A Rose By Any Other Name Is... Younger, Faster, And Named Chris Wilcox

WWOD? Rates the Rose/Wilcox Swap

Malik Rose arrived in New York via trade (for Nazr Mohammed) during the 2004-2005 season. He played in 26 games down the stretch that year (under Herb Williams who had taken over for a deposed Lenny Wilkens) and averaged a shade over 23 minutes per contest. The following season he started in 35 games, the majority of which were late in the season as injuries took their toll on the club. In each season since his minutes have dropped precipitously. In 2008-09, Rose played in 18 games for the Knicks and averaged 8.9 minutes in those games that he did play. That leaves 35 games when he never got off the bench while the game was on. In his prime, he was a dogged defender who could be counted on to go after bigger post players and do everything he could to move them off the block. He would also get two or three buckets a night without having a play called for him. He was the glue guy of a championship Spurs squad. He was the sort of limited player that fits a role on a top-flight club and the sort of player that was too limited to make a difference on a bad team. Like the Knicks. By all accounts, Rose is a great teammate and as dogged in his charity work as he was working in the paint.

Yesterday, Knicks President Donnie Walsh shipped Rose to the StolenSonics in exchange for Chris Wilcox. The Knicks also included "cash considerations" to make up the small difference between the two contracts (small difference = less than a million dollars).

Ultimately, we traded away an older guy who rarely plays for a younger guy with some of the same skills who might actually play. And we did it without affecting the salary cap. I'm for this, in theory. I think the Knicks roster has had too many dead spots this season and this eliminates one of them at approximately zero cost.

Chris Wilcox is playing in his sixth NBA season after a noticeable (but, perhaps not noteworthy) career at the University of Maryland. He was drafted with the No. 8 pick in the 2002 draft by the Los Angeles Clippers. The Knicks tapped Nene with the No. 7 pick (and quickly traded him to the Nuggets) but had actually worked out Wilcox. At the time, I think was pulling for Wilcox selection. But this was probably because I was a college student who had just watched him help the Terps to a title. In those days, he was athletic and powerful. Unpolished and unrelenting. I liked those things then. I still do.

Before enrolling at Maryland, Wilcox led his high school squad to a state title in North Carolina. So, the guy grew up as a winner. And, then he ended up playing for the Clippers. Where he won less. After four forgettable seasons in LaLa land he was traded to the Seattle Sonics. He "blossomed" in the Emerald City, averaging more than 13 points and 7 rebounds in each of the last three seasons. His numbers were down across the boxscore this season - including an almost ten minute drop in minutes per game. The StolenSonics originally package him in the deal for Tyson Chandler. That deal was rescinded and he was quickly turned around and shipped to New York.

At worst, Wilcox is a version of Rose that Coach D'Antoni can feel comfortable about putting into a game. Even if he doesn't crack the regular rotation, he's a younger, taller, faster and stronger version of Rose. For about the contract and without any long-term implications. At best, Wilcox is a guy who can join the frontcourt rotation and toughen up the Knicks interior defense. He's the guy that takes the hard foul last week when the Knicks were being run over in Oakland against the Warriors. He takes some of the minutes off of Lee's plate, which should serve to keep him rested and to slightly depress his numbers (which will only help the club as we look to sign him to a contract after the season).

The biggest (and perhaps only) thing the Knicks lose by parting ways with Rose is his off-the-court leadership and his influence on the younger players. I would contend, though, that these things were much more necessary and valuable when the team was mired in dysfunction than they are now. When the team was being torn asunder by the feud between Isiah Thomas and Stephon Marbury or the feud between Isiah Thomas and the City of New York it was important to have Rose calming the younger players and staying on an even keel as the world burned around them. I think that skillset is less necessary on a team listening to its coach and not under siege from its fans.

Although it's hard to say that this trade is a resounding success at first sight, I think it's a deal that reaffirms the team's commitment to making the playoffs this season.

Grade: B

The WWOD? Interview: Alan Hahn

Also Known As, Part 1 of the WWOD? Second-Half Preview Spectacular

The concept of the "interview" is most commonly thought of as it pertains to job applications. In those cases, the person being interviewed is looking to prove something to the questioner. Going way back to way-back times in history that we've mostly learned about in school books and in Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure, there is the Socratic manner of questioning. Which isn't really interviewing at all. It's more like asking a series of questions in order to get someone to agree with you. It's equal parts educational and manipulative. This is a large part of my strategy when playing Risk. A more recent formulation of the interview was postulated by Andy Warhol's Interview magazine, which was a celebrity-obsessed mag that focused on fashion and art. And, occasionally, Burt Reynolds.

The WWOD? Interview is like none of these things. Perhaps it's best described as an inversion of the job interview, in which the questioner worked for Warhol and was interviewing Socrates. By posing questions to someone more knowledgeable and better credentialed than me, I hope to learn things that I do not know and gain insight into those things that remain murky to my lesser intellect.

