First off, hopefully this post actually posts; I've had trouble getting them to do so recently. Now then, here's my rant. It's October, a time when the baseball playoffs are in full swing (by the way, great performance from Beckett, and stupid decision by Sweet Lou), the NFL season is moving swimmingly, and the NBA is right around the corner. As this takes place, I can't help but notice that the major sports networks, namely ESPN, still are trying to cram soccer and poker down everyone's throat. Why?

I've stated this before in several blogs, but soccer is and never will be a major sport here. The reasons are simple; there's no action and thus no excitement. You want a major reason why "football" is so big elsewhere? Because there are no viable alternatives in these usually poor countries! Here in America, we have good, no, better alternatives, so soccer gets (rightfully) pushed aside.

The rules for it are ridiculous enough. For starters, there's this overrun (or whatever it's called) that doesn't count in terms of gametime, but goals scored there do count. It led to perhaps the most ridiculous tie in the history of mankind during the recent Women's World Cup, where I think Japan and Mexico were playing. Japan led 2-1 after regulation ended, only to see Mexico score in the overrun to force a tie. That's bull if you ask me! And speaking of ties, doesn't that make you sick? Even the poorly run NHL found a good way to end ties; the shootout! If soccer wants more viewers, don't trot out an injured, aged David Beckham; do away with overrun and allow ties to be settled (in all regular season games) by a shootout. But for title games (World Cup) play to the bitter end. Then soccer could have some traction.

But at least soccer does exibit some athleticism. Poker's inclusion on sports TV (and many other networks) baffles me. Where's the athleticism in poker? From the players throwing down their cards on the flop?!? There is a mental aspect of the game, but in general there's nothing here that makes it a sport. Tap dancing isn't a sport; I rest my case (yeah, I know it's a George Carlin bit, but it makes sense). The game should be reserved for networks like GSN (which shows this #### and blackjack on Mondays), not FSN or ESPN.

And yet the networks are enthralled by it. So much so that ESPN allowed the baseball playoffs to go to TBS so they could show this and The Contender. Wow, what a boatload of #### that is! A non-sport and a lame reality show over the baseball playoffs? Sounds like Must-Miss TV to me! And there are no people I want to see on these shows; I don't respect anybody who looks like a blind tourist, and Sugar Ray Leonard could knock out any of these scrubs on his show... today! Where's the appeal in this?

In fact, any palor games should be left in the palor. That goes for pool, bowling, chess, checkers, Scrabble, etc. These games aren't sports! So get them off the TV! There is nothing inherently athletic about these GAMES! So enough is enough!

Am I the only one who thinks these games should be banished to Versus or not? Or do you think there's something that I left out? Let me know. I've got to go watch some real sports.

It would be easy to simply attack Michael Vick and his trial for dogfighting. But it pales in comparison to the circus-esque atmosphere surrounding baseball the last two days. It's bad enough that an alleged cheat will (someday, we can only hope) become the home run king. It's worse when I hear people suggest black pitchers (in this case, perhaps Dontrelle Willis) might serve up softballs for him to hit, and that race could play a role in the chase.

Don't misinterpret my words as saying "There's no racism in sports or the world". Believe me, there are still plenty of idiots out there who believe segregation should still be legal. Those people are the ones I try to avoid on the bus. But when the sports shows say Willis, who starts tomorrow against the Giants (who he cheered for as a kid) could aid Barry, whoa, you think the record will be tarnished when it happens. It's akin to Brett Favre allowing Michael Strahan to break the sack record a few years ago; it lessens the accomplishment. And even Barry doesn't want that to happen.

