General: The Ol' One-Two Punch

Another week, another attempt by myself to bust out of the Vegas circuit. But, hey, while your here, try your luck at the craps table -- we've been lucky all night.

ONE: It's almost sort of sad that we have the Ottawa Senators and New Jersey Devils facing off against each other in this year's Eastern Conference Final.

"Why," you ask?

It has nothing to do with styles (both teams move the puck quite nicely thank you), or media markets (granted the ratings this season are the worst in some time on both sides of the border). It has everything to do with quality of fans.

In the regular season the Devils had the eighth lowest average attendance in the league based on fans in seats, and fifth lowest when you talk about percentage of seats sold. Ottawa was 17th and 15th in those departments.

Ottawa fans were ostensibly staying away because of "playoff failures" (the reality is quite a bit more complex, and starts as always with "location, location, location," and ends with "local economy").

Meanwhile, New Jersey has always had problems drawing in a rink located in "the Swampland" in an area of the country where 60% of it's market wishes it could afford to live in Manhattan and secretly cheers for the Rangers and Islanders (though they'd never admit it).

Even throughout the playoffs both teams have struggled at times (the Devil's more so) to sell out their buildings.

How much more rewarding would it be for TV, and for those who matter, the fans, if say Toronto and the Rangers were colliding? The top two teams in the East by percentage of seats sold, and one and three for actual average attendance?

Hate those franchises as you will, but in their cities, to many people, they matter.

TWO: Is the future of NHL's Anaheim franchise "just ducky?"

Like Ottawa and New Jersey. Anaheim also had very poor attendance this year -- it improved from worst overall last season, but the Ducks still sat at fifth worst in average, and seventh worse in percentage of seats sold. I didn't pick on them because, really, this franchise has been so lost you can't blame the fans for not showing up. Why would they?

Add to this the fate of the last two "surprise" teams, last year's Carolina Hurricanes and the 1997-98 Washington Capitals.

Both these teams were similar to the Duck in that they dedicated themselves to a strong system and received exceptional goaltending from Kevin Weekes and Arturs Irbe for the 'Canes, and Olaf Kolzig in Washington.

This season Carolina slumped badly, missing the playoffs and finishing 10th worst in percentage of seats sold, and 12th from the bottom in average attendance.

The Caps followed up their surprising run to the Stanley Cup finals by missing the playoffs in 1998-1999, shedding 24 points in the standings to fall to 68. The Capitals also began a long decline at the box-office to where they currently sit -- in the bottom half of the league.

Anaheim might be in tough next season. Star Paul Kariya is an unrestricted free agent and while he says he plans to stay in Anaheim the check-book will have to open.

In addition, goalie, J.S. Giguere will be a restricted free agent. A team like Philadelphia, desperate for top-flight goaltending, may force the Ducks to match an inflated offer sheet to keep their young phenom. The Ducks, with the underrated Martin Gerber as back-up might be able to weather the storm on the ice, but how do you sell fans on losing a man who might win the Conn Smythe Trophy for top playoff performer?

Re-signing Kariya and Giguere to big money deals will impede Anaheim's ability to make additional moves. Sure the Ducks have good young players such as Stanislav Chistov and Samuel Pahlsson, but the Hurricanes had Erik Cole, Josef Vasicek and Peter Svoboda, and none of those three were able to take the steps the club had counted on.

Bottom line -- in a tough Western Conference Anaheim is only even money to make it back to the playoffs next year.

ONE: I rode Robert Horry pretty hard last week, so after seeing the following quote I have to admit that whatever else Will Smith's basketball playing clone does, he is fair in his assessment of his own work in this year's playoff.

Said Horry of his lamentable 2003 playoff performance, which included a very uncharacteristic total of 2 for 38 from beyond the arc:

"I don't know if you have a word that's the opposite of heroic."

Well, yeah we do -- it's two words actually -- Samaki Walker.

TWO: Darlings one day, bum's the next.

After their 113-110 Game 1 loss to Dallas, ESPN labeled the San Antonio Spurs the San-an-choki-o Spurs.

Besides the fact that it's only mildly clever (and I'm the one cornering the market on "mildly clever" -- so stay off my turf), it's a little ridiculous.

Yes, the Spurs let a 101-87, fourth quarter lead slip away, but it was against the freakin' Dallas Mavericks people!

The Mavs are the most spontaneous and combustible team in the NBA. With the way that Dallas can shoot, and the way Don Nelson can suddenly mix in zone defenses that nobody has ever seen before Dallas definitely have the ability to dominate a quarter like they did the fourth in Game 1 outscoring the Spurs 30-19.