In the first installment of The WWOD? Interview (which is also the first installment of the multi-part preview of the second half the Knicks 2008-2009 season which will be rolling out through the next few days), I've been lucky enough to have one of the NBA's top beat writers agree to read through a terribly overwrought line of questioning and provide a few insightful answers. Alan Hahn covers the New York Knickerbockers beat for Newsday and has been one of the best at wedding beat reporting and blogging. His blog, The Knicks Fix, is a daily stop for any die-hard Knicks fan with a desk job. Hahn formerly covered the Islanders and took over the Knicks beat in 2006. Aside from having the X's and the O's down cold and being un-beholden to any particular players (and not overly concerned with which of his colleagues/competitors is beholden to particular players), Hahn has really set himself apart from the pack with his level-headed and mathematically sound understanding of all the ins and outs facing the Knicks as 2010 looms. He takes his work deadly serious but also seems to keep his topic in perspective, mixing in humor and going easy on the fire and brimstone that characterizes much of the coverage that we've grown accustomed to in and around New York City. He probably is also kind to the elderly and a good tipper.

So, I sent Mr. Hahn (left) ten rambling questions over the weekend. He sent back ten cogent answers. If it were up to me I'd have kept at him until he our exchanges were less cordial. I'd have kept picking his brain about hoops until a restraining order was at least mentioned casually. But, I didn't. Because Hahn seems to be a genuinely nice guy and someone who I would love to keep on friendly terms with.

When James Lipton and the fine folks at The Actors Studio wanted to begin an interview series in 1994 they aimed high when booking their first guess. They brought in Paul Newman, since the man who played the titular role in Cool Hand Luke and breathed life into Butch Cassidy and Reg Dunlop represented the height of the acting craft. Well, Alan Hahn is WWOD?'s Paul Newman. Please give him your undivided attention.

WWOD?: Before we open up the playbook and get into the first half (and then some) of the Knicks 2008-2009 season, I'd like to get to know a bit more about our guest. So far, we've figured out that you're quite tall by layperson standards, that you previously covered the Strong Islanders of the NHL before landing the Knicks beat and that you (perhaps along with Peter Abraham of The Journal News) have best grasped the relationship between beat reporting and blogging. How did you end up on the Knicks beat? Was this a destination you had in mind when you embarked on your career as a journalist?

Alan Hahn: Thanks for pointing out my freakishly abnormality, though I feel so normal at 6'6" when I'm in an NBA locker room. Then again, I'm 6'6" with a college basketball background and yet I'm holding a tape recorder instead of a ball or a clipboard. Which is kind of depressing. So, again, thanks for pointing that out....Turning more serious, I have to say from the perspective of what I expected out of life as a 12 year old, I've accomplished two dreams I had, which was to cover the Islanders and Knicks, which were my two favorite teams growing up as a sports fan. I was quite happy covering the Isles and could have stayed there for another 10 years (unless the franchise moved to Kansas City...then forget it). I had always followed the Knicks with some interest and the NHL lockout allowed me some time around the team as a backup and sidebar writer. My editor approached me in 2006 about making a change and said he wouldn't take no for an answer. It was a tough transition, but also fun for me because I already had so much of the team in my blood from a historical point of view. I still miss hockey, but I also felt a little bit like coming home when I got back to basketball.

WWOD?: Your employer is Newsday, which from afar seems to offer both advantages and disadvantages when it comes to covering the Knicks. It must be mentioned that both your paper and the team you cover fall under the purview of a certain member of a band called JD & the Straight Shot. I'm going to guess that you'd inform me that both Dolan-helmed companies are a pleasure to be around if I were to ask. So, I'm not even going to ask that question. Moving on, has the fact that Newsday has a smaller print presence in the Big Apple and its non-LI environs been an impetus in building up (and being permitted to do so by your editors) such a robust web presence? Or was The Knicks Fix blog something that just came to you naturally?

AH: Please refer to him as "Mr. Dolan" henceforth. And to be very honest, I have not experienced anything -- anything -- that would suggest I have any reason to benefit or be concerned about being owned by the same parent company as the team I cover. I know on the surface it is natural to wonder or speculate so I understand the question. Anyway...I think we do a great job with our web content, arguably the best among the NY-based newspapers. I don't think our location on Long Island was the motivation to go big on the web...it is the direction we believe our business is headed and we, I like to think, are at the forefront. We set a precedent that you might notice the other NY tabs have followed. All of the beats have a blog. The Knicks Fix evolved from there and continues to evolve as I try to provide what I think the Fixers want and what the blog should be. It's fun and, sometimes, a great release.

WWOD?: Between the various distractions under the previous management junta and the incessant discussion of the Summer of 2010 since Donnie Walsh took the reins of the franchise it seems as if at least half the story with these Knicks has been off the court in the past few seasons (probably going back to that stillborn run at the playoffs in 2006—07). Has this been a hindrance to covering the club or has it actually helped, insofar as there is endless fodder for discussion even when the play is uninspiring? After all, greatness and disrepute move more papers than mediocrity.

