Bottom line is to win in the NBA, your best players have to play. Ask lionel Hollins if it was his ego and the idea that he had to "stand up" to
Iverson or was Mike Conley a better player than AI? Bottom line, no other player as accomplished as AI has been asked to do what he has been asked to. I have watched NBA "stars" over the years live off of a name and start when they were well past their prime and now all of a sudden, AI is being asked to "sacrifice his game" so that he can become a sideshow on a loosing team? GET REAL I need Tom Ziller's job, it seems all you have to do is pile on when the villians are written about and bandwagon the heroes. I thought you actually had to know about athletes and the canvas that they use to express his / her artistry? AI is a singular talent, teams should be built around him, not the other way around. Otherwise, you negate his talent.

The fact that mine is the only post answers your last question. I'm sure that once folks read my retort, they will chime in accordingly

And, I know there will be some, Floyd included who will say that they "gave" Shane Mosley a chance and they "ducked" Floyd, but if you remember, that was when Mosley was the champion and the real draw and Mayweather and his folks essentially asked for the "lion's share" of the purse and when Mosley's folks said no, and that became the "ducking" that Floyd always talks about when he's asked about Mosley.

Floyd is a gifted fighter and more importantly a great athlete. He is also a guy who grew up fighting much like Tiger Woods grew up golfing. He comes from a boxing family and has always shown a polish that I have only seen in other great fighters. He's a smarter more atheletic version of Pernell Whitaker. Having said that, I think the fight he is afraid of is NOT Paquiao, it is Shane Mosely, who is also a fighter trained from a very early age who is also a great athelete. The difference is toughness and a "prize fighter" mentality. Mosley is classic in this sense, while Floyd is more "matador" than bull. Both are quick, but Shane hits harder and is more deliberate with his punches. Manny is too small and limited and will be easily beaten by Floyd. Styles make fights. A more compelling fight for Manny would be Mosely as well if you like a high action slugfest with a knockout ending. Just take the emotions and the "hater-isms" out of it and think for a second, watch some of the fights that each of them have recently fought and you will see what I mean!

As a longtime Knick fan, I say take him! We could use someone who will play as hard as they can for 48 minutes each night. The problems with AI in the past are in the past. The only issue he has now is with sitting. He has never liked to come out of a game, he wants to play every minute of every game. Coming off the bench limits his minutes and if a team is loosing, tries his patience as it would any of us. He would glady come off the bench for Cleveland, L.A. or Boston. What do the Knicks have to loose at this point. Let me know soon so I can order my Jersey!

Folks out there bashing Byron are entitled to their opinion, but they are dead WRONG! Byron suffers from the same problem that Pat Riley did. The teams they coach are driven hard to overachieve, that is why they are as successful as they are. He has never coached the most talented team in the league, but he's been to the finals and won everywhere he coached. When these overachieving teams play the best teams, they usually come up short, but they are competitve BECAUSE of coach Scott. Larry Brown suffered from the same thing, look how long it took for him to finally win it all. Most of these NBA players are cool with drawing a salary and just showing up. You have to either lead them from the bench, or have a player like Jordan, Bird or Magic to become the defacto leader to make them play at a high level.

Dude, it's the way you describe his stint in Memphis as a "sideshow". They had a legitimate chance at making something happen, with a re-energized, almost dedicated version of Zach Randolph (the new Derrick Coleman)and a band of young, long-armed, talented players like Mayo and Gay. Iverson's issues are with MINUTES! During the league leading scoring years, he also averaged the most minutes played by a player. He has never liked sitting! He has never liked to come out of a game! I need your job, just write a bunch of "opinions" with no basis in reality. The problem was that Lionel Hollins does not like Iverson as a player and that's why this all fell apart.

I am shocked at your comments '08. Obama is no more a Muslim than I am. while I agree he is no savior(not even close), at least he is trying to do something. I've listened to the working class complain about big business and the "rich gettin' richer" my whole life and now that a guy comes in and tries to represent them all I hear is complaints from the same folks.

sadly, you have bluray folks proclaiming victory and at the same time trying to convince everyone that they should pay twice as much for their hardware, it's crazy! This should be the final blow to blu ray! The ability to buy a player for less than $150us that will play at 1080i and upconvert! The studios all are backing blu because they still believe that piracy is the cause of their reduced profits in the past 7 years, not because of any technical specs! Folks, stop drinking the kool-aid and save your money! The studios will make the discs if the public demands it! It should not be the other way around. Why is that such a difficult concept. we should all be giddy, the consumer actually getting ahead. Even if blu wins, the consumer looses in the end. How is that good? The blue ray hardware has always been twice the price of the hddvd hardware all the way back to the 1080i rca players two years ago at wal-mart (that were actually toshiba). All I know is that I have a 52" 1080p lcd panel (sharp), a 50" 720p plasma (philips) and a 26" el-cheapo 720p lcd (westinhouse) a PS3, and 2 xbox360 premiums and one xbox360 elite with hddvd add-on drive and a blue ray (sony bdps300) all purchased at various times during the past 3 years and I have seen all combinations of these devices. The proof is in what your eyes see, not what somone tells you..no matter how convincing. I'm not saying I regret buying the bluray player, I'm just saying I wish it had cost me 140 versus 299, especially since I have that and the xbox360 elite w/hddvd connected to the same monitor and the difference is imperceptable. The only reason I got the add-on player is because many hddvd are combo discs at the same price as the BD so that my son could play them on the non-hddvd xbox360 he has connected to the 26" LCD in his bedroom. It works out that I have 12 bd and 32 hddvd with the matrix set and the Star Trek TOS season 1 set. Sorry for the long rant, I don't usually post, just read. But with this latest development with warner, I had to say something.

What's funny is how during these tough economic times, the blu ray camp ridicules the idea of being able to buy an HD player for $140 bucks while they gladly pay more than twice that for a device that does exactly the same thing! Most don't even have a monitor capable of 1080p @ 24HZ, but they claim they can tell the difference between 1080i and 1080p. Tisk, tisk...the reason HDDVD will endure is because they will have all those players in people's homes, even homes that have blu-ray BECAUSE the players are cheap enough to do so. HD-DVD won't go under because even in laptops and other computers the format is more consumer friendly because of it's stability and durability. It's not going away. Consumers may not be able to take full advantage of HDDVD for home theatre applications, but then that would be our fault for not doing enough real world comparison on our own.