At least Barry doensn't open his mouth to the press every chance he gets. That is not the case for Gary Sheffield of my hometown Tigers, who never met a microphone he didn't like. Yesterday, he basically called Bud Selig a hippocrite and said he was in on the head-in-the-sand approach baseball took on steroids in the late '90s. He also said baseball should embrace Barry, instead of shunning him. Perhaps he has a point on Bud's role in the steroid era. But Barry Bonds has been his own worst enemy by taking a standoffish stance towards the media. He may not yet have committed a crime, but he simply isn't a guy many fans outside of San Fran want to cheer for. May I point out that Sheffield has an autobiography coming out soon. This may yet be a selling ploy (think Pete Rose).

Speaking of selling ploys, how about ESPN, or as I now think of them, BBSPN (the B's for Barry Bonds)? It's wonderful how they can junk their lineup for the next two nights to show the Marlins/Giants games for the chance (key word there) that Barry could tie and, if a miracle occurs break, the record. It's bad enough that they break in on the scrollbar with the pitchcount (balls and strikes) of his every at-bat. Now we must watch two losing teams do 'battle'? Barry is in a major slump (something like 3 hits the last five games), So who knows if it can happen? Just stick to the basic cut-ins, not the entire actual game!

In closing, Barry Bonds should break the record in our lifetime. But no one has to embrace it like it was done legitimately (for the record, I think he did cheat). ESPN should allow the chase to take it's course, Sheffield should stop talking for all of our sakes, Bud should be there when the record falls, and baseball better thank it's lucky stars the NBA and Michael Vick have taken the spotlight off it. Gotta go! Gary Sheffield just called me a hippocrite!

Wow, it's great to be back! My computer was on the fritz for three weeks, so I haven't been able to blog since that time. And what a past few weeks it has been! We've seen Michael Vick indicted because of his alleged involvement in dog fighting. We saw Tim Doneghy investigated by the FBI for allegations of gambling on games he officiated and those he didn't. And there's the lingering cloud of Barry Bonds as he pursues Hammerin' Hank (with Bud apparently in tow). So, in my comeback, who has had the worst problem recently: the NFL, the NBA, or the MLB?

When looking at this objectively, Bud Selig must feel a sigh of relief. His problem of whether he should follow Barry around seems trivial compared to the serious allegations in the other leagues. His problems were self-induced (he was the do-nothing commish of the 'Steroid Era', after all) and have nothing to do with criminal activity (At least it's not proven Barry took steroids). So he shouldn't lose sleep here.

Roger Goodell, and the Atlanta Falcons as well, is/are faced with a tricky quagmire. Vick seems to be declared guilty in the eyes of many people (animal lovers of which I am one). But he also has almost as many supporters who cry "Give him his day in court!" with passion. Goodell suspended Pacman Jones for crimes which, as of yet, he's not been found guilty of. Vick may not yet be guilty, but if the league or the Falcons even thinks he should be on the field in '07, their credibilty sinks. Watch this one for more developments.

But the man with the most trouble is certainly David Stern. The Czar of the NBA must have been staggered by the investigation into Doneghy. The thing that strikes me as odd is that Stern claims that the league didn't know until June 20th that Doneghy was being investigated. Even though reports claim there were su####ions A YEAR EARLIER that he was! Stern's speech today was full of rhetoric like "Our system for officials is run by former FBI guys" and " This was the work of a rogue official". What if it wasn't? Then the NBA's already low credibilty is blown up forever! Once your credibilty is gone, you become pro wrestling: a sham that's rigged!

To recap, MLB is not in much hot water; the NFL could be if it treats Vick like a star; and the NBA is in a full-blown crisis. So, what do you think? Are there more refs involved here? FFor Stern's sake, I hope not!

In case you're confused, I'm talking about them d*** Yankees (a little self-edit). This weekend was a complete disaster as they were swept by Oakland in an unwatchable series. The off-field antics were more entertaining here. First, Scott Proctor set his equipment on fire in front of the dugout on Saturday. Then, later that night, Jorge Posada questioned his team's passion. Then, on Sunday, Alex Rodriguez's wife wears a shirt to the stadium with 'F*** YOU' on it. What has happened to the most admired (and hated) team in America?