AH: I think what you're asking me in all those words is does the fact that there is a lot of off-the-court stuff to discuss make it easier to cover a team that is otherwise uninteresting right now? The answer is this: I think all teams are covered the same. If the Mets were out of it in August, the beat writers -- good ones -- would find angles to keep the reader engaged and interested. You have to keep a relevant topic going . . . not necessarily make up something or blow up a minor story. . . I mean find the relevant story. For the Knicks its the 2010 plan, its how things happening now are impacted by that plan (i.e.: not making a major move at the trade deadline because you don't want to compromise your cap space in 2010 by adding salary now). It's what to do with David Lee and Nate Robinson. Etc. To write about what happened at practice for a team that has been essentially eliminated (not that the Knicks have yet, but if and when they do), is irrelevant. I can't imagine fans want to know about a lineup change, at least not as the main story, when the game that night really doesn't mean anything. To me, if and when the Knicks are inching toward elimination, we should be focusing on the development of Danilo Gallinari and Wilson Chandler and what could happen with David Lee and Nate Robinson, etc. Our job is to find the stories that are most relevant to the team. I actually think it's harder to cover a losing team than it is to cover a winning one. Winning teams are easy. The angles come every day. The games always matter. Matchups matter. Strategy matters. But for losing teams, March and April can feel like an eternity, especially if the coach isn't on the hot seat.

WWOD?:.Now, that we've gotten to know you and have a better understanding of how it is that you do that thing you do so well it's time to turn out attention to the court. What do you see as the best-case scenario for the second half of the Knickerbockers season? What did you see as the best-case scenario coming into the campaign?

AH: I still see it the same way: if the Knicks can show the league (and the fans) that they are no longer a circus act, it's a start. If they can hang in the playoff race for most of the season, it's a good sign. A nice playoff push, whether they achieve it or not, is a major step. If they somehow can make the playoffs, all well and good. But deep down I think it's more valuable for the franchise to get one more lottery pick. They don't have one in 2010 and you certainly don't expect to be in the lottery in 2011. So here's the chance to land one more quality young player (cheap contract for a while) before you make a run at the big-name players in 2010 (via trades or free agency). So right now the best-case scenario in my mind is that Gallinari continues to emerge and maybe starts to show his potential and the Knicks stay in the playoff race up into April instead of having meaningless games before the Final Four.

WWOD?: Looking back at the season thus far, the player who has exceeded my expectations by the greatest measure is Chris Duhon. I was underwhelmed by his signing during the offseason and uninspired by his play very early in the season. But, he seemed to find his way during a November game at Washington and really come into his own. How much credit can be given to Coach D'Antoni's system? The abundance of minutes? And to the player himself? I'm inclined to think that he won't be here for the long haul in spite of his fine play thus far this season, but what are your thoughts on Duhon's future in a Knicks uniform?

AH: I think even Chris Duhon would admit his success this season is a direct result of the system. Look at Steve Nash's season in Phoenix right now. His game has suffered tremendously in D'Antoni's absence. For the right point guard, this system can really make you look good (statistically speaking). That's why D'Antoni was so convinced that Duhon was a good fit. His game was right for the demands of that position. But you also have to credit Duhonfor having the cubes to handle the Stephon Marbury situation during training camp. Chris has really raised his profile after turning into a backup guard in Chicago. I think they'll look to extend him after next season, but the cost will be interesting. My only curiosity is his durability. The minutes are very demanding, especially without a backup PG on the roster. But the guy is tough and, I believe, is a winner.

WWOD?: Moving on from Duhon's future to that of his teammates, have you gotten a feel for how the lack of certainty surrounding virtually everyone on the roster (save Danilo Gallinari, probably) has affected these guys on a nightly basis? It would seem to me that it must make it difficult for anyone to assume a leadership role or to demand accountability when there is really no one with much solid ground under foot.

AH: I think you said a lot there about where the Knicks are as a team and what this season is all about and why the 2010 plan is so important. This is a team with players, probably mostly role players and some who could be key pieces to a great team, but the biggest thing they are missing - aside from a two guard or a backup point guard or a shot-blocking big man -- is a true leader. A superstar who can be the main man. The Knicks haven't had this element since Patrick Ewing. Period. And they just won't have that accountability and standard until they get someone like that again. The guy who just won't accept losing and who makes everyone else raise their game to his level. Those are special players who don't come along in salary-dump trades. And that's what makes 2010 so critical to this franchise's future, in my opinion.

WWOD?: The two (important) players whose futures are most unclear are Nate Robinson and David Lee? Lee (with the help of yeoman's minutes) has played his way into a borderline All-Star and lock for 10/10 whereas Nate has been both The Great (aside from his HUGE game against LAC, that 19-point second quarter he had against Charlotte was out of this world) and The Goat. Both are fan favorites that may be casualties of the rebuilding process. Do you think either player would be inclined to re-sign at a discount to stay in New York? Do you think the club has designs on keeping either (or both)? And, if the Knicks are actually able to lure Lebron James and Chris Bosh here in 2010 then do either current Knicks even crack a championship-caliber starting lineup?

