From center to guard: a brief history of the G.O.A.T.

When discussing the NBA, there was a time when an argument about the best center in the league was a de facto argument about the greatest player of all-time.

We might now look back on a debate between Wilt Chamberlain and Bill Russell as a question of the best player of the era, or even the best center of all-time. But at the time, they were the contenders for G.O.A.T. (greatest of all time), Wilt for his unparalleled statistical dominance, Russell for the fact that he almost always won a championship.

There were no guards of the era in serious contention. Jerry West is one of the greatest guards of all-time, but he never won an MVP or a scoring title. You must respect the versatility of Oscar Robertson, but it would be hard to argue that he was better in the 1960s than Wilt or Russell.

In the 1970s, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar came along to dominate the league. He legitimately deserved consideration with Wilt and Russell as G.O.A.T., a completely dominating force.

Through 1979, you could not raise a good argument for anybody as the G.O.A.T. other than Wilt, Russell, or Kareem.

And then came Magic Johnson and Larry Bird.

It wasn't just that Magic Johnson was the most versatile point guard ever (he was). And it wasn't just that Larry Bird was the most versatile forward ever (he was). It was that Magic's and Bird's versatility came with championships. Magic dominated the game of basketball in ways no point guard had ever done, and Larry Bird dominated the game of basketball in ways no forward had ever done. Suddenly, there were non-centers who could be considered for G.O.A.T.

And then came Michael Jordan. Jordan tied Wilt's record with seven consecutive scoring titles (and went on to win three more after his first retirement), so he was clearly dominant enough to be considered with those great centers. He was versatile and ferocious. He was a shooting guard that eventually won six championships without a dominant post game for support (though for his last three titles, he had Dennis Rodman, the best rebounder ever, to support him).

After Jordan (and even during his career), it seemed that everybody was always looking for the next Jordan. That meant everybody was looking for a dominant and versatile shooting guard. And since basketball fans seemed to unanimously agree that Jordan was the G.O.A.T., that meant looking for Jordan's successor as a shooting guard meant looking for Jordan's successor as the G.O.A.T.

This meant that Hakeem Olajuwon, who in the mid-90s played basketball about as well as it could be played, isn't in debates about the G.O.A.T. This means that Shaquille O'Neal, who was as dominant as a player could be, was rarely considered the G.O.A.T. (although Elliot Kalb called Shaq the best in his book).

Now when we look to today's players for the G.O.A.T., we look almost exclusively at shooting guards. Kobe Bryant is brought up. It is assumed that LeBron James will eventually be G.O.A.T. In the discussion of G.O.A.T., it's shooting guards that dominate the conversation, and post players are rarely mentioned. This means that even though everybody calls Tim Duncan the greatest power forward of all-time, nobody is calling Tim Duncan the greatest player of all-time.

I would suggest that we remember that the G.O.A.T. does not need to play the same position as Michael Jordan, and that we remember the ways that a dominating post player can control a game.

A lousy player's football card: 2006 Score Donovan Morgan

Since I know you don't know who Donovan Morgan is, I'll tell you everything I learned from the front of his Score 2006 card (#300). Donovan is a WR and he wears #11 for the Houston Texans.

Now here's what the blurb on the back of the card tells us:

Morgan entered the season finale of his second NFL campaign with just one career reception. In Week 17 at San Francisco, however, he had three for 33 yards.

In the words of Ron Burgundy, "Don't act like you're not impressed."

I have nothing against Donovan Morgan. I don't mean to call you lousy (for I suspect Morgan will google himself and find this webpage). Sorry, Mr. Morgan: it really seems unnecessary for me to pick on people like you who are probably worked really hard and are honored to play in the NFL at all. My real vexation is toward Score. Why, Score, did you feel the need to make a Donovan Morgan card in your set? Getting this Morgan card prevented me from getting a card that might have been slightly enjoyable on some level. The only people interested in this card are Morgan's family and maybe--maybe--some hardcore Louisiana-Lafayette fans. Instead, Score gives us a card of a player we're not ever likely to care about.

Hmm. Three for 33 in the finale, when nobody cares and coaches are just trying out the youngsters. Still....that's something. He might be able to make the Viking roster.

Brett Favre's bed and why he can lie in it.

Michael David Smith at the Fanhouse points out that "Brett Favre Treats Randy Moss Different Than Javon Walker." Now even though two years ago I spent hours arguing about the Walker-Favre-Packer situation with Packer Fan Rob (I thought Walker was justified in using whatever little leverage was available to him, and I thought Favre detestable for siding with management against a fellow worker, especially considering how much more than Walker he was making), I think we can see these as two different situations.