There are many problems here, so let's start with this one; Joe Torre no longer inspires players like he once did. I'm not saying he's a bad coach now, but there comes a point where your message gets old. Coaches/managers don't have a long shelf life like they used to. That's why we marveled at Bill Cowher all those years, and why we marvel at Torre lasting as long as he has with Steinbrenner, who at one time wasn't afraid to fire guys (just remember Billy Martin). But it's time for Torre to gracefully exit this mess.

A mess, mind you, not of his making. Like Ozzie Guillen said, you're only a great manager if you have great players. Aside from A-Rod and Derek Jeter, the other Yankee hitters haven't produced (unless you call Jaosn Giambi's doing that 'stuff' producing). Giambi, Bobby Abreu, et al, haven't been hitting consistently, and if the Yanks don't hit, they don't win (true of all teams). You expect more of a team with ten players making at least $10 million (no other team has more than five).

What has killed the Yanks, more than anything, has been their inability to aquire good YOUNG starting pitching. Sure Clemens was great, but he's not been worth the money and perks so far, and Mussina and Pettite have stunk, as has Chieng Meng-Wang. The fact that none can pitch more than six innings leave a stressed bullpen doing too much, and the whole team sags. Look at the last five champs: all had either great pitching or got hot late and sizzled in the playoffs. The Yanks haven't had that, or a title, since 2000.

So, where does the lion's share of blame go? That's right; on GM Brian Cashman! Since he got carte blanche to construct this team, he has focused on mostly hitting, which is great for show, but won't win titles. Is it a coincidence that the Yankee teams that won World Series weren't necessarily the most talented? Sure, there were stars aplenty, but there were also role-players who did the little things to win games. On this star-ladened team, there aren't many guys willing to do that. Cahsman put this team together, and should go down with his ship.

How do you correct this? It sounds drastic to Yankee fans, but they need to develop good young players of their own. Sign some players to keep you competitve in the short term (with their money, that's the least you could do) and draft pitchers to develop. Within a few years, you should have the kind of aces needed to be elite again. Simple enough.

As for the F-Rod shirt; if you can't stand the heat, as Harry Truman said, get out of the kitchen! You have to expect the New York fans to get on your case when your husband makes $27 million a year. You've just made his job a lot harder because now he's a bigger target (as if he isn't already). Just stay home, enjoy his money, and use it to get a better shirt! Until tomorrow, that's it for now.

Today, a certain amount of Pirates fans (anywhere from 100 to 7000, depending on the report) walked out on their team during the game. The reasoning was simple; they are tired of supporting a team that has had losing seasons every year since Barry Bonds left in 1992 and they blame management for failing to improve their team. I don't really care who does what with their season tickets, but this stunt has been done twice before, and if it proved anything, i doesn't work!

Being from Detroit, the incidents I mention are the two walkouts staged by Lions fans the last two seasons protesting the Dean of Bad GMs himself, Matt Millen. Two years ago, several hundred or so protesters walked out of the season finale against the Bengals, and then last year, attempted to repeat the deed (only to see virtually no one join them). Though it provided embrassing coverage of the team, Millen retained his job thanks to the loyalty of the Fords, who fire no one (unless they work for the company).

The main point I'll try to stress is this: protesting shows a emotion, albeit a negative one, and ownership actually likes to see emotion (even negative ones). It shows them that their fans truly care about their team, and will continue to support it no matter what. That's dangerous, especially if Pirates fans think their protest can change the gears of the team. That can't happen overnight.

You see, Millen has survived despite a 24-72 (or close to that) record over six years; even the Texans, horribly managed in their own right and with one fewer year under their belts, have more wins than do the Lions. Millen survives because the fans, despite their supposed anger, continue to support their team. They're still selling lots of seats at Ford Field, and thousands wait on a waiting list for those seats. That's not the way you can affect change of the product.