AH: I'm not sure it makes sense for anyone in their situation, at their age, to sign for a "discount". It's idealistic, but ridiculous to expect from players so early in their careers. Now saying that....either or both could re-sign backloaded deals that take some pressure off the 2010 cap situation. That is something I can see. But will they be able to sign both players and not compromise 2010? Doubtful, at least not unless they can move Eddy Curry's $11.2M salary off the books for 2010. As for signing LeBron or Bosh or whomever . . . I think any team becomes a championship contender if they can bring in two legit all-star players. Look at the Celtics. They brought in Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen. They added him to Paul Pierce and the worst team in the NBA won the title. It can be done.

WWOD?: In my discussion with other NBA bloggers I am frequently asked how I feel about the Knicks "throwing away" two seasons in a most-likely doomed, all-in gamble for Lebron James. I always turn the question around and ask what exactly the club threw away. Yes, we dumped Jamal and Z-Bo but we also are on track to win more games this season than we did last season. I'll contend that the club is aiming to rebuild through free agency and that even without Lebron (or Wade) the club will be better off in two years than it was last year. Do you see Walsh's strategy as overly dependent on signing Lebron (or Wade)? Do you think the team actually threw away two seasons? Or that the regime is trying to navigate the straightest-line course from the purgatory they found the club in?
AH: I don't think fans can get so fixated on one guy. Even if the media have given no indication to the contrary so far. Do I believe he'll stay in Cleveland? Yes. But so many things can happen between now and then so you always have to leave the door open. However, regardless of LeBron, the Knicks are doing the right thing by getting under the cap in time for a summer where so many of the league's top players are expected to be available. And even if they aren't free agents, the Knicks could acquire players in a trade. So it's a good strategy...better than anything we've seen over the past decade, I would argue.

WWOD?: As much as it has become a topic as tiresome and eye-roll inducing as bank bailouts, we would be negligent to neglect it altogether. What should be the denouement of the Marbury saga? Forgetting how we got to this point, what do you see as the most sensible – and fair – conclusion to this course of events that has sullied the reputations of all parties? Is there any chance that Duhon's current injury provides one last chance for reconciliation?

AH: I believe the best approach is what we're seeing now: pay him to stay away. Let the contract melt off the payroll and let him be a free agent this summer. Wish him well and move forward. It makes no sense to pay him to be a free agent and then allow another team to benefit from your generosity. He is under contract and your obligation is to pay him. Period. So you pay him. Period. In the state of our current economy, I don't know how anyone can feel empathy for someone who will be handed $20.8M to stay home. It's almost like a severance pay, which many bank executives can relate to. The rest of us can only dream about it. And, quite frankly, if Stephon really really wanted to play and had a team that desperately wanted him...don't you think he would accept the Knicks buyout offer and move on, knowing he could make that money back in free agency this summer? Don't you think he'd have far more value this summer as a free agent if he finished the season playing great for a playoff team and had a great run in the post-season? But right now, if he winds up not playing this entire year, he goes into the summer not playing in an NBA game for 18 months and a year older and with teams wondering if he is worth the risk. Just bloggin.

WWOD?: In the kiddie-pool shallow view of many fans, you have a great gig because you get tickets to Knicks games, get to meet the players and travel the country. And while those things are true, I know there's a lot more to it. There's the airplane smell that you can't get out of nostrils, the being away from family and friends, the exhaustion of getting in to a strange city in the middle of the night and then getting up early to attend a morning shootaround before a Sunday afternoon game where players won't give you a straight answer about the location of a fire extinguisher even after you've burst into flames. We now it's not all courtsides and high fives. But, what has been the best I-can't-believe-I'm-actually-here-right-now moment that you've had while covering the Knickerbockers?

AH: Whoa. Who gets tickets to Knicks games? I don't. I have a season credential. It's only for me and, I mean, I'm not there with a beer and my buddies kicking back. I'm sitting with a laptop keeping notes, following stories and writing like mad to make deadline. The travel can make you forget what day it is, never mind the city. Like you said, it's crazy. I tell my family and friends...I'm around in the summer. But from October to April I'm a ghost. I loved it when I was single, but once you get married and have kids, it can really rip your heart out sometimes. But it's also a great adrenaline rush. So no complaints. Just lots of cell minutes and web cam conversations with the kids. It's funny, some fans don't even realize we actually travel. They think we watch the games on TV and write about it off that. Hilarious. I love the reaction I get from people when they go, "You mean you get to go in the locker room?" Yeah! Sweaty towels and everything! But the I-can't-believe-this-is-happening-to-me moment hasn't happened yet. I imagine it would come if I ever covered the Islanders in the Stanley Cup Finals or the Knicks in the NBA Finals. It would have to be something surreal. Something I enver thought I'd ever get to see. Something magical. Maybe that's my new dream. I want to grow up and cover a championship team.

And, that's all we wrote. Please go check out Hahn's fine work over at The Knicks Fix and pick up a copy of Newsday at a newstand near you to read all about the latest Knickerbockers news from a guy covering the game with a diligence, honesty and fealty to his readers that is increasingly rare these days.

Carpe Dunk Contest

Knicks Winning the Slam Dunk Contest

1989 -The Force Is With You Young Skywalker

New York's other other No. 7 (after Mantle and Reyes), Kenny "Sky" Walker powers his way to the '89 title over Spud Webb, Clyde the Glide and others.