However, there is a larger point raised: if Favre and/or the Packers had treated Walker's off-season contract demands differently two years ago, the Packers wouldn't have even needed Randy Moss: they have one of the best WR duos in the league with Walker and Donald Driver.

Javon Walker is an extremely good WR that was coming off an exceptional year, and he asked for more money. At the time, Favre wasn't upset with the Packer management for failing to do whatever it could to give him good support at wide receiver; at the time, the Packers took a hardline and Favre defended it, condemning Walker's behavior and openly stating that he hoped the Packers didn't give Walker a new contract. Clearly the decision was the Packers' decision to make; however, if Favre had quietly gone to GB management and suggested the importance of surrounding him with talent like Walker, Walker may have got a big contract and remained a Packer great. Instead, he held out of some off-season activities, got hurt game one in 2005, then got traded to the Broncos (where he was excellent: if you're not impressed with his total numbers--69-1,084-8, plus 123-1 rushing--remember that the Broncos ranked 26th in pass attempts and featured struggling Jake Plummer and rookie Jay Cutler throwing passes; according to Football Outsiders Walker ranked 16th in WR DPAR, which doesn't take quarterback quality into account).

If Favre had taken Walker's side, he might have had all the skill position help he needed, and nobody would have thought the Packers even needed Moss. But at the time Favre sided with the Packers for resisting securing the services of a very good WR; now he's angry at the Packers for being unable or unwilling to secure the services of a very good WR. Which is basically MDS's point.

When Brett Favre looks at the skill position players around him, he might be angry at the Packer organization and wish there were better players. But at WR (where they are OK: Driver is very good and Greg Jennings and others have potential), Favre is partly responsible for not having an incredible talent like Javon Walker.

We love William Shatner

According to the Fanhouse, The Stanley Cup and William Shatner will be in the room together at the same time on Boston Legal this week.

This is all the excuse we need to re-watch our favorite moment in world history.

Please watch William Shatner's spoken word version of "Rocketman" and tell me you're not inspired to get through another day.

NBA Players that Time Forgot: Artis Gilmore

There's not original commentary in this post; I'm just repeating things I just learned. Consider it a public service announcement: respect the ABA.

While watching this basketball game I've been surfing around basketball-reference.com, and I was looking at the season-by-season league rebounding leaders. I came across the name Artis Gilmore. Gilmore is a guy I remember my dad telling me about, but I didn't really know that much about him. Looking at his profile, I just have one thing to say.

Oh my.

Checking out Gilmore's profile on basketball-reference, here are the reasons you should know about Gilmore, and why he's one of the greatest basketball players of all-time.

He was an ABA rookie of the year, MVP, All-Star MVP, and Playoff MVP.

He led the ABA in field goal percentage twice and led the NBA in field goal percentage four times: he is both the all-time ABA and NBA leader in field goal percentage.

In his five years in the ABA, he led the league in rebounds per game four times, and was second a fifth time; he's the ABA's all-time leader in rebounds per game (17.1). When he moved on to the NBA, he was in the top-10 in rebounds per game 7 times.

He led the ABA in blocks three times and blocks per game twice.

And he led the Kentucky Colonels to the 1975 ABA championship.

We've got to start paying more historical respect to the greats of the ABA. A lot of ABA players went on to great NBA success, but we should remember those stars that played their primes in the ABA. Like Gilmore, many great centers have their best statistical years in their first five years (look at Wilt's sick first six years, or Kareem's dominant Milwaukee years). I think we ought to at least bring up Gilmore's name when we discuss the all-time great centers. When you consider his ABA dominance, you can make an argument that Gilmore is one of the top 10 centers every to play the game.

So, in summary, at the end of the day, what it comes down to, the bottom line is, in conclusion, respect Artis Gilmore.

Randy Moss and Bobby Layne (or, when character doesn't count)

Dr. Z says that Randy Moss should not be a Hall of Famer:

"As long as I'm a selector, the Canton Highway will be a very difficult road for Moss. I don't care how many great years he gives the Patriots. The guy's a dog, and there are too many people who spent years of sacrifice without getting a sniff from the Hall."

So Randy Moss dogged it too much; he didn't try his best, and so it would insult those players who did sacrifice themselves to win if Moss made the Hall of Fame.