You'd think that a team like San Antonio, who just eliminated a L.A. Lakers squad that had not lost in the playoffs for three years, and has a multi-MVP award winning star center, might be granted a one-game mulligan by the grand-pooh-bah's of sport before they started getting labeled as "chokers."

As a footnote the Spurs then went out and dealt with Dallas handily in Game 2.

ONE: The New York Yankees kind of remind you of a cat toying with a mouse huh? The cat plays and plays, but won't let the mouse die. Then, just when the poor rodent thinks it might actually have a chance to make it -- SNAP -- down comes the claws.

That's what New York just did to long-suffering (are there any other kind?) Boston Red Sox fans.

After starting out 18-3 the Bronx Bombers looked like they might clinch the division by late July. Then New York tumbled, and tumbled hard. So hard that the beleaguered BoSox, a franchise liked by Lady Fortune the way Al Capone was liked by the FBI, crawled into a first place tie to open a three game set with the hated pin-stripes -- in Boston no less. With New York reeling the door seemed open for Boston to make the Yanks play "catch-up" for a while.

Well it took the Yankees all of seven batters to SNAP down that claw. A Raul Mondesi (Raul Mondesi???) bases loaded triple off of Casey Fossum made it 5-0 after seven Yankee hitters and the game was, for all intents and purposes, over.

This probably is going to mark a 20 game stretch where New York rolls off a 16-4 record or something like that, and fans in Beantown are going to go back to studying their occult books -- specifically, the chapter on "curse lifting."

TWO: Don't you love it when athletes talk? It's so cute, the way they wriggle their noses up like that. It's especially cute when they have things as intelligent and stimulating to say as Mark Grace did the other day.

The Arizona Diamondbacks first-sacker had this to say after his teammate Curt Schilling's complete game, 14 strikeout, two hitter:

"You know, I've always been a guy who said that hitting solved all the world's problems. When you hit, there's no Middle East problem, there's no crime problem, the problems all disappear. But when you've got two pitchers like Schill and Randy, I'll put it this way: When they pitch like that, I'm happy as hell."

Attaboy Mark, and if Curt throws a no-no, homeless people get mansions, smack addicts flip over to strawberry milkshakes, and you're so gosh-darned pleased you go skipping down to first-base after every walk, right?

ONE: It takes the Ottawa Senators 15 games before they put Jason Spezza into the line-up?

You know, for a franchise that has lived a good, good life on the strength of their evaluation of young talent they really missed the boat on this one.

I guess big, strong skating centers who can score; on a team that is still a shade small up-front doesn't make a lot of sense, huh?

TWO: Maybe they make'em smaller in the Czech Republic?

That's the only answer I can think of for the bizarre report out of Prague that had Dominik Hasek attack and beat another player unconscious in an in-line game in the Czech capital.

Well, to be fair, some reports suggest that Hasek only leveled the player with a check causing the concussion, spinal injuries, and broken nose...

Hmmmm, broken nose AND spinal injuries, Hasek didn't maybe, run the guy from behind with his goal stick did he?

Not a completely emotionally calm, totally not a loose canon guy like Hasek? Why never!

Hasek says it started after he was hit first in a scramble in front of the net -- one sort of thinks of those as the occupational hazards of being a goalie.

I wonder if Hasek was ever tempted to chase, say, the 6'2, 220lb Keith Tkachuk after the St. Louis Blues aggressive power forward knocked "the Dominator" for a loop one day?

Yup, they must make'em smaller over in the Czech Republic...

ONE: On a completely different note how on earth did Biz Markie ever get to record "Just a Friend?"

Don't get me wrong, I love "The Mark's" bizarre, off key wailing ode to hoodwinked men as much as the next guy, but seriously Biz Markie can't sing, at all.

"Just a Friend" may very well be the worst example of the human voice careening off of, or near, notes in the history of modern recorded music. The part of the song where Biz really gets into it for that second set of "Oh Baby, you/Got What I Need's" is one of those rare moments where laughter collides with stunned horror.

Nobody brought down a vocal level at that point in the mix?

The suggestion to perhaps, re-record the section, in a voice that is a little less howler monkey was never made?

These are astonishing truths in the history of music.

The killer is this was Biz Markie's first (and some would say only) big hit. So some music producer actually decided to take a shot on a guy without a track record who sounds like two hound dog's wailing over a lost rabbit.

