We don't want Allen Iverson's talent ruining our selflessness and hustle!

An interesting poll on Pittsburgh's Post-Gazette.com confirmed that 64% of Pittsburghers, if they were hypothetical basketball GMs, would not want Allen Iverson on their hypothetical basketball team, the Pittsburgh Hustlin' Whiteys. This begs the question, for what reason would a team not want a four-time scoring champ and former MVP while he's still only 31 and has never been given a chance to play with a decent supporting cast?

The reason for these poll results is a symptom of sports analysis which has long troubled me, and here I can only begin to scratch the surface: hustle and selflessness, or the perception thereof, are somehow seen as more important and more praiseworthy than actually possessing talent or being good at things. Note that this poll comes from my hometown of Pittsburgh, where people constantly boo Jaromir Jagr, who won two Stanley Cups and five scoring titles in Pittsburgh, but never booed scrappy Jason Kendall, who was getting paid $10 million to hit .283 with 3 home runs in 2002.

Why would you not want Iverson on your basketball team? Because he's selfish? That can't be the reason, because he was 8th in the league last year with 7.4 assists a game, more than Lebron "Captain Selfish" James, Gilbert "King of Selfish" Arenas, Sam "Cassellfish" Cassell, and way above Kobe (actually selfish) Bryant's 4.5. You must not like Iverson because he doesn't play defense, right? Well, he was 8th in the league with 1.9 steals a game, whereas hustlin', intangible-havin', teammate of the galaxy Steve Nash, the league's Most Valuable Player, finished tied for 79th. If you asked the question, would you want Steve Nash on your team, what would the results be? Would "Yes" exceed 100%?

The issue here is, clearly, sportswriters and sports fans find it convenient to label an athlete with a persona and, rather than actually looking at statistics or, god forbid, watching the guy play, they simply resign themselves to tailoring the player's doings to fit how they would like that athlete to be perceived. You've heard it all before:

George Brett and Pete Rose argued with umpires because they were gamers who couldn't bear not winning. Barry Bonds and Albert Belle argued because they're spoiled, whiny assholes.

Alex Rodriguez's .290 avg /35 HR / 121 RBI season constitutes a clutchless, hollow superstar unable to deal with the pressures of the big city. David Eckstein's .290 avg / 2 HR / 23 RBI is the mark of a scrappy hustler who plays way bigger than his 5'7" stature.

As if you even need to be told this, Brett Favre throws into triple coverage because he's a competitive gunslinger. Any other quarterback who does it had a lapse of judgment.

The Iverson backlash isn't some simple moral issue, either. Iverson recorded a rap album six years ago that supposedly contained derogatory references to homosexuals, and the swirling controversy that emerged (for which Iverson apologized) generated countless TO-like debates about whether Iverson was worth having on a team. Meanwhile, Todd Jones of the Detroit Tigers DIRECTLY STATED his numbskulled distaste towards gays, and that hasn't stopped anyone from viewing him as an exemplary baseball human being whose value extends far beyond his consistently sub-pedestrian stats.

Allen Iverson is six feet even in a game dominated by giants, and yet, outside Philly, you'll never read a column about how scrappy he his, how hard he plays, and how his accomplishments which are phenomenal by any standards become superhuman when one takes into account his size. Meanwhile, that cute lil' bugger David Eckstein is the recipient of constant, constant, never-ending, everpresent, praise just for being short (and white). Eckstein's moderate baseball ability allows for his obnoxiously calculated hustle to appear more noticeable, giving sportswriters endless fodder for columns about how intangible his contributions are and how anything a short person does is somehow more praiseworthy than what people of average height do. Iverson's talent marginalizes this, though, and because he's been graced with an ability that we're all jealous of, he forfeits the right to be able to be praised for his effort, and will only make us notice him when he missteps.

