Book-browsing the other day, I came across the latest issue of Rolling Stone, their 40th Anniversary issue. Interesting in that it had 20 interviews with various VIPs and their recollections of 1967, The Summer Of Love.

Jimmy Carter, Patti Smith, George McGovern, Jane Fonda, Michael Moore, Paul McCartney...

... and not a single person of color.

Not a one.

Now, I know, it's Rolling Stone. Dedicated to keeping rock and roll alive, music that if you believe some is mostly white: The Beatles, Elvis, Buddy Holly, The Stones, Chicago, Led Zep, The Doors...you get the idea. Never mind the fact that R&R orgins are rooted in rhythm and blues, or the Chuck Berrys, Otis Reddings, Little Richards who helped shape the genre.

And I have no problem giving props where they are due - I have and play music from all of the above in my collection. But RS has always seemed to accept its roots with reluctance, preferring the "rock" in "rock and roll" - and that is not my reality.

Speaking of reality, quick: What were the two defining issues of 1967 - if not the decade? If you chose anything other than Civil Rights and Vietnam, kindly go back into hibernation.

And the faces of civil rights were...King, Ralph Abernathy, Stokley Carmichael, Huey Newton, Andy Young, Fannie Lou Hamer, and so on. (Notice a trend?) The most hated man in 1967 America?

Muhammad Ali, of course, refused induction ("I ain't got no quarrel with them Vietcong") and  unjustly stripped of his title that June at the peak of his serious, serious game. 

And Rolling Stone decided that out of 20 interviews they couldn't have ONE interview of an Ali, Andrew Young, Smokey Robinson or Carlos Santana? Was Bill Russell or Jim Brown busy? How about a close associate of the late, great, Ceasar Chavez? 

What, all of their phones were disconnected?

Rolling Stone blew it. By design. 

Then again, whitewashing history is so... 1967...

And that's why that issue stayed on the rack, unbought.

----------------

In other news, the Spurs Robert Horry was ready and willing to compare his Spurs to the great teams of the 1980's.

"We would beat them," he boasted.

"No disrespect to the guys back in the 80's and the 70's, but the guys now are so much better than those guys," Horry said. "I don't care what they say. If you look at old films, guys only went right. They turned and kept it in their right hand. Look at the things LeBron (James) can do, Tim (Duncan) can do, Tony (Parker) can do, Manu (Ginobili) can do. Little (Daniel) Gibson over there. There's no way you can compare those guys. We watched what they did and expanded on that."

OK Big Shot Bob, are you telling me that everyone in today's NBA can go left? Please! You've been in the league since Mikan, and the next time I see you post twice in a row will be the first. I'll be the first to say that this league has more athletes than ever. I'll also say that basketball skills are still in shorter supply league-wide than common sense in the Paris Hilton household.

While I'm on this subject, Tim Duncan would have to play center, assuming that we use the 06-07 Spurs in this comparison. Honestly, does anyone really believe that Fabrico "Little Fabio" Oberto would last against Robert Parish, Kareem, or Moses Malone? I'm disqualfiying him on his hair alone. Nah, Timmy D, you're going to have to man up and be what you are - a center.

Now onto the comparison:

1985 Lakers vs 07 Spurs:

Backcourt: Magic v. Tony Parker. Parker would probably draw Bryon Scott, I suspect Magic would guard the offensively challenged Bruce Bowen or the solid, but aged Michael Finley. Scott would not only slow down Parker somewhat, but unlike Eric Snow, Bryon had a deadeye out to three point range. And who guards Magic? Ginobili would get posted more than a Gabrille Union pin-up. Bowen couldn't stop LeBron from posting - do you think he'd do better with Magic? Edge: Lakers, but not a huge one.

Frontcourt: Big Game vs Big Shot. James Worthy , A.C. Green and Kurt Rambis vs Bruce Bowen, Horry, and Oberto. I suspect that Bowen would start by guarding Magic, hence Horry would get the PT on James. For stretches, Horry would hold his own - after all, Worthy is the forefather of Horry - a tall (Worthy goes 6-9 to Horry's 6-10), "long" explosive 3 on the wing.

Alas, Horry may have been "The New", it doesn't mean he's "The Improved". Worthy is far more offensive-minded and can score inside or out, depending on the situation. A young Horry would have made this a really interesting confrontation with his defense and length. But over 7 games, if the series goes that long, Horry gets ground down, forcing Bowen or Finley to deal with number 42. A.C. Green/Rambis and Elston/Oberto would be a standstill.

But the special matchup would be The Hair of Oberto vs The Jehri Curl of Green. A.C.'s grease would give him a small edge inside, where he'd be harder to grab, but it would be hell on his shooting touch.

Edge: Lakers, Worthy being the difference.

Center: Kareem vs Duncan/Oberto/Elston - Possibly the two most fundamentally sound big men to ever play square off. The Skyhook v. The Bank Shot. The Old Stone Face versus... The Younger Stone Face. Duncan would get the edge running the floor on the 40-year-old "Cap", but the skyhook is money - and I'm talking Euros (have you seen the dollar lately?). Kareem basically took most of the regular season off from rebounding, but stepped it up in the playoffs. Duncan's D would make life difficult for Jabbar, and Elston would #### to make life painful and slow The Old Man down. I suspect Horry would even take a turn here. But Duncan isn't used to guarding prolific post men. He usually left the dirty work of guarding Shaq to Robinson or Malik Rose until the 4th period. He won't have that luxury against this team.

Edge: Draw.

The Bench: Spurs bring the 6th man of the year in Ginobili. Brent Barry would drop in some threes. Horry would be the swing man playing the 3-4-5 slots. But the Lakers would bring Michael Cooper, the Bruce Bowen of the 80s (minus the cheap shots) to lock down Parker or G-Nose (more likely), and to match Barry or Bowen on 3's. Mychal Thompson and Kurt Rambis would provide more scoring than Elson or Oberto, and could guard Duncan credibly. Thompson and Kareem at the 4 and 5 have a clear edge on any Duncan combo that the Spurs could throw out.

Edge: Lakers, slight.

Overall, I actually like the 85 Lakers more, with a younger Kareem, but their bench wasn't quite as deep (Silk Wilkes was getting up there in age, as was Bob McAdoo), and no A.C. Green.

And I'd like the Spurs to take a couple of games on guts, Parker, and a big game from Manu supporting Duncan. But the Lakers' superior depth and running game and Magic would be too much over the course of seven games. The Spurs would have to slow the tempo, and the great secret of the Showtime Lakers was that they could play it either way, much to the chagrin of the Spurs.

The Verdict: Lakers in 6.