2006 - Standing on the Shoulders of Short Guys

A persistent Nate the Great takes home the '06 title with unmatched creativity, athleticism and a little help from a little friend.

Nothing Says Lovin'... Like the Slam Dunk Contest

Couldn't get dinner reservations at that swank steakhouse in Tribeca? No more tickets available to watch the animals doing it at the zoo? Are you totally stumped about how to spend Valentine's Day with your main squeeze?

Well, David Stern, the National Basketball Association and the fine folks at TNT have just the lubricant to ease your evening of romance: The NBA Slam Dunk Contest. Because nothing shows that special lady that you've been thinking about her like sitting down near a crackling fire space-heater with the finest bottle of Yellow Tail Merlot available at the Los Muchachos bodega on the corner to watch Dwight Howard defend his slam dunk championship against Nate Robinson, J.R. Smith and Rudy Fernandez.

Trust me, she'll just love the dunk when contestants are asked to team up with another person to execute a slam. That's when you lean in real close, kiss the nape of her neck and say in the deepest tone you can effectively pull off, "Baby, I just want you to know that if I were ever selected to participate in a contest of slam dunks that you would be my first choice of person to leap over. I just want you to know that, baby. Now and forever."

After that, she'll be all yours. Because the communication of those players and the intimacy they show and the way they share personal space will be like the next level that she wants to take your relationship. And, if somehow, someway that doesn't work then just recite this poem.

Rockets are red
Knicks are blue
Let's move to the bed
I wanna dunk you

These words work 60% of the time every time.

A Brief History of Friday the 13th

If a Friday should happen to fall upon the 13th of any given month then you're in trouble. We all are. Friday the 13th is considered a day of bad luck and danger in the U.S. of A. as well as most of Western Europe. Except in Italy, where they get all freaked out by Friday the 17th. Which is just crazy.

This superstition arose in part because of the unholy union of the number thirteen and Friday, which have each been considered unlucky for a really long time. So, that makes Friday the 13th like the exact opposite of peanut butter cups, which take two things that are great on their own - peanut butter and chocolate - and make one thing that is even better together.

The number 13 has been the unwelcome table guest at the all-numbers dinner party ever since Jesus's last Passover seder. Ever since that fateful sitdown - also known as the Last Supper by people who don't really know what Passover is - it has been considered terribly unlucky to have thirteen people seated at a table. The fear is that as soon as that last person pulls up a chair that one of the diners is doomed to die, imminently. Another reason that mankind has been totally uncomfortable around the number 13 is that it is most decidedly not the number 12. Apparently, everyone loves the number 12 and everything afterwards is sort of a letdown. In numerology, the number 12 is deemed the number of completeness. This is why there are 12 months of the year, 12 signs of the zodiac, 12 tribes of Israel, 12 Apostles of Jesus and 12 steps to sobering up. Or, are there 12 of those things only because that number really is completeness? Total mind blow. Remember, there is no spoon.

Either way, 13 is no good. Insofar as it is incomplete and may have played a larger role than Judas in the rucifiction-cay of a certain personal savior. And, this neatly brings us to Friday. Which was the day on which the aforementioned J.C. was crucified, possibly because of that whole 13-guests-at-a-table thing. Not surprisingly, Christians have viewed this day of the week a little skeptically ever since.

Of course, the holiday celebrated on the Friday during Easter weekend is called "Good" Friday. As ever, the Roman Catholic Church is ironic through and through. Some folks who were less versed in the actual lack of goodness of Fridays may have taken this whole "Good" Friday thing a bit too literally and eventually opened up a chain of reasonably-priced restaurants called T.G.I. Friday's. Or they may not, but either way, there is something also ironic about naming a restaurant with an acronym that stands for "Thank God It's Friday" since, you know, Friday is very, very unlucky because that was the day that some people may (or may not, we're not here to debate the historical reality of any of this, just to deal with the anecdotal reality), have killed God's kid. So, this deity probably wouldn't be too keen on Fridays no matter how much he/she loved potato skins. Or, maybe I'm just over-thinking this.

And, from all of these mystical and religious underpinnings sprang that most spiritual of film cycles: the Friday the 13th series featuring murderous Jason Voorhees and all manner of nubile young men and women who are doomed to be mutilated (not too long after being titillated).

The first film in the series featuring a hockey-masked killer was released in 1980. This troubled fellow later turned up in space, Hell and the nightmare realm where Freddy Krueger resides. Oh, and he also went to Manhattan. He didn't care for it. Today, a new installment of the story comes out. It's considered a reboot. Which is sort of like the film-making version of a mulligan. This film, released cleverly on Friday, February 13th brings Jason back to his original haunt Crystal Lake.

[Ed note: this post is culled from the WWOD? archives and is a slightly edited version of a post that originally ran on WWOD? on 6/13/08.]

Not 4 Long

Favre Retires After 1 Season With Jets
(And, I try for a tabloid-style headline)

I'm relieved. Not quite "oh-she's-not-pregnant" relieved, but definitely "don't-worry-antibiotics-will-take-care-of-it" relieved. Brett Favre will not be under center for the New York Jets next season. The play calling and the running game will not be held hostage by history. The future is now. I'm not sure if the future is bright. I'm not sure what the Brett Ratliff Era will bring. Or, if it is even upon us. But it is now. And, Brett Favre is in the past.