Pirates fans can be smarter than Lions fans if they show antipathy towards their team. Stop wearing Pirates gear! Stop attending games (by the way, the Pirates don't care if you walk out; they've got your money, anyway!)! Ignore them like the plague! If you ignore them long enough, maybe they'll come around. Until then, the bottom line here is that this protest won't mean much. If anything, they may be creating another Millen!!! Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!

Having been under the weather recently, I didn't get the chance to post Tuesday and thus didn't have my usual list ready. Today, I thought, since there not much action in the sports world, the time is right for a little fluff piece. What sports don't translate well (in my opinion) to TV? Here's the list...

10. Swimming: You ever wonder why sports shows break in with world records in this sport? I do. Beyond Michael Phelps and the newest Playboy cover girl Amanda Beard though, what's there to like? I like to quote George Carlin when he says "Swimming isn't a sport; it's a way to keep from drowning!". That about sums up my point.

9. Lacrosse: It did provide us with perhaps the most controversial stories of the past year at Duke, but have you seen it on TV? It looks like a combo of hockey and soccer (we'll see them later). It just looks weird when you see it. Worse still, thanks in part to the Duke case, it has seen an explosion in viewership. I just wouldn't want to be seen out in the field with the stick they play with!

8. Boxing: Let me clarify here; I don't want to see mediocre boxing. When marketed properly and when legit stars are fighting, yes, boxing is watchable. When you can't identify whose fighting who and bouts end in three rounds or less, what's the point? After all of fighter 1's "I hate you!" and #2's "I hate you, too!", there needs to be substance. Boxing will never be the bell cow it was in the past because it has been run by crooks like Don King for too long for people to care.

7. Winter and most Summer Olympics: Let me say that I'm very patriotic, but unless Americans are in the running for gold in particular events, we (mening the viewers) don't care. The Winter Olympics were such a disaster for NBC in 2006 that they were easily outdrawn by American Idol. Such a thing would have been unthinkable during the Miracle on Ice. The main problem: too much time for too few events. These Olympics are streched thinner than Nicole Ritchie. As for the Summer, it's more of the same. Solution: eliminate some of the events, shorten the time devoted, and show only the events we care about. One more thing: show it live at a time we can watch. Having the results be shown before we see them just defeats the purpose.

6. NASCAR and other auto racing leagues: I know these motor sports are very popular, but think about what you're watching. It's not this simple, but you are watching men (primarily) driving around an oval for hours with not much changing over that time. Admittedly, I only watch it to see what kinds of crashes occur; those are some really spectacular crashes! And usually, that's the only tme they are mentioned on the news. As for IndyCar, enough about Danica! Did you see how the recent race was promoted? "See Danica take on Dan Wheldon"! Why not just put them in a steel cage and let them go!? It was bush league.

5. Pool: This and poker really get on my nerves; the sports channels are loaded with this stuff! Are either one of these games sports? I say no. Pool is a difficult game to master, but it still shouldn't be shown on a sports channel. Give it its own channel; perhps the Poker and Pool Channel, and show it there. Poker is the ultimate craze; even the major networks give it time (NBC and CBS have). That game requires more luck than skill, so it shouldn't be on TV. Period.

4. Tennis: This was part of the reason for this post; Wimbledon has started. I think I can speak for many Americans when I say "If the Williams sisters or Andy Roddick aren't winning, who cares?". Roger Federer is the best player, and Rafael Nadal is a good #2, but where are the McEnroes, the Borgs, the Connors, even the Agassis that made this fun to watch at one time? Everyone today talks like Tiger Woods is their speech coach, and that is what drives people away.

3. Hockey: Want to know why the NHL is down on its luck (besides being on Versus, the worst commish in sports, etc.)? Becuase it really isn't much fun to watch on TV. It's hard to see the puck, and most times, it's too low scoring for me. Like NASCAR, the only times we hear about hockey is when someone gets maimed by a cheap shot artist. The NHL needs to hire a new commish, cut back on fights, get back on ESPN (although it won't, now that it has its comfy home on Versus for a few more years, by which time it will have completely disappeared from America) and maybe then it can recover some viewers.

