed NBA stints (in New York and Boston), as well as all his personal life drama, and just focus on his body of work. What you are left with, if you can narrow the focus, is a Coach who has led three different schools to a decent amount of success; a coach who has won one national title, and been on the verge of four other national titles (3 final four, 1 championship game beyond the title year). He wins most of his games, and he seems to have a good rapport with his players. On the whole, he's a really good coach who will be able to jump up this list as he continues to win, and especially if he wins another national title.

9. Denny Crum - Coached at Louisville from 1971 until 2001; won two national titles at Louisville in 1980 and 1986; won 675 games in his career; 4 Final Four appearances in addition to the two national titles

Crum had a less than stellar end to his career, although it is important to remember that he was not tied to any of the NCAA sanctions levied at Louisville in his final few years there. Taking that into consideration, his teams generally overachieved during his tenure at Louisville, and he is one of only 11 coaches to win multiple NCAA titles, while also ranking in the top 20 in career wins.

8. Lute Olson - Coached at Long Beach St, Iowa and Arizona; Won one NCAA championship (1997 at Arizona) and made another four Final Four appearances; 780 career wins

Olson is placed here because he had the gusto that few men have. While coaching at Iowa from 1974 through 1983 he built a program that made a final four, and seemed to be capable of being an annual contender in the Big Ten (his last five years at Iowa saw one first place, three second place and one fourth place finish in the conference). Yet, driven by a desire to build something his own, and to get away from the "fish bowl" of Iowa, Olson went to a traditionally terrible Arizona. There, he turned the program into a frequent (11 time) Pac-Ten champion, as well as a periodic national powerhouse.

7. Jim Calhoun - Coached at Northeaster and Connecticut; two time NCAA champion (1999 and 2004); 823 career wins (and counting)

I battle putting Calhoun here if for no other reason than that his UConn program seems so steeped in corrupt patterns that I'm not entirely sure that he's accomplished this legitimately. Still, it's hard to overlook his mounting win total, his national championships, and the long list of professional players who owe allegiance to the man. Let's just say that if the NCAA decided to have UConn vacate some of these wins I wouldn't be sad.

6. Adolph Rupp - Coached at Kentucky (1930-1972); 876 wins (third most all time) and 82.2% winning percentage (2nd best all time); 4 NCAA Championships (1948, 1949, 1951, 1958); Two additional Final Four appearances

S0me interesting facts for Rupp: he was forced into retirement at the age of 70 because that was the mandatory age for all Kentucky employees to retire; he was a four time Coach of the Year; he wore a brown suit to all games. What holds Rupp back is a number of things. First, he coached in a different era; his teams were generally all-white up until 1969, and his Kentucky team was famously defeated by Texas Western in 1966, in a match featuring an all-white starting five (Kentucky) and an all-black starting five (Western). Was he a racist? It is generally held that he was, but for the purposes of this list it doesn't really matter. All that matters is that he didn't coach in the modern era for long, and his greatest successes came in a game that was vastly different than today's game.

5. Roy Williams - Coached at Kansas and North Carolina; 614 career wins (and counting); 2 NCAA Championships (2005 and 2009); five additional Final Four appearances

Williams has gone from being the Coach who couldn't win the big one while at Kansas to a two time national champion with little standing in his way of continuing to build an impressive resume. While at KansasWilliams built a dynasty that could never get over the top, but one that was routinely in the top ten of the nation. Now at UNC, his teams have seen some volatile moves from NCAA champions to missing the tournament, but he was solidly placed himself inside the top five coaches, with a chance to move up the list towards the crowded top.


4. Mike "Coach K" Krzyzewski - Coached at Army and Duke; 3x Coach of the Year; 4x NCAA Champion; seven additional Final Four appearances; 868 wins

I have to make a confession: Coach K will likely be at the number two spot on this list before long. He as more NCAA titles than the next two coaches, and he will soon have more wins than either of them. More importantly, it seems like there isn't really much of a slow down; just when it became "common knowledge" that Duke couldn't compete for the national title anymore, they went off and won it last year. Coach K is a great tactician on the sideline who learned under the best (see number two) and who will likely move into the number two spot on this list. What is left to be determined is if he can mount a serious offensive at the number one spot.


3. Dean Smith - Coached at North Carolina; 879 career wins; 4x Coach of the Year; 2x NCAA Champion; nine other Final Four appearances

Dean Smith is in this spot as much out of respect for his tremendous coaching style as anything. Over the course of his tenure at UNC his teams were routinely among the best in the nation, and although they only won the Big Dance twice, they were in the mix frequently from 1967 (his first Final Four appearance) until 1997 (his last Final Four appearance in his final season at UNC). Dean Smith is basketball at one of our nation's top basketball schools. He is currently number two on the all-time wins list, although he likely will be passed shortly by Coach K. Beyond everything else, Coach Smith held a dignity that few others (although certainly our number one) can match.