I guess it's unreasonable for me to expect sportswriters to stop misguidedly affixing significance to things cold turkey. But as long as we're passing judgment on athletes, Iverson's "we're talkin' bout practice" will always draw more ire than Eckstein's "we're talking about .290, 2 and 23!"

Thanks to firejoemorgan.blogspot.com, as always, for never missing an Eckstein column

NCAA vows to intentionally botch seeding in '08 to create upsets

The NCAA selection committee has issued a formal apology to college basketball fans for seeding teams too accurately this year, which has resulted in a disastrous Final Four consisting solely of incredibly talented, exciting, well-coached basketball teams. To prevent similar debacles from occurring in future tournaments, the NCAA has officially decided to seed teams incorrectly from now on in the hopes of increasing the propensity for sportstalk-fueling upsets.

"All these good teams in the Final Four this year, I feel like we really dropped the ball," said Gary D. Walters, head of the NCAA Men's Basketball selection committee. "Fans don't want to see really outstanding teams playing basketball well and therefore earning spots in the finals against one another. Something had to be done to get some upsets going, and we feel like this new 'wrong seeding' plan might do the trick."

The new seeding plan carries the following mandates:

- The top team in the Big East can be seeded no higher than number four, and all other teams in the Big East will be seeded 11 or lower, allowing people to say "wow, the Big East really got screwed this year, I could easily see (Pitt/Marquette/Louisville etc.) knocking off a three seed."

- Three of the four number one seeds will be given to Big Ten teams, although in the event that a legitimate team emerges from the Big Ten, like this year's Ohio State, they will be dropped to an 8 seed and immediately labelled a "Cinderella."

- Any teams that most people haven't heard of (i.e., Memphis, Butler, Southern Ill.) will be seeded no higher than 13, regardless of their record.

- If no double-digit seeds make the Final Four, the lowest-seeded remaining team will instantly be changed to a 15 seed, and everyone will have root for them, including fans of the three other remaining teams.

- Finally, the entire PAC-10 will automatically make the tournament and be given seeds 2 through 6.

"I hope this new plan works," said Walters, "because I really don't want fans to be tortured like they have been this year. Florida / UCLA and Ohio State / Georgetown? Who's going to want to watch this crap? People keep telling me 'I miss George Mason, I miss...' then they try to think of another example like George Mason and can't but still, it makes me feel really guilty for putting them through these predictable-in-retrospect catastrophes."

"Next year," added Walters, "when someone at the water cooler says 'hey, how bout North Carolina? Ten seed making it to the Final Four, huh?' I'll know that I've done my job right."

Most point-having NCAA article ever!

In the latest round of ESPN downplaying the excitement of a sporting event which is not broadcast on ESPN, Pat Forde wrote a thoroughly pointless article about how March Madness is going to be boring because there's no Cinderella team this year. Three quick things that anger me before we get to the article's gooey inside:

1 - Would ESPN be talking about how boring the tournament is if it weren't being broadcast on CBS? If the tournament were on ABC, we'd have 30 minute breakdowns of every matchup on Sportscenter, with everyone in the studio raving about how Thursday at 12:10 ET can't come soon enough, and every tickerbar for the next five days would have a lengthy section devoted to every matchup, with the date, time, and different facts about each matchup scrolling by throughout the day.

2 - Is anyone actually saying "aw, man, you mean we might have to watch Florida vs Kansas and Georgetown vs UNC? This sucks!"

3 - Every year, people talk about how much they don't care about the World Series when the Yankees and Red Sox aren't involved. Apparently, a young Tigers team just a couple years removed from a joke season and a banged-up, falling-apart Cardinals team that managed to crawl through two rounds of the playoffs don't count as Cinderellas? I'm not saying I was thrilled to watch the Tigers and the Cardinals in '06, but come on, sportswriters, pick a mindset - do you want to see underdogs or not?

As if the purpose for Forde's article isn't stupid enough, the actual article itself is some of the most substandard (non-NHL) journalism I have ever seen on ESPN.com. The article begins:

Cinderella, the plucky princess of March Madness, died a quick and undramatic death over the weekend. She was 12... Pause with us while we mourn Cindy's passing for a moment.