2. Golf: Just because Tiger is hot doesn't mean his sport is. To paraphrase Carlin (and I believe this too) golf could be fun if you could play by yourself, but you must play with other hacks, making it boring. I'll take it a step futher; you need to play golf to enjoy golf. If you spend upwards of six-eight hours watching golf, you need to get a social life. There's no imagination here; everybody does the same things on the same holes everyday. At least it isn't as bad as...

1. Soccer: The world's most watched sport is the ultimate disgrace when it comes down to it. Like golf, you must play soccer to enjoy it. It is by far the most boring game on TV. When games are ended in 0-0 ties, that's bad. When goals are scored in overrun (or whatever that is) time, that's bad. When your World Series of your sport (World Cup) is decided on penalty kicks, that's unforgivable. That's akin to ending a tied Super Bowl on a field goal kicking contest or the seventh game of the World Series with a home run derby; it cheapens the championship. In short, soccer should be banned from TV until the rules are overhauled. Until then, enough Beckham! He's not saving soccer here!

There's the list/rant. Agree? Well, I certainly can't argue. I must go now; I can't miss Wimbledon!

Picking up from yesterday's post, I now offer the other end of the spectrum: who were the worst #1s of all time? To review, here's the best list again:

1. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (1969)

2. Magic Johnson (1979)

3. Tim Duncan (1997)

4. Shaquille O'Neal (1992)

5. David Robinson (1987)

6. James Worthy (1982)

7. Hakeem Olajuwon (1984)

8. Patrick Ewing (1985)

9. Elvin Hayes (1968)

10. Allen Iverson (1996)

Now then, here's the worst, going in inverse order (10 to 1). The criteria: the picks must have been made between 1966 and 2002, and only #1 overall picks may be considered.

10. Ralph Sampson (1983): Sampson makes the bust list because the Rockets sacrificed the 1982-83 season (allowing league MVP Moses Malone to sign in Philly and getting only Caldwell Jones and a draft pick) to get him. At the time, Sampson was considered a prospect with a long, bright future in the NBA, although his Virginia teams constantly came up short. In his first three seasons, two of which he was paired with Hakeem Olajuwon, Sampson put up good numbers (double-double averages each year) and helped his team to the Finals. Then injuries started happening on masse, and he never recovered, eventually retiring officially in 1994 after playing last in 1992 with the Bullets. A case of injuries sabotaging a promising career.

9. Doug Collins (1973): Here's another case of injuries derailing a career; the Sixers, coming off a league-record worse 9-73 record, drafted Collins #1 in the draft. After a rough rookie year, he became a solid guard, averaging more than 18 PPG from 1975-79, before a plethora of injuries cut his career short. He retired in 1981 and eventually coached Chicago, Detroit and Washington before settling in as a TNT analyst. Not exactly what Philly had in mind.

8. David Thompson (1975): Before you say "Wait a minute! Thompson was a good player", consider the team that drafted him #1 never got to enjoy the fruits of the pick. As many know, the ABA still competed with the NBA for college players (although it folded and merged into the league the next year), so Thompson, fresh off a national title at NC State, was hot property. The Atlanta Hawks, owners of the third worse record that year, drafted him, but he chose to take the offer from the ABA's Denver Nuggets. His career was shortened by injuries (a common theme, huh?), but I'm sure the Hawks would have loved to have a guy who scored more than 21 PPG for six straight years on their team, wouldn't you?

7. Austin Carr (1971): How does an expansion team that lost 67 games in year one improve? By drafting smartly. The Cavs, owners of that mark in 1971, chose to draft Carr from Notre Dame (admittedly in a poor draft talent-wise). After being a solid scorer in his first three years (averaging over 20 PPG), Carr eventually deevolved into a complementary piece over time, averaging no more than 17 PPG the remainder of his career, before retiring in 1981.