Here is a story that Hall of Fame RB Paul Hornung (himself suspended a year for gambling) recounts about Hall of Fame quarterback Bobby Layne (the story is recounted in several places: check this Lions blog for one retelling, or this Milwaukee Journal Sentinal article). Layne's Lions were tied 13-13 late in the game, and the Lions were in field goal range for the go-ahead winning score. Layne waved off the field goal unit and attempted to go for a TD on fourth down. The pass failed, and the game ended in a tie. According to Hornung, Layne had placed a large wager on the game and wanted to beat the point spread; a three point win wasn't going to win the bet. He was traded away that week.

So Bobby Layne, who allegedly cost his team a victory because he gambled on the outcome and attempted to win his bet rather than win the game, is in the Hall of Fame.

When does character matter? When does illicit behavior matter? When does disrespect for the integrity of the game matter? When does total effort toward team victory matter?

Evidently, it matters when it comes to Randy Moss's Hall of Fame case. It didn't matter for Paul Hornung, a known gambler. It didn't matter for Bobby Layne, who may have cost his team at least one victory because he was more interested in winning his bet.

So you tell, Dr. Z, Hall of Fame voter: why is Randy Moss unworthy of the same Hall of Fame that currently includes Hornung and Layne as members?

Playoff Legacy Watch: Jason Kidd

Can I hype up Jason Kidd just a little more?

In the Nets victory over the Cavs in game three, Kidd had 23 points, 14 assists, and 13 rebounds, meaning through 9 playoff games this year, he's STILL averaging a triple-double. I'll take him over any point guard alive right now.

The Charm of Packer Fans

I teach in Wisconsin. One day while chatting with students, I casually mentioned that I hate Brett Favre. I will never forget the look of amazed horror on one girl's face; she actually said, "How could anybody hate Brett Favre?" For a student who had probably never discussed football with anybody outside of Wisconsin, I'm sure it came as quite a shock that some people see the world differently than Packer fans.

And so I can sympathize with Sam Brownback (note: this is the one moment in history that I will express sympathy for Sam Brownback). As you can see at Deadspin and the Fanhouse, Brownback learned what happens when you suggest to Packer fans that Brett Favre is anything other than Jesus.

I'm reminded of a Kids in the Hall sketch: an actress is giving an acceptance speech for an award, and in between thanking the usual suspects, she casually thanks Hitler. As she blithely comes off stage, her manager corners her in horror saying, "You thanked Hitler!"

Good luck in the Wisconsin primary, Mr. Brownback. You may as well have spit on children and kicked old people in the shins while you were there.

Today's Elite Quarterbacks

Offseason. Deal.

I believe there are three elite, top echelon quarterbacks in the NFL today. These are three QBs that at this point will always have their teams in contention, will always be leading teams to wins, will always be putting up superstar statistics, no matter what seems to be going on around them. I'm big on team wins and massive TD-INT ratios, just so you know.

Peyton Manning
Since 2002, Manning's Colts have won 10, 12, 12, 14, and 12 games. Manning has NEVER thrown for fewer than 26 touchdowns and 3,700 yards in a season. Never. He is the best of the best.

Tom Brady
Since Brady became the Patriots starter, the team has won 11, 9, 14, 14, 10, and 12 games. He's always had a winning record. They've been legitimate contenders for the Super Bowl in all but one of his years as starter. While leading his teams to wins, he's always thrown 12 or 14 interceptions in a season (sort of weird) and 23-28 TDs the last 5 seasons. The Pats will content for Super Bowls as long as he's there.

Carson Palmer
In my mind, Palmer ranks just below Peyton Manning as the stereotype ubermensch NFL stud quarterback. Big, strong arm, smart, always effective. It's early in his career, but based on his numbers the last two years (3,700, 32-12; 4,000, 28-13), I believe he's always going to be throwing 25+ TDs and keeping the Bengals in contention for the playoffs--and eventually more. You may not agree with my placement of Palmer in the top-3 NFL quarterbacks, but he is an utter stud at the position and in a year or two you will not question it.

There are three other QBs I consider a notch or two below these three. Here they are, and why.

Donovan McNabb
It is only because he failed to finish the last two seasons due to injury that I'm not listing four elite QBs. From 2000 to 2004, his teams won 11, 11, 12, 12, and 13 games. The last two years when McNabb got injured his team was still contending at the time. He's got a good team and organization around him, to be sure, but he's a playmaking stud. If he stays healthy, he is among the elites.