At least, until he comes out of retirement in eight weeks and signs a one-year deal with the Vikings.

Perhaps, the most lasting legacy that Favre will leave in the greater New York area is the abundance of dark green No. 4 jerseys. It was (at least from April to October) the top-selling jersey in the NFL this season. And, now it is as relevant as an Emmit Smith's Cardinals jersey. It joins the ranks of those jerseys that will always make you do a double-take when you see them in a crowd. It will become a cautionary tale for aging legends in future years.

Once during a SNY broadcast of a New York Mets game, should-be Hall of Famer turned Broadcaster Keith Hernandez referred to his final days in Cleveland as "the wilderness." And, that is the name I've given to the pantheon of wayward sports jersey. Whenever a player's pride and lack of creativity keeps them on the field long after their bodies and minds have ceded that which once made them great they find themselves in The Wilderness.

The Wilderness: New York Branch

Joe Namath's Rams Jersey

Walt Frazier's Cavaliers Jersey

Willie Mays' Mets Jersey

Patrick Ewing's Magic Jersey

Keith Hernandez's Indians Jersey

Warriors Overrun Knicks, 127-144

Read All About It:
ESPN.com
The TImes
Newsday
The Post
The News

The Post is Prologue: Knicks @ Warriors

Knicks (21-29)
@
Warriors (17-35)
10:30 P.M. EST
Oracle Arena, Oakland, Calif.

The good thing about the NBA is that there is (almost) always another game. Unlike, football there is ample room to bounce back from a devastating loss. Or a disheartening four-game losing streak. Which is what the Knicks are trying to do tonight on the left coast. The game between the Knickerbockers and the Warriors is being billed as "an entertaining shootout" according to ESPN.com and has the highest OVER/UNDER of tonight's nine-game slate according to Vegas at 231.5

I'm actually hoping for a game that doesn't see that many points scored. Mostly because the Knicks are on the road and have played as tough a stretch as anyone is likely to play this season (and hasn't handled it as well as the Lakers did who played a pretty tough first week of February themselves) over the past eight days. No matter what the Warriors' record is they are not a team that you want to face on a road trip when you're dragging and looking forward to getting home again. Nellie will have his horses run all over you on a night like that. Which is why I'm hoping for a lower scoring game. That way I know the Knicks will be there at the end.

Of course, if the game is too close at the end then we may all get to watch Jamal Crawford hitting a game-winning shot to lift his new team over his old one. Between Jamal's match-up against his onetime teammates and Al Harrington's return to Oakland there are storylines aplenty. I'd imagine that Harrington enters tonight's tilt with a bigger chip on his shoulder as he was shipped out of the Bay Area because he was in Coach Nelson's doghouse. Crawford, on the other hand, knows his Broadway exit stage left was purely business.

Anyways, I'm looking forward to it and gladly willing to drink a few extra cups of coffee in the morning after staying up late to see this one played out.

As (is again becoming) per usual, I've been trading emails today with a blogger who covers the Knicks' opponent. Below you'll find a back-and-forth with noted Warriors blog Fear the Beard.

WWOD?: How's Jamal Crawford doing? I miss him. Sometimes. Is he most accurately described as the Warriors point guard?
FTB: Jamal is doing well. The adjustment process is always a bit strange for players new to Nellieball, and obviously the Dubs are stacked with combo guards and scorers, so sometimes he disappears a bit. But his passing and game stewardship is being utilized more these days with Monta back in the lineup at the two. His defense is coming along as well as this unit starts to mesh.

WWOD?: What's your final impression of Al Harrington, and the swap for Crawford?
FTB: Tough to say. We still don't have a traditional "four" most of the time, except for the rare occasions where Biedrins and Turiaf have taken the floor together. This makes it a little hard to say it was the ideal trade. Nonetheless, Harrington was always going to be the victim in Nellie's system, which places a lot of unusual pressures on the "four" position.

WWOD?: Given the Ellis injury and the departure of the Bearded One in the offseason, what were your expectations heading into the season? What are they right now?
FTB: My expectations were admittedly pretty low coming into the season, but lately (with most of the team being healthy for stretches here and there) it seems like this team might be a little better than I thought. They're still going to have trouble defensively, but it seems that Crawford's continued development as a floor general and maybe one good trade could get them back into the mix in the west. Next season at least.

WWOD?: It seems like almost every time that I watch the Warriors (which is probably no more than 2 or 3 times a month when their games are nationally broadcast) that I hear about some other young player in Nellie's doghouse. Is his relationship with the players on the roster becoming a problem or do those in the rotation appreciate his my-way-or-the-highway approach?
FTB: Probably safe to say that young players are always going to chafe a bit in his system for a year or two. Unless they are absolutely brilliant, finished products upon arrival. Even Chris Webber was in his doghouse. Chris Mullin too. It's almost a rite of passage in his psychological approach I'm thinking.