This sure is awfully literal - did he really have to give a specific age to this dead little girl that he's describing? At first I thought he picked '12' because of the 12 seeds, but no 12 seeds played in round 2, VCU and Winthrop were 11s. Forde literally just made up the age of a symbolic child who was killed by high-seeded basketball teams this weekend. She was also "plucky."

The 2007 version of a glass-slippered party crasher is No. 7 seed UNLV, which is a joke. As I've been saying since the brackets were unveiled, Vegas was criminally underrated by the selection committee. The Runnin' Rebels were a 4- or 5-seed in underdog's clothing.

I give Forde props for jamming Cinderella analogies into every paragraph, and he's on such a roll, he kind of mentions Little Red Riding Hood too? A 4-seed dressed up as an underdog? Didn't Little Red Selection Committee notice what big ears Grandma UNLV had? What a pointlessly angry paragraph.

This doesn't mean she can't (and won't) rise from the dead in years to come. But for the time being, we'll have to stuff a sock in all the parity talk.

Now we're talking about supernatural zombie Cinderella possibly rising from the dead? I have a simpler, albeit crazier explanation: out of sheer probability, one of the twenty-eight double-digit seeds usually manages to win two games in a given year. This year, for the first time in a while, none of them did. This does not mean we have to stuff any socks into any types of talk, nor does it mean that a fictional girl is going to have to undergo a miracle resurrection next year for an underdog to make it through. If anything, one could argue that the fact that almost all the high seeds won is kind of an exciting anomaly in itself.

If either [Butler or Southern Ill.] wins, we'll be back to rhapsodizing about the achievements of the little guys. But neither will qualify as Cinderella. She's stretched out on a cold slab in the March Madness morgue.

What?? Now there's a literal morgue in fairy tale land? I also love Forde's complete dismissal of any potential excitement that might arise (on CBS) next week. "If Butler or Southern Illinois knock off the one-seeds, it'll be a huge upset that everyone will be talking about. But it can't be fairy tale girl, because she is in a morgue, so don't get too excited when you're watching the games on not-ESPN this weekend. Did I mention how exciting NASCAR, which ESPN is expanding its overage of, is?"

Indians sign Grant Hill to fix injured bullpen

Spring Training '07 Preview: Cleveland Indians

The Cleveland Indians, rattled by the retirement of banged-up Keith Foulke and the uncertainty surrounding Joe Borowski, decided to solidify their bullpen by signing former NBA star Grant Hill to a 4 year, $28 million contract. Reactions from the Indians' franchise has been nothing but optimistic, from the dugout all the way to the front office.

"He's such a likeable guy," said Indians GM Mark Shapiro, "everyone's always pulling for him. If he can stay healthy, he'll fit in great, he's a real character addition to our bullpen."

Hill failed every facet of the Indians' team physical with flying colors, and the Indians offered him the contract the next day, a class move which Hill described as "very, very surprising."

"I thought it was a joke," Hill recalls, "I'm thirty-four, I've never thrown a baseball, I'm still in the NBA, and so on. I guess they have a bunch of injured guys in their bullpen, though, and they kept telling me I'd be the 'perfect fit.' I was flattered. Surprised, not completely sure what they meant, but yeah, mostly flattered."

The Cleveland Plain-Dealer reports that the Indians may still be looking to add another player to the bullpen mix in case Hill gets injured; among the leading candidates to be signed are former NFL quarterback Joe Theismann, former Detroit Red Wing Vladimir Konstantinov, Barbaro, and Hilary Swank's character from "Million Dollar Baby."

Steve Nash = Ted Leo?

Anyone ever notice how much Steve Nash looks like indie rocker Ted Leo? Seriously, anyone? Hello? Not a lot of fans of fundamental basketball and ultra-catchy, vaguely politically charged indie rock out there? I know I'm not the only one who's ever noticed this, right?