Matt Hasselbeck
Why Hasselbeck, you say? Because his teams have been to the playoffs four straight years. He's now a dependable quarterback that you expect to win; of course, he's not near Manning, Brady, or Palmer.

Drew Brees
I don't trust him to be a consistently dominant quarterback yet. In the last three seasons his teams have won 12, 9, and 10 games, and he's thrown 27, 24, and 26 TDs (with very few interceptions); he's good. Another year like last year, and I'll rank him with the best.

Friday Afternoon's Minor Blizzard

(During the summer, these blizzards could come at any time of the day).

Via the Fanhouse, Dr. Z says Randy Moss shouldn't be a Hall of Famer. His logic, however, is dreadfully flawed. Says Dr. Z: "The guy's a dog, and there are too many people who spent years of sacrifice without getting a sniff from the Hall." So because other people worked hard and sacrificed but weren't good enough to get into the Hall of Fame, Randy Moss can't get in even though he dominated for a long stretch of time? By that logic, if you give 75% effort and break every record in the game, you shouldn't get in because other people gave 100% effort and still didn't get into the HOF (even if at 100% effort they weren't that good).

Chris Mortenson, hypocrite?

I completely support Charles Barkley's right to say whatever he wants to say on a national stage. Members of minority groups being able to have this type of carte blanche free expression is good for the nation and a sign of progress.

A lousy player's football card: 2006 Topps Arnaz Battle

Here's what card #142 of Topps 2006 collection says about 49 WR Arnaz Battle:

After making eight catches in his first two seasons, Arnaz snared 32 passes for the 49ers in 2005 (including his first three touchdown grabs) despite missing six games. His performance has convinced Coach Mike Nolan that the former college quarterback has a bright future in San Francisco. "He will be a part of this as we go forward," Nolan said.

How do you make 32 receptions in one season sound impressive? By comparing it to eight catches in two years (actually, it was 0 in '03 and 8 in '04). Suddenly you can think, "Wow! In 2005 Battle caught FOUR TIMES more receptions than he had in his previous career! That's improvement!" But really, going from "completely inadequate" to "just below mediocre" isn't that impressive.

Topps also editorializes that Mike Nolan thinks Battle has "a bright future with San Francisco." What Nolan said was, "He will be a part of this as we go forward." Does "he will be a part of this" mean "bright future" to you? Not to me.

However, maybe Battle does really have a bright future. After all, in '06 he improved to 59 receptions for 683 yards in 16 games, improving from "just below mediocre" to "simply mediocre." Though the 49ers deemed it worthy to acquire Darrell Jackson and Ashley Lelie this offseason: despite Battle's "bright future," he's probably a good #3 WR.

See arnazbattle.com for more information.

Blizzard: the "I won't grade anything at all for four months and it feels so good I want to scream" edition.

While I've been trying to finish up the semester while taking care of a mild mannered child, here have been some of the interesting things in the sports blogosphere.

McBias does a guest blog at the Starting Five to talk about...blogging.

The Starting Five also has an interview with Dave Zirin (one of the rare sportswriters who occasionally ends up at Common Dreams).

Everybody is buzzing about Don Banks' SI story on Michael Vick and forcing dogs to maul each other. You can discuss the story at Football Outsiders.

Cheerleaders are very different than you and me. Yes, they have more ______.

(this is a game, see. F. Scott Fitzgerald once told Ernest Hemingway, "The rich are very different than you and me." Ernie replied, "Yeah, they have more money." So, fill in the blank with something creative (and preferrably not lewd).

Blue Viking Devil is kicking out the fantasy football preview posts along with photos of football cards (if people in their late 20s can't obsess about fantasy sports and spend our disposable income on sports cards, I don't want to be a person in his late 20s).

See Adrian Peterson in pixel form!

The evidence is piling up: Greg Oden is an alien. Trust noone. The truth is out there. Fight the future.

Fantasy Football Disinformation

I can't give you real fantasy football previews, because members of my league read this blog, we do an auction league, and nobody can know what I actually believe. That is why my fantasy team is called Orwell's Ministry of Truth: I must lie about who I want. But I can't just lie--then everybody would know what I want, too. So I mix in truths and lies and let everybody figure out if I'm being honest or lying, or whether I want you to think I'm being honest or lying, or whether I even know what I think.

But for those readers not in my fantasy league, these nuggets of predictions are good enough. Does it matter whether you think I believe them or not? You'll make your own decisions, and these are things to think about, so it might help you. I believe some of these statements. I believe the exact opposite of others. Some of these statements I partly believe. Some of these statements I'm unsure about. It doesn't matter. It's Fantasy Football Disinformation Season.