WWOD?: With Baron Davis, Jason Richardson, Harrington and Pietrus gone, do you still think that your current squad can look to build on the 2007 upset over Dallas? Or has the franchise really started fresh? Is the most lasting legacy of that playoff series the renewal of local interest in the team?
FTB: It's a new team and a new day. Most of the key figures in the playoff upset have left the building, so I would say that the legacy is really passion, for the fans and the remaining players. The culture of losing was vanquished at least temporarily, and that's better than not at all.

Worst. 60-Point Game. Ever.

Was Kobe's Big Night the Worst 60+ Point Game Of All Time?

As the time ticked down in the final minutes of the fourth quarter the tension in the Garden was reaching a fever pitch. Would he do it? Was it possible? Was this history in the making?

And, no. It wasn't Kobe's point total that had me at the edge of my seat late in the game. He had scored so many from the free-throw line (he went 20 for 20) on so many dubious touch calls and so wholly divorced himself from his teammates that watching his scoring display was more like being in an art gallery than at a sporting event. We were looking at something incredibly impressive that I couldn't fathom most people doing but there was little immediacy to it. He was firing up a few lightly-to-slightly contested jumpshots each minute that he was on the court and making more than he was missing. No doubt, it was something that most players couldn't pull off but it was also something that most players wouldn't attempt so doggedly without at least making concessions to their teammates. All in all, 50 points was a long time coming and not a shock when it arrived. 60 was a mild surprise but it was also deliberate. Of the last 12 offensive possessions that Kobe was on the floor for he either shot or got to the line 10 times. Trevor Ariza managed to sneak in two shot attempts during this time but there was no doubt that Kobe was just trying to score as many points as he could. Los Angeles called a timeout with 2:32 to play. They were up 18 points. And Kobe came back out. He had 59 points. He nailed two more free throws and then exited with 61. These were meaningless points. DJ Mbenga should have been on the floor. Not Kobe. When Bernard King scored 60 (for the previous MSG high) on Christmas day in 1984 he did it in a shootout against Michael Ray Richardson and the Nets. The Knicks lost that game by six and each point King scored was desperately needed by his club. He was carrying them on his back.

Unfortunately, too many of the johnny-come-latelies and carpet-bagging Lakers fans had dampened their pants with enthusiasm as Kobe pushed aside his teammates for his own glorification.

I was on pins and needles, however, as the game wound down. I wanted to see if Kobe Bryant could pull off a 60 point and zero rebound game. It seemed impossible. And, I was pretty sure that it had never been done before. Frankly, I became obsessed with it once I noticed. As Kobe feigned interest on defense and fired off laser beams from deep on the other end I was ever anxious that a long carom would hit him in the hands. Thankfully this did not happen. He left the game to rapturous applause and I knew that history had just been made. Impressive history and dubious history.

Impressively, Monday night was Kobe's sixth 60-point outing of his career. He's now second on the 60-point game list behind Wilt Chamberlain. The Stilt has 32 such games on his resume. Which abounds with numerical wonders. Michael Jordan trails both, forever, with 5 such games. Before last night, it was Jordan's famous double-nickle game at the Garden in 1995 (while wearing the four-five) that was the unimpeachable standard for a performance by a visitor. Kobe scored 61 on Monday. But has he really outdone Jordan?

Kobe did score more points on fewer shots. But that was in large part because he got nine more attempts from the free throw line than Jordan did when he scored 55. Also, it can't be forgotten that Jordan scored all the points while bringing the Bulls from behind against a Knicks team that finished the season with 55 wins. Most impressively, he recorded one of his two assists on the game-winning play. He fed Bill Wennington for a dunk that killed the Knicks during the endgame. That assist hurt even more than if Jordan had dunked it over Ewing, Oakley and my grandfather. That pass hurt badly. Given the context, I'd say that MJ's game was more impressive. Like King's 60 points in '84, every score mattered.

There have been, fittingly, 60 games in NBA history during which a single player has compiled 60 or more points. Wilt Chamberlain, who as I mentioned is responsible for 32 of these games, owns the single-game points record with 100 in a game. Also against the Knicks. I'm going to guess that Wilt had at least one rebound in that game. But, it's unfair to compare Kobe's 61 to Wilt's century mark. In fact, it's mostly futile to compare Kobe's big night at the Garden to any of Wilt's 60-point outings. Chamberlain was a different animal. By sheer virtue of his size he was bound to rebound the ball.

This leaves the other 28 games in which a player has scored 60 points. And before we go any further down this primrose path, let me say that saying this is the worst 60-point game of all time is like saying that Ingrid Seynhaeve is the least attractive model in the 1993 Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue. She's still hotter than Hansel right now. It's all relative. So, let's bear that in mind as we take a look at these other games. The game Bryant had is probably one of the top 100 or 150 games ever by an NBA player. But, is it worse than the other 59 60-point games?

Yes. In my opinion, it's the worst.