One day VH1 will do a "Behind the Music" dedicated exclusively to "Just A Friend" and the true story of how the song made it out untouched (I'm guessing Biz had pictures), and the terrible toll it took on scrawny high-school guys trying to "hit some skins" with this song on the mix tape in the Impala, will come to light.

Still, in Biz Markie's defense it may be the most fun song to sing drunk and en masse since Neil Diamond recorded "Sweet Caroline."

TWO: Memo to Harrison Ford: please quit now...

I want to be able to remember you as the man who astonished a Spanish student I met abroad. We were talking about his two favorite movies "Indiana Jones" and "Star Wars." When I mentioned that he really liked Harrison Ford movies the kid looked confused.

I explained to him that Ford was in both.

"You mean," he said breathlessly, "that ONE man was BOTH Indiana Jones AND Han Solo?"

I nodded.

"This man is truly the greatest man who ever lived," the kid murmured reverentially.

Note he didn't say "greatest actor" he said "greatest man." Harrison, you were the best -- the stud, the "rogue playing, women's heart fluttering, smart-ass in the face of death talkin'" man.

That time has gone, let it go. No more action movies for your thickening 60-something bod. Especially no more action movies like Hollywood Homicide -- that features a) stupid looking physical comedy, b) stupid sounding faux-"ebonics" (you're not down Harrison, and that's ok) and c) Josh Hartnett -- who's trying to break out of his "I had this look of sincere stupid intensity surgically implanted on my face" stage of his career.

That's why sunsets were invented Harrison -- so heroes like you can ride into them.

ONE: Nick Van Exel is rather fun to watch is he not? "The Quick" was absolutely unconscious in the Mavericks-Kings series last week.

Van Exel shot a combined 69-133 from the field in the series and 24-53 from beyond the arc. That's a 51.9% field goal percentage and 45.2% from three-point land. Take out Van Exel's one bad game, Game 4, and those number's jump to 54.9% and 46.9%.

It wasn't just how well Van Exel shot though, it was the way he made the baskets that was so special.

Van Exel hit long three's with hands in his face. He knocked down those wide-open looks that so often in this seemingly fundamentally unsound league are bricked. He darted into the lane, burning some of the best defensive smalls in the game to tag pull up J's. He forced his way inside and then stepped back to nail a jumper over various behemoths like Hidayet Turkoglu and Keon Clark. He went to the cup and would not be denied, and the 6'1 Van Exel did it all with a snarl on his face. A look that told the Kings that he would not be stopped.

When faced with that snarling, sneering visage I wonder what the Kings thought? Did they use it as motivation "we're going to wipe that look off his face, we're gonna win this just to knock HIM out!"

Or did they, deep down, know that they were facing an opponent who wanted it more than they ever could? Who, more importantly, was not afraid to step on their throat, to choke the playoff life out of a team reeling from facing another team where so many players could make so many big shots?

Every time Van Exel shot the ball it was exciting, every time he touched the ball you anticipated greatness. Van Exel delivered the goods and I'm going to remember his performance, in a league where they say, quite rightly, that skill is being overtaken by blind athleticism, for a long time.

TWO: A lot of people are saying the only reason the Dallas Mavericks made it through to the Western Finals is because Chris Webber, the Kings all-everything forward was hurt.

I can see the argument; Webber's offensive game is such that nobody on the Mavs really matches up with him too well. He's too quick for a physical guy like Eduardo Najera. Shoots to well to have Dirk Nowitzki play off him to deny him the drive. Is too powerful for a smaller man like Adrian Griffin or Raja Bell to handle.

The problem for Sacramento though was not offensively -- though at times they did struggle. The key was always going to be to slow down the full-throttle Mavs. As Dallas showed over and over again, they will run and shoot you into the ground. They might miss for five, six, maybe even seven minutes consistently, but don't be fooled -- they will find the range again.

I wonder whom Webber would have handled, Nowitzki is the obvious choice, but I don't know if Webber is the man who can shut down a guy like Dirk. When Nowitzki is on his game he is more or less unstoppable, much like Webber himself.

The key difference is Nowitzki -- with Game 6 as an odd contrary example -- likes to take pressure shots, and he hits them. Webber has yet to show that when the game matters that he will demand the ball, and do something with it.

I think the Kings played well without Webber. Certainly C-Webb would have been an asset, but with the way Dallas played in the series (and remember they were going to be up 2-1 after Game 3 regardless of Webber's health in that game) I don't know if Webber could have turned the tide.

Once again, it's been great to see you all out here tonight. Don't forget to tip your waitress.