6. Pervis Ellison (1989): There's that injury bug again, although "Never Nervous" wasn't exactly a special player, either. After being drafted by the Kings in 1989, Ellison flopped, averaging 8 PPG and 5.8 RPG in 34 games, before being dealt to Washington after the season. He played more than 70 games just once in his career (1990-91) and had just one good stats year (20 PPG and 11.2 RPG in 1991-92) before becoming a journeyman benchwarmer for the rest of his career.

5. Joe Smith (1995): When the most noteworthy thing you do is costing your team 3  draft picks and having your contract terminated, your career isn't going well. Smith, taken ahead of Kevin Garnett, Rasheed Wallace and Jerry Stackhouse, among others, had a decent but not great career in many cities. It was his illegal contract with Minnesota that he's most remebered for, costing the team its first rounders in 2000-02 and 2004, a price that the team is still paying for today. No wonder Garnett wants a trade! Joe Smith was that valuable?

4. Kent Benson (1977): Proof once again that size doesn't mean he's good. Benson was a key player at Indiana, helping the school to the last undefeated college season and the NCAA title in 1976, before being drafted #1 by the Bucks, desperate for another Kareem. Well, Benson had his moment with Kareem, getting punched in the nose by Jabbar on opening night (it hurt Jabbar more; he broke his hand and was suspended for 20 games). After two and 1/2 years of middling production, the Bucks traded him to Detroit (for Bob Lanier), where the production was little better (career averages of 9.1 PPG and 5.7 RPG), before being dealt to Utah (for Adrian Dantley) and finishing up in Cleveland in 1988.

3. Kwame Brown (2001): Although he still has time, its become apparent that he'll never live up to the outsized expectations he had when he became the first high schooler drafted #1. To make a sad story short, Brown never showed the passion to be a star in Washington, before he was dealt to the Lakers in 2005 (for eventual All-Star Caron Butler). He has shown flashes, but they've been too few and far between. Enough said.

2. Michael Olowokandi (1998): The Clippers have been notorious for wasting their high draft picks (Benoit Benjamin, Danny Ferry come to mind) but none have been more of a waste than the Kandi Man. Olowokandi is the NBA's answer to Mike Mamula: his workout so impressed the Clips that they took him at #1. After five years of mid-level production, he fleeced another team when Minnesota, the Land of 10,00 Mistakes, signed him to a big contract. There, he had more of the same laziness issues he had in L.A., and Minnesota dumped him on Boston, where he's never been seen again.

1. LaRue Martin (1972): Perhaps it was because he played in an era where less pressure was on draft picks, but no other picks have been as disasterous as this one. Bypassing such players as Julius Erving (who was eligible since his class at UMass graduated that year), Paul Westphal and Bob McAdoo, Martin proved so ineffective, that Portland had to draft another center, HOF center Bill Walton, two years later. His career stats: 5.3 PPG and 4.6 RPG, with his best year in 1975 when he averaged 7 PPG and 5 RPG. He left the league the following season and now works for UPS. 5 points and 4 rebounds from the #1 pick. Talk about the biggest bust of all time!

That's my list. What do you think? Are there worse #1s I haven't mentioned? After this list, who's left to blame?

Today I decided to debut a new Tuesday feature (or for me, a reason to post on Tuesdays) pondering a top ten list a la Letterman. The recent Kobe trade demands had me think "What were the best trades in NBA history?". Since this is my blog, let's let you decide! Here's my list, going from ten to one. Hopefully the Lakers won't make the same mistake...

10. Wilt Chamberlain's two trades: In both instances, Wilt led his team to a title, but the fact that he won only two (one for each) in five chances lowers this a bit. Still, Chamberlain was dominate in Philly, which got him from San Francisco in '65, leading the Sixers to the '67 title with a dominate 68-13 record. He then led the league in assists the following year, before his trade to the Lakers, who won a then record 69 games in 1972 for another title, where he was Finals MVP. They also appeared in three other finals, so this was a great deal.