You guys are all losers.

Forbes knows less about sports than that dude yelling at the bar

I'm usually Numbertruster McStatso in this blogspace, but this Forbes Magazine list attempting to quantify the 100 Best General Managers in sports is about as pitiful as it is retarded.

Using a poorly conceived mishmash of flimsy stats called "winning improvement index" and "payroll containment," Forbes has determined that the best GMs in sports are:

1. Kevin McHale, Minnesota Timberwolves

2. Jay Feaster, Tampa Bay Lightning

3. Billy King, Philadelphia 76ers

4. A.J. Smith, San Diego Chargers

5. Lou Lamoriello, New Jersey Devils

6. Don Waddell, Atlanta Thrashers

First off, besides Feaster and Lamoriello, none of the others have won a championship; King's 76ers did make the NBA Finals in 2001, meaning four of the six best GMs in sports have a combined one Finals appearance in 29 seasons (McHale's Wolves have gotten past the first round once in his 11 years there.) Also note that McHale, King, and Waddell could all conceivably be fired in the next year and their fanbases would be happy. Can the same be said for Billy Beane (#26), John Schuerholz (#42), or Ozzie Newsome (#89)? Not to mention A.J. Smith constantly feuding with coaches and giving away Drew Brees to New Orleans, or Don Waddell adding Keith Tkachuk to the group of one-dimensional forwards he calls a team, or EVERY SINGLE CONTRACT Billy King and McHale have dished out in the past four years?

All right, so the list is BS. I don't need to waste more than a paragraph debating that point. My question is, though, how can Forbes, which seems so smart when it's sitting in my investment banker friends' bathrooms, come up with such a fundamentally flawed module?

Big problem number one - this garbage "Winning Improvement index" is meaningless. Billy Beane is the highest-ranked baseball GM at #26, just one spot above fucking Bobby Clarke, who was fired earlier this year and probably should have been two years ago. The list apparently treats winning and winning percentage as numerical equivalents between all sports; in the NFL, the Chargers went 14-2 this year, in the NBA, the Mavericks have an .847 win percentage, and in the NHL, with win totals weighted because of overtime victories, Buffalo technically has a .733 win percentage. Meanwhile, no team in baseball even finished above .600 in 2006, and the '01 Mariners, who set a modern record for wins, still only finished at .716. No matter what, improvement in baseball is never going to be as numerically drastic as it will in the other sports, and, as a result, Dave Taylor (#18) of the hapless LA Kings is a better GM than the Twins' Terry Ryan (#53).

Big problem number two - Counting "winning improvement" and not just "winning" improperly rewards GMs who happen to have taken over for struggling teams. The Chargers were 31-65 in the six seasons prior to A.J. Smith's arrival, which not only means that pretty much anything the Chargers would have done under Smith would have been an improvement, but it also means that Smith was allowed to reap the benefits of five seasons of high drafting, including the infamous Michael Vick trade orchestrated by John Butler prior to Smith's tenure that resulted in LaDanian Tomlinson, Shawne Merriman, and Drew Brees coming to San Diego. The team obviously improved after that, and, long story short, A.J. Smith has a Winning Improvement index of 209, securing his space on Dumbnumbers Magazine's list of stupid doodooheads.

I could go on to talk about how the list only measures vague franchise results, not the actual actions of the GMs, or about how it doesn't weigh in highs and lows or playoff success, or pretty much anything about anything, for that matter, but what's the point? We all know that it would just more or less confirm what this list tells us - that Isiah Thomas of the Knicks (#82) and Dave Littlefield of the Pirates (#84) are better GMs than the Red Wings' Ken Holland (#90) and his three poorly indexed Stanley Cups.

Butt Daredevils?

Really, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette? Of all the typos you could have made, you actually chose the one that resulted in the word 'Butt'?