2. Robert Montgomery "Bobby" Knight - Coached at Army, Indiana and Texas Tech; 902 career wins; 3 National Titles; two additional Final Four appearances

Let's get one things straight: Bob Knight was a full-of-himself, better-than-thou jerk. But he was also one heck of a coach, and throughout his career that was proven time and again. What is funny is that if he had been able to reign himself in, to focus a bit more on humbling himself in front of recruits and containing himself on campus, he might have been able to win a few more national titles, have won 1,000 games, and have retired a Hoosier. But often times our greatest strengths are our greatest weakness, and for Coach Knight that is reality as well. He has more wins than any other coach, although he will also be passed by Coach K in relatively short order. He has his national titles, and his team was the last perfect season in the NCAA, but he also has his career being finished in exile in Lubbok, TX. What speaks volumes for Coach Knight is that his players are devoted still, that his graduation rates were better than anyone at a major program during his era, and that his program's were pristine with the NCAA: not even a sniff of a violation. Coach Knight did what Sinatra said: he did it his way. His way was being a brilliant tactician, an on the court general who could coach circles around the rest of the Big Ten and most of the nation. His way was not cheating as contemporaries at other schools did, and by only taking a player if that player made a commitment to getting his degree, not just using Indiana and its unique heritage as a spring board for the NBA. His way was winning the right way. On the one hand, if he had begun to bend the rules and change his approach he could have had it all: five or six titles, 1,000 + wins, retirement from IU. But that wouldn't have been Coach Knight. Say what you will about him. He did it his way.

1. John Wooden - 664 career wins; 10 National titles; two additional Final Four appearances; six time Coach of the Year

As I said yesterday, little can be said about Coach Wooden that hasn't already been said. I've argued before that the top three on this list could go in any order with a compelling argument, and that still holds true. The ten National Titles in twelve years is impressive, but it is partially an artifact of a different era, and to that end an argument can be made, and it can even make sense. But the fact still remains that Coach Wooden's UCLA dynasty stands alone, built upon his unique coaching ability, and his personality that permeated the game long after he was done coaching, and will continue to do so now that he is gone. When Coach K gets to his 1,000th win and cuts down his fifth National Title banner the argument will begin anew, the same way it did When Dean Smith became the all-time leader in wins, and the same way it did with Coach Knight. Maybe Coach K will even be able to get to six or seven National Titles, and then he will be able to make the argument 1 and 1A. But he'll continue to be 1A. Coach Wooden will be #1.

2010 ... And Then A Break?

Two weeks from now I will have woken up in a field in middle Indiana. I'll brush my teeth, and change my clothes, and then I'll prepare for the second night of Dave Matthews Band's two night stand in Noblesville. Judging from the set lists thus far, it looks to be a solid, if not totally spectacular, weekend. Thus far we are seeing the majority portion of the songs still coming from Big Whiskey and the GrooGrux King, with an increase in the number of songs from Bush League albums such as Everyday and especially Stand Up. A typical concert, according to antsmarching, is showing a wide variety of songs, from the three aforementioned albums as well as Busted Stuff, Under the Table and Dreaming, Before These Crowded Streets, Some Devil, and Crush. It seems that DMB is interested in giving a total overview of their discography this summer.

Perhaps most exciting is the fact that the band has busted out a few hits that haven't been heard in years: "Big Eyed Fish" (not heard since 2006), "Kit Kat Jam" (on the bench since 2003), "JTR" (out since 2006), "Sweet Up and Down" (rarely since 2007), and "So Right" (out since 2006) have all made returns to the set list with some frequency this year. "JTR" and "Sweet Up and Down", in particular, are exciting as they are two members of the legendary Lillywhite Sessions group, and two of the group which did not make the jump to Busted Stuff. Throw in the fact that night two seems to be consistently getting a final encore of "All Along The Watchtower," and let's put me down as cautiously optimistic.

And I say "cautiously optimistic" rather than fully excited because mixed in with all of these throwback songs, and the full arsenal of albums at their disposal, has come the news that DMB will take 2011 off from touring. If you know anything about the group you'll know why this is such shocking news: the group has toured during the summer every year for the past twenty years, without break. Even when the band was in trouble, even through the death of LeRoi Moore, even when Dave was on the verge of quitting ... DMB toured. It is one of the main things that has made them such a phenomena, and it has helped the band to remain unique in the music industry. They were the throwback to the old days of concerts, when groups toured because they loved playing together, rather than just to pimp a new album.

And, to that end, one has to wonder if there isn't something else going on underneath the announced "we need a break" message. Perhaps it's as simple as the group getting older; it's hard to believe it's been twenty years since this group first started. Maybe it's as potentially exciting as the fact that they want some more time in the studio to make another album (which will hopefully be as good as the last one). Or maybe the fire is starting to go out (who could blame them?). Either way, I'm not taking for granted that 2012 will see another tour, with newly invigorated band members and maybe even new material. We've already seen one band member tragically die before his time, and more tragedy could strike. Or the band could just realize that they've made so much money that they don't need the hassle of giving up half of their year (at least) to criss-cross the country. I don't know the answers, but needless to say I'll be ready for both shows this year, and I will cherish them. And next summer the group will be missed by quite a few people. Because, from experience, so few bands can even come close to being in the same ballpark as DMB in terms of a live experience, and having that void will only serve to highlight that difference.

R.I.P. Coach Wooden

I'm not sure that words can really describe how great John Wooden was, not only as a basketball coach, but also as a man. He is someone that we all can aim to be more like, no matter our age. Rather than try to paint a picture here, I'll just pass along this video to help us all reflect:




Rest in peace Coach Wooden. Thank you for all you taught us, and for setting the example you did. You were the greatest of all time, leaving no doubt about that statement, and allowing only debate on who followed you in that list at number two.