9. Shaquille O'Neal to Miami for Lamar Odom, Caron Butler and Brian Grant (2004): Yes, the deal that started this Kobe ball rolling, but the fact is that the Lakers haven't recovered yet, and Shaq celebrated his 4th title last year (not last season, mind you). Maybe he wasn't dominant, but he was a key figure, drawing attention from Dwayne Wade enough for Wade to be MVP of the series. Meanwhile, Odom has been decent, but Butler was traded to Washington (where he was an All-Star) for the dramatic bust, Kwame Brown, and Grant left for Phoenix at seasons end '05. Enough said.

8. Dave DeBusschere for Walt Bellamy and Butch Komives (1968): DeBusschere was a steady performer for the Pistons in the '60s, but when he was traded to the Knicks, his value skyrocketed. DeBusschere was a key component of both Knicks championship teams of the '70s, and became team GM (remember his celebration of winning the draft lottery in '85?) and a Hall of Famer. As for the others, Bellamy was a HOF, but after playing 88 games (a record) in '69 and another full season in '70, he left for Atlanta, and Komives was below average. A superstar for less deal.

7. Julius Erving for cash (1976): This deal is at 7 not so much for what Erving did, but for what he meant to the league. For those who may be confused, the then New York Nets were cash strapped when the ABA merged into the NBA in 1976 (mainly from paying fees to the Knicks for playing in New York) that they traded Erving to the 76ers for cash, straight up. Erving goes on to win a regular season MVP (only man to do it in the ABA and NBA) and a world title oin 1983. The Nets have never won an NBA title in two trips to the Finals.

6. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar for Elmore Smith, Brian Winters, Junior Bridgeman and Dave Meyers (1975): Kareem had demanded a trade following the '75 season, one where the Bucks missed the playoffs for the first time with him, to either New York or Los Angeles. What makes this curious is that Milwaukee was in the West at the time; why not trade him to the East? In any case, Jabbar won three MVPs in L.A. (to go with three in Milwaukee) and with the help of a man we'll see later on the list, won five titles to go with his Milwaukee one, becoming the NBA all-time leader in many categories. As for the players traded for him, only Bridgeman became anything more than filler for a team.

5. Kobe Bryant for Vlade Divac (1996): Yes, Kobe's been involved in a trade before. On Draft night in 1996, Jerry West became enamored with Kobe's potential. So he called up Charlotte, who needed a center. Since Shaq had just signed with the Lakers, West was more than happy to trade Divac. Vlade lasted just two seasons in Charlotte before signing with the Kings in 1998. Meanwhile, Shaq and Kobe would lead the Lakers to three world titles.

4. Scottie Pippen for Olden Polynice (1987): When you look at it today, you wonder "What was Seattle thinking?". Well, Seattle needed a center, having set up what looked like a solid front line (Dale Ellis, Xavier McDaniel, etc,) and traded first round pick Pippen on draft day for Polynice. While Pippen became a six time world champion, a multiple time All-Star, one of the most versitle forwards in history and a member of the 50 Greatest Players club, Polynice was just a space eater for Seattle, the Clippers, Detroit, Sacramento, the Sonics again, and Utah. Hindsight is 20-20, huh?

3. Robert Parish and #3 pick (Kevin McHale) for #1 pick (Joe Barry Carroll) and #15 pick (Rickey Brown): This is a prime example of why the Celtics won 16 titles; who else would trade the #1 pick and come out much better for it? Parish's game blossomed in Boston after he struggled in Golden State, and McHale became a great PF with his unparreled low-post game. Together with Larry BIrd, they won five conference titles and three NBA titles. As for the Warriors, Carroll became an All-Star in 1987 but was traded soon after, and Brown retired form the Hawks in 1985 after being traded there in '83. They combined for two playoff appearences. No wonder the Warriors missed the playoffs in 8 of ten years.