Sounds like the online editor was none too happy about his beloved Xplosion losing. And no, the fact that the city in Montana is pretty much 90% of the way to being the word 'butt' anyway is no excuse.

EDIT: The typo has been corrected. Apparently, instead of re-reading their own submissions for mistakes, the Post-Gazette just reads Teapot Dome Scandal constantly figuring that I'll let them know when they have accidentally typed the word 'butt'.

The Longest Winning Streaks In Sports

The Suns' 17th straight win on Sunday was impressive, but, in order to retroactively diminish this accomplishment, let's take a look at some of the longest winning streaks in the history of organized sport. Also, this article will hopefully get me some Google hits somewhere down the road, boobs hot sex webcam free download porn.

Turns out, the Suns have a ways to go - the longest winning streak in NBA history is [fucking] 33 straight wins by the 1971-72 LA Lakers. No one's even close - the Milwaukee Bucks of the previous season won 20 straight en route to a championship season, although the Lakers shattered that record in '72 then knocked the Bucks out of the playoffs. Phil Jackson's '99 Lakers notched 19, though the Jordan era Bulls never ran off more than 18, tied with the '81-'82 Celtics and the '69-'70 Knicks. Also, despite what this confusingly worded article says, the Charlotte Bobcats do not, in fact, crack the top trillion.

Numerically speaking, the shortest record streak of the major professional sports belongs to the NHL's Pittsburgh Penguins, who won 17 straight in the 1992-93 season. History fails to mention that the Penguins were likely inspired by yours truly attending many of the games during this streak, though granted, I was still of the age where I was buying twist ice cream cones at the games and pretending the vanilla and chocolate ice creams were fighting. Also, bear in mind that in the NOT NEW NHL, or whatever the league was called back then, ties were commonplace - the longest unbeaten streak in NHL history belongs to the '79-'80 Flyers, who were ultimately upended in the Cup Finals by Al Arbour's Islanders. The Islanders also eliminated the '92-'93 Penguins, and my mom yelled at me for throwing a puck at the tv after it happened.

When I looked up the NFL's longest win streak, I expected it to be either the '72 Dolphins or some hilarious olde tyme team that started using the forward pass regularly despite ridicule, so needless to say, I was horrified to be reminded that these guys broke the record a couple years ago with 21. That's all well and good, but how'd they fare in the playoffs?? Really? Whatever.

I recalled offhand the Oakland A's 20-game win streak in 2002 (in the 20th win, they went up 11-0 on the Royals, then gave up 11 unearned runs and still won 12-11). However, the longest winning streak in MLB history actually unearths the olde tyme hilarity I was expecting out of the NFL, namely the feat of 21 straight wins shared by the 1880 Chicago White Stockings and the 1935 Chicago Cubs. The 1916 New York Giants did win 26 straight games, but they technically tied a game in the middle of the streak, which used to happen frequently in baseball's lightless days. Or alternatively, the Giants just weren't fit to tie Chicago's White Stockings.

Looking beyond the four major professional leagues exhumes some even more humorous streaks - minor league baseball's Salt Lake Trappers won 29 straight games, the record for a professional baseball league. Bud Wilkinson's Oklahoma Sooners hold the D-I football record with 47 straight wins, 24 of which came against Yale, and 23 came against William & Mary, but the streak was finally ended by Notre Dame, the other school that existed then. Interestingly, Notre Dame also ended the UCLA Bruins' 88-game record basketball streak from 1971-1974, though perhaps no one will ever top Notre Dame's streak of being indescribably unlikeable, a streak that dates back to around the school's third year of existing.

However, no winning streak in sports will ever top the greatest of the great - The United States held the America's Cup for 132 years! Granted, in a numerical sense, this streak totalled 25 victories, fewer than the Salt Lake Trappers' unforgettable '87 season, but when one takes into account how much preparation and frustration percolated in the years between each Cup race, the majesty of the feat comes into perspective. Also, while I have no knowledge or giving of shit about sailing, I do know that there are probably people who care about it a lot and that some of them live in other countries, so, you know, yeah. Wooo! U-S-A! U-S-A!