Going back to the 1986-87 season there have been 15 occassions on which a player has topped 60. No player (Kobe included) ever recorded zero rebounds. Including Monday night, just three had fewer than 6 boards. Kobe had 5 boards while scoring 60 against Memphis in 2007 and Iverson had 4 against Orlando in 2004. In that game Iverson had 6 assists, 5 steals and block. He scored 60 on the nose and his team won. He took at least a dozen shots in the paint and attacked the rim as he always has.

I know it can be simplistic to look at statistics as the be all and end all when documenting the night a player had. But it's also the best place to start. I saw Kobe's game. He didn't defend. He rarely passed. And throughout the second half he rarely played aggressively. He took what the defense gave him (15+ foot jumpers) and he benefited from a lot of favorable officiating.

The number of rebounds and steals put up by other members of the 60-point club displays the way they imposed themselves upon their opponents. In arguably the best game of the group, Jordan scored 69, grabbed 18 boards, dished out 6 assists, nabbed 6 steals and blocked a shot @ Cleveland in 1990. He also committed five personal fouls. Now, that is game in which he bent the opposition to his will. In 2006, Gilbert Arenas scored 60 against Kobe's Lakers and grabbed 8 boards and handed out 8 dimes. Another complete game. David Robinson, Shaq and Karl Malone have all topped 60 and they had 14, 23 and 18 boards respectively. I haven't be able to track down the box score for George Mikan's 61-pointer in 1952 but I'm going to guess the game's first giant picked up a double double.

I have no doubt that further rifling through yellowed newsprint or long-underused microfiche at the public library would further highlight the lack of depth in Kobe's record-setting game at the Garden. But, no amount of data is really needed to convince me (although I'm not sure about anyone reading this...). Because I watched Kobe with my own eyes. He was not like Jordan out there. He had an icy resolve but no ferocity. If anyone on the Lakers was really holding the Knicks down it was Pau Gasol, who had 31 points, 5 assists, 14 rebounds (4 on the offensive end) and 2 blocks.

I don't care what anyone says about the inanity of focusing on such a small detail because I have watched enough basketball to know that someone giving it there all does not come through 37 minutes of action without gathering a single rebound. It just doesn't happen. If you drive to the paint then you eventually gather your own miss or get a tip in after dishing the ball to a big. If you are playing tight defense then you inevitably follow a man underneath the hoop. And, without Andrew Bynum in the lineup there were more rebounds to be had.

I don't doubt that Kobe is capable of getting boards. And, that's the worst part. I just think that last night he didn't care. He left the hustle and the contact to his subordinates and only worried about getting his. It really wasn't inspiring. Which makes all the slobbering over him in the media that much harder to take. Where is the love for Pau's game? Where is the mention of the fact that the dude got 1/3 of his points at the stripe and is playing in a league with hand-check fouls that would made Jordan invincible?

I guess it's not news to say that Kobe isn't as good as MJ. But, after listening to everyone fawn over Kobe for the past few days it still feels like something worth noting.

And, you know what the worst part about this is? It's made me agree with Reggie Miller and stick up for Michael Jordan.

In the Year Two Thousand...and Ten

The Knicks' starting lineup will be...

PG: Darren Collison
The Knicks drafted Collison out of UCLA with the 16th pick in the 2009 Draft. After a season backing up Chris Duhon the Knicks turn the team over to their young floor general.











SG: Michael Redd
Redd saw the market for his services decline as the offseason dragged along. Although he was obscured by the mega-stars on the market, teams also shied away from him due to concern over his lingering knee problems. He signed late in September 2010 at a discounted rate with the Knicks rather than taking a more lucrative offer from San Antonio. The Knicks had the flexibility to sign Redd, even on the cheap, because they were able to unload Eddy Curry to the Mavericks by including Wilson Chandler in exchange for Josh Howard's expiring contract during the 2009 season.










SF: Lebron James
Having won a title during the 2008-2009 season in Cleveland, Lebron felt like he had given his all to the Forest City. To the shock of no one he quickly signed with the Knicks for a max contract after the Cavs were eliminated in the Eastern Conference Semifinals by the Orlando Magic. The press conference was held in the middle of Times Square at high noon and traffic was closed for eight square blocks like in those scenes from Vanilla Sky. Nike footed the bill for the street closures and unleashed a new Lebron shoe that would go on to be the greatest-selling shoe in the history of the company.











PF: Danilo Gallinari
The Italian Stallion is already hear. He's six feet and nine inches tall and still growing at 20 years old. He looks to shoot the three, can take guys off the dribble and can finish the ally-oop above the rim.









C: Chris Bosh
Of all the members of the Class of 2010, Bosh is the one who seems the surest bet to bolt his current team. Shockingly, he'll think long and hard about it. After Lebron quickly jumps to Manhattan, Wade signs with Miami and Joe Johnson inks a deal to play with Duncan in San Antonio, all eyes will turn towards Bosh. He'll realize that he likes the spotlight. He likes hearing about himself on Sportscenter after being relatively anonymous up in Canada for so long. For these reasons (and for that max contract), he will sign with the Knicks. Everything about the situation appeals to him. He'll get a ton of pub but won't have to carry a club. He knows Lebron and D'Antoni from the national team and even the weather in New York will seem balmy after so many years north of the border.