2. First round pick in 1979 (Magic Johnson) for the right to sign Gail Goodrich (1976): This is one of those sign-and trades that, at the time you make them, you don't know how they'll turn out. The then New Orleans Jazz thought Goodrich, a true PG who led L.A. to the 1972 title, would complement Pete Maravich, so they morgaged the future to get him. In three injury-plagued seasons, Goodrich and the Jazz never reached the playoffs, and after getting the worst record in the East in 1979, they lost the chance to call the coin flip to the Lakers, who won the flip, then took Magic #1 overall. He ended up with 3 regular season MVPs, 3 Finals MVPs, five NBA titles, and at the time of his retirement, was the all-time assist leader. Quite a disparity, isn't it?

1. Draft rights to Bill Russell for Ed Macauley and Cliff Hagan (1956): In the annals of sports, no trade has defined a dynasty more than this one. To make matters worse, they essentially traded Russell for local guys to save the team, only to move anyway 12 years later, and another team (the Rochester Royals, now the KIngs) passed on Russell when Celtic president Walter Brown (according to legend) steered the Ice Capades (the Ice Capades!) through Rochester for a couple of years (they move to Cincinnati one year later). To make matters short, Russell was the greatest winner of his, or any other, generation, winning two college titles, an Olympic gold medal, and 11 NBA titles in his 13 year career, much of which he spent dominating defensively as few others have. Macauley and Hagan did help Bob Pettit and the St. Louis Hawks beat an injured Russell-led Celtics for the 1958 title (the only Hawks title), but the team moved to Atlanta in 1968. Eleven to one. Which would you take?

Honorable Mentions

1. Utah Trades rights to Dominique Wilkins to Atlanta for John Drew, Freeman Williams, and cash (1982):  Just imagine a Utah team with Magic, Stockton, Wilkins, Malone and Mark Eaton: wouldn't they have won some titles in the '80s?

2. Charles Barkley to Phoenix for Jeff Hornacek, Tim Perry and Andrew Lang (1992): The only reason it doesn't make the list is that Phoenix didn't win a title.

3. Phoenix trades Dennis Johnson to Boston for Rick Robey (1983): Talk about betting on the wrong horse: DJ wins two more titles, Robey quickly disappears.

4. Grant Hill signs with Detroit and is traded to Orlando for Ben Wallace and Chucky Atkins (2000): Wallace goes on to lead Detroit to a title. Hill goes on to 4 ankle surgeries.

5. Mark Aguirre to Detroit for Adrian Dantley (1989):Controversial, but the Pistons didn't win titles in the Bad Boy era til he arrived. Coincidence?

Any other trades I  may have missed? Or disagree with my choices? That's what this post is about. What do you think? 

It's spring training, the time when everybody, Yankees and Royals, has the same record, and hope springs eternal. Nonetheless, why must we be subjected to spring training games on national TV? There's nothing to get excited about (don't give me the Dice-K ####, either) and the majority of the games are played by minor leaguers who will likely get shipped down by the end of it. Admittedely, they are shown at times when the schedule is rather clear,but the only reason we watch any baseball is to see the stars play! Why sit through four hours of boring #### and not see the real players for most of the game? If they are that vital, why not make them count, huh? I say let the local markets show these game and let the Foxs and ESPNs show only the games that matter. As Charles Barkley once said " Preseason is just another way to scam the fans out of their money". What do you think?

What's the deal with the fat contracts given to practically every baseball free agent of late? We've seen J.D. Drew, Julio Lugo, and Gil Meche (Gil Meche!), among others, garner fat contracts, the Red Sox pay $51 million just to talk to a Japanese pitcher, and Ted Lilly earn his contract... on the operating table! I guess the only requirement to get a good check is to throw the ball over the plate! Imagine the monopoly Roger Clemens could command for a half season of work? The question I wonder is this: who got the most #### for their buck? Any winners here?