Also, even though it's not a winning streak per say, the North Carolina womens' soccer team has won 18 NCAA national championships, and no other school has more than 2. That's way more impressive than the previous paragraph. Forget I said all that crap about sailing.

So, bottom line, no matter what number the Suns stop at, the unique nature of the winning streak achievement will forever hold a sort of special, separate relevance in sports' historical cannon. Also, I just now discovered this Wikipedia Page that says most of what I just said but organized much better. Although only slightly funnier.

Pistons collect all three light-blue properties, win Chris Webber Sweepstakes

In case you didn't see ESPN.com's headline, the Detroit Pistons have won themselves a brand new roleplayer in Chris Webber, their reward for collecting the Oriental, Vermont, and Connecticut gamepieces in the latest round of McDonald's Monopoly game. Here are the rest of the available prizes:

Dark Purple: Choice of Maurice Clarett, Rae Carruth, or Bam Morris. Or all three.

Light Blue: Choice of Chris Webber or $10,000 of salary cap relief.

Light Purple: Choice of one small coffee, small fries, or Alexandre Daigle.

Orange: Choice of coaching Duke football, Penn State basketball, or USC ice hockey.

Red: Everyone the Seattle Mariners have signed in the past three years.

Yellow: Choice of Michael Vick, Lamar Odom, Viktor Kozlov, or a quarter pounder with the word "potential" on it.

Green: Choice of Mike Tice coaching your team or a Big Mac which will be eaten by Mike Tice unless you distract him by allowing him to coach your team.

Dark Blue: Brett Favre.

Collect all four Railroads: Choice of becoming head coach of the Lions or getting shivved by a boxcar hobo.

Thousands of Instant Win pieces available too!!! One in four wins!!! Prizes include:

- Order of hash browns

- NFC Playoff Spot

- Second round pick in the NBA Draft

- Gold Glove

- Sausage McMuffin with egg

- Home-ice advantage throughout the NHL Playoffs

- Juwon Howard

- A World Series title

Shaq and Kobe vehemently reconcile in order to enjoy future Christmases

In the wake of the Heat's third straight Christmas Day victory over the Lakers, superstars Shaquille O'Neal and Kobe Bryant publicly stated again and again that they are in no way feuding, that they are on completely friendly terms both personally and professionally, and that future Christmas Day games highlighting their rivalry will no longer be necessary.

"I really, really like Kobe Bryant," an emphatic O'Neal reiterated multiple times at the Christmas Day postgame conference. "Our rivalry is completely over, and all that stuff he said about Phil Jackson or about me or the stuff I said about Phil Jackson or whatever, it's all gone and in the past. Can we please have Christmas off now?"

Shaq's comments prompted laughter from the crowd of reporters.

"I'm not joking," teased a comically straight-faced Shaq. "I don't know how I can say this more clearly: I am tired of playing basketball on Christmas Day."

Bryant added, "The Heat beat us again, fair and square, so I guess that settles it - there's no more need for these Christmas games. The Heat are the champions of Christmas, and Shaq has won our rivalry. In fact, they beat us so emphatically, I won't even be angry if I'm spending next Christmas at home with my family instead of traveling across the country to play a regular season basketball game."

Bryant continued, "Did I mention I love Shaq? We are so not rivals now that I would find it insulting if they schedule another Heat/Lakers game next Christmas and hype it up as a rivalry, because it's not one anymore, and it's especially not one if it's on Christmas, and also I might be hurt next Christmas so if I were the NBA I wouldn't schedule one, is all I'm saying."

The 2007-08 NBA schedule will not be released until the summer, but after these recent comments, it is believed that another Lakers/Heat Christmas Day matchup will be scheduled to reignite the Shaq/Kobe rivalry.