Even though most RBs follow seasons of overwork with injury or poor performance, Larry Johnson is young and will not be affected by his NFL record 416 carries in 2006.

While Marvin Harrison is always a reliable (and affordable) fantasy WR, Reggie Wayne will emerge as Indianapolis’ #1 WR.

Viking RB Adrian Peterson will be the best rookie RB in the NFL since Barry Sanders.

Travis Henry will be a top-3 fantasy running back in Denver’s system.

With the WRs now at his disposal, Tom Brady will be the #1 scoring QB in the NFL. He’s already a reliable fantasy QB, but now he’ll be spectacular.

It is not critical to get one of the two top TEs (Gonzalez and Gates); there are second tier TEs that will put up 90% of the production at 50% the cost.

Willis McGahee will be a disappointment in Baltimore; he’ll be solid, but he will not play at the superstar level he is expected to.

Matt Schaub is an unproven, average QB that will bring down the Texans‘ offense; stay away from Andre Johnson and Ahman Green.

Vince Young has no WRs and no RBs of any note to work with; he will not be a fantasy stud QB in 2007.

2007 is the year Eli Manning puts it all together.

Norv Turner’s offense can only help Ladanian Tomlinson continue his spectacular production: Turner RBs usually get 1,400-1,700 yards.

Clinton Portis and Shaun Alexander will recover from injury-plagued 2006 seasons just fine.

Randy Moss should once again be the top-ranked fantasy WR.

If you pair Larry Fitzgerald and Anquan Boldin on your fantasy team, the duo will get you 20 Tds.

Willie Parker will be a disappointment now that Ken Whisenhunt is no longer in Pittsburgh.

Get Alex Smith cheap, and by the end of the season, you’ll have a valid fantasy starter.

Draft Donovan McNabb, start him for 4-6 weeks, and then trade him before he gets injured again.

The Saints will score the most points in the NFL this season--load up on their skill position players.

Tarvaris Jackson will rush for 5+ Tds; if you think he will also throw for 15+ Tds, he’s worth having on your roster.

Michael Vick is no great passer, but you have to like a 1,000 yard rusher at QB in fantasy football.

Maurice Jones-Drew will be a top-5 fantasy RB this year.

Stay away from all Jets; there’s not a real good fantasy starter on the roster.

Finals Week Blizzard

During Finals Week, every moment I'm not grading papers or exams feels like a wasteful moment. But still I'll provide you with a few interesting links.

If you don't like Peter Kings' MMQB today, you can go to Football Outsiders to complain about it.

Doug at PFR has an interesting hobbyhorse: proving why Joey Galloway is an underrated great. He consistently makes convincing arguments, too.

Via The Big Lead, 100% Injury Rate notes that Michael Wilbon doesn't like bloggers or PETA (and I thought he and I could be friends; turns out he must hate me with the energy of a thousand suns).

If you like your sports blog to include a social conscience and critical examinations of representations of race, you should definitely read The Starting Five. The posts and the comments are consistently thought-provoking.

And at Costanza Book Club today, I list the TV shows that I believe aspire to "great art" (with very little explanation of why).

A Sunday night blizzard

All grading papers and no play makes PV something something. Go crazy? Don't mind if I do.

Deadspin notes the interesting poll finding black people and white people have differing views on Barry Bonds. Signal to Noise gives it some analysis.

Deadspin also has a note on John Amaechi.

I probably should have written already on the transsexual writer at the LA Times (who has her own blog), but I had nothing unique to say. We wish her the best.

Bill Simmons has been hard on Dirk Nowitzki, but he reminds us that stars in the past have had lousy playoff games and series, too.

The Strib says Adrian Peterson's first day of minicamp went well, and also has a good feature on Brian Robison.

Check out Vikings.com for Brad Childress's comments on the mini-camp.

If you enjoy my critiques of local sports columnists, you'll also enjoy I Dislike Your Favorite Team.

Moderately Cerebral Bias looks at this year's good NBA playoff performances in losing efforts.

CHFF tells us why we should remember Weeb Ewbank.

And finally, Costanza Book Club is being resurrected. That's why I've removed the non-sports links at this blog (they're all over there, anyway), and I'll likely make fewer non-sports comments on this blog (there weren't a lot anyway). It's a blog about literature, literary theory, philosophy, teaching, TV, and movies. It's worth another shot.