Kenyon Martin out for season; Nuggets coaches, players go about their business

ESPN.com today reported that Kenyon Martin will undergo season-ending knee surgery, an announcement which has left the Denver coaching staff not scrambling or hindered in any way.

An unconcerned Coach George Karl reacted, "Yeah, ever since we signed Kenyon in '04, we've been practicing and planning for every game as though he's going to be hurt. So if he shows up we're like, cool, icing on the cake. Now that we know he's done for the year, it's actually kind of nice, it's one less thing to worry about."

For the past year, on the rare instances when Martin has been healthy, Karl has had second-string forward Eduardo Najera run every drill in practice right along Martin's side, with Karl giving instruction only to Najera then finishing every practice by saying "Martin, if you're healthy, just do what I told him." The Nuggets even had the names of Carmelo Anthony and Najera engraved onto their lineup card as the starting forwards, but Karl indicated that there was more than enough space in the margin to write in Martin's name and an arrow, if need be.

The Nuggets' cautious relationship with Martin dates back to his initial contract signing with Denver, when the team fitted him for custom $80,000 knee braces with the initials "KM" on them, in addition to taking out a $1 billion life insurance policy on Martin, a policy usually reserved for excessively wealthy CEOs and European royalty.

"Kenyon Martin Bobblehead Night" is scheduled for December 18, but stadium officials admit that they just made that up, they knew he wouldn't be playing.

Stern introduces "New Ball Dress Code"

NBA Commissioner David Stern today issued an updated off-court dress code for players, requiring individuals to wear business casual attire with no fewer than twenty new NBA balls affixed onto them. Stern claims that the new NBA balls, which can be sewn onto garments or worn as jewelry (within reason), have a greater grippable surface area than the old ball and are more resistant to moisture.

Nonetheless, players around the league have openly voiced their discontent with the latest of Stern's numerous policies.

"Umm, I'm not really sure what to say at this point," quipped a bewildered Lebron James, trying on his league-approved attire before a team practice. "I don't think I have any energy left to get mad at this. I guess I'll wear the balls."

"It's retarded," said an unusually vocal Tim Duncan while being fitted for a pair of basketball-covered slacks. "I'd say they were treating us like babies, but I'm not sure why you'd ever do this to babies. We'll do what the league wants us to do, but we won't be happy about it."

Stern added that if any players violate the new zero-tolerance policy against arguing with the officials after a foul call, the minimum number of balls will be increased to forty.

Transcript from Pat Riley's press Conference following the Heat's 108-66 loss to the Bulls last night:

PR: Thank you all for coming. So, that game. Yeahhhhh... did not.... play..... so great. It was, you know, kind of.... like... well, it was like you were expecting.... no... what was I trying to say? Um... yeah, it was not.... very.... you know? Not at all. Not one bit. Not one itty widdle bit. At all. No sir. No sirreee Bob. Noey nope nope.

Q: Do you feel that perhaps your team was a bit complaiscent, still coming off the high of last year's Finals?

PR: Um.... you might.... you know, it's kind of like.... Wow. Wow that game was not.... what we wanted.... or expected... or wanted... by any means... or.... wanted.... or.... the thing, what was I saying? Yeah, not such a great game.

Q: Do you believe that with this decisive victory on the road against the defending champs, the Bulls have established themselves as the team to beat in the East this year?

PR: Hoo-eee, that was some loss. I mean, my god. Wow. Wowzers. Wowzamadooo. Wowie Wowerson. What a.... just.... just terrible thing.... the thing that we... I mean, what happened? How did we.... what... what were we.... I mean, like, you know? What??? It was... just... it was the.... I mean, really? By forty points? At home?? That just never.... you never want to.... you, you think that... what I'm saying is, you absolutely cannot.... do.... the thing... with the stuff... that we sort of did.... on the thing.... and the stuff too.... we did... also. I don't know. I don't--

[Riley sheepishly walks away from podium, muttering to himself]