Obligatory Animal Rights Comment on the Kentucky Derby

Since today is the day sports fans pretend to care about horse racing, I thought I'd guide you to some PETA articles on why horse racing is bad.

The Horseracing Industry: Drugs, Deception and Death

Barbaro's Tragic Injury: A Symptom of a Cruel Industry

PETA must really dislike Kentucky in general.

"Join me, and together we'll rule the Galaxy as Father and Son" Blizzard

Now when I look at Dirk Nowitzki, I think, “He’s like us.” The Mavericks' loss to Golden State makes me think of Nate Wright, Gary Anderson, Nate Poole, and it’s hard to describe how much my view of the Vikings’ history is related to my perception of myself. A few weeks ago, Shoals at Free Darko wrote "when I wake up and look in the mirror, I see a lot more Baron&Monta&Stephen&J-Rich&Baby Al than I do Dirk&Jet&Howard&Devin&Diop." Not me: when I look in the mirror, Dirk, Avery, Josh, and Jerry are exactly what I see. Especially now. And I'm not the only one making this connection.

The Fanhouse compares Warriors-Mavs to Jags-Broncos.

The Daily Norseman also thinks the Vikes should sign Keyshawn Johnson.

Vikings War Cry comments on the possibility Troy Williamson doesn't make the team.

Imus is not dead: Leave the Man Alone comments on his lawsuit.

FreeDarko reacts to the Warriors' upset.

Tecmo Blog writes up the My Name is Earl Rudy episode (I kept recognizing actors, but then when Charles S. Dutton gave the motivational speech, it all connected. The Office was good last night, too, but whenever I'm watching it, I wish I could watch the superior British version right afterward).

I Dislike Your Favorite Team compares Randy Moss to strippers.

The Starting Five continues its interview trend with Jeff Pearlman.

The Warriors are ousting the Mavericks, and that's a bad thing.

You may think this is a fun story: the 8th seed Warriors upset the 1st seed, 67 win Mavericks in round one (and do so fairly easily).

I don't.

No, I take that back: this is a good story. But it's probably a short-lived story. However well the Warriors match up with the Mavs, do you think they have the horses to get to the NBA Finals? The Mavericks did, and now that they are eliminated, there's a little less excitement. Just think if Utah manages to beat Houston: the Western Conference Finals will feature Sun/Spurs v. Warriors/Jazz. Do you really want to tell me that's going to give us more fun, and better basketball, than either the Suns or the Spurs taking on the Mavericks?

Tell me you want to watch a San Antonio-Utah Western Conference Finals, followed by a San Antonio-Detroit NBA Finals. Tell me. I'm rooting like hell for the Suns and the Rockets.

Cinderellas are nice stories now, but what they really do is rob us of great matchups a round or two down the road.

Now, if Golden State really does push this thing to the Finals, that is a story worth watching. Then we could put them into historical context of the '81 Rockets. But if they now lose in round two, the Warriors' upset of the Mavs just robs us of watching the best go against the best. They've given us fun now, but that fun now might cost us a lot of fun later.

(All that said, Golden State v. Phoenix in the Western Conference Finals would be outstanding).

Spurs-Suns Blizzard

I couldn't be more excited for the Phoenix-San Antonio series; I think it's going to be the best series of these playoffs. Both teams have great players; both teams play extremely good basketball; both teams are competitive; both teams are capable of winning the NBA championship. I might go so far as to say the winner of this series will win the NBA championship. It's going to be fun to watch Amare, Marion, Nash, Manu, Duncan, and Parker.

Just a few links today before I start grading papers:

Cold, Hard, Football Facts has a good article on Randy Moss and TD productivity.

Earlier this week I wrote about why Jason Kidd is better than Steve Nash. Bethlehem Shoals brings up another HUGE edge Kidd has over Nash: Kidd is a great defensive player. Kidd has been all-defensive first team 4 times, and he just made all-defensive second team for the fifth time; take a guess about when we'll ever see Nash making an all-NBA defensive team. I think I'll make the NBA all-defensive team before Nash does.

A little blizzard

The Ppress asked the two best Viking RBs ever, Robert Smith and Chuck Foreman, about Adrian Peterson. Says Smith: "I anticipate that my reign as all-time leading rusher is going to be over very early into the next decade" (via Kansas Viking).

In the Strib, Mark Craig talks about the personal struggles Adrian Peterson has been through.

Everybody is already talking about this NY Times story on racial bias in NBA foul calls.

The Starting Five has an interview with Scoop Jackson.