The word clutch has become a parody of itself. Pretty soon basketball arguments will consist solely of one person shouting “Clutch!” and another screaming “Not Clutch! Choker!”. That word and the qualities that are supposed be inherent within it seem to elicit a hyena-like mentality rather than any form of cogent analysis or discussion.

Look, I’m not saying that clutch play doesn’t exist. I’m also not saying that some players feel the pressure of the moment while others remain largely unaffected. (Confidence is just about the most important thing one can have in sports or any walk of life.) What I am saying is that boiling every late game success or failure down to whether someone is clutch or not is impossibly myopic.

There is this mentality out there where great and more importantly, clutch athletes possess some innate super power to will the right outcome in a pressure situation. Let’s take the free throw line as an easy example. Clutch players are never supposed to miss an important foul shot. When they do, they choked. Is it ever possible they just missed? (All of them have.) Someone who is an 80% free throw shooter over a season is likely to hit that mark over time. If they miss two consecutive clutch free throws, chances are they may hit their next several consecutive clutch attempts. They’re likely to wind up around 80%. Again, that doesn’t mean the moment won’t cause some guys to tighten up; it’s just impossible to quantify and people seem to single out the players they want to label as chokers.

My other problem with this clutch obsession is that it has instilled an idea in the NBA that the best player must take the important shot…no matter what. Designating a last-shot taker is ridiculous. You are making the other team’s job easier (they know who to guard) and your best player’s job more difficult (he is loaded up on). And now that best player is also faced with a culture that believes he should pull up over a double team rather than finding an open teammate. Huh? (This viewpoint also tends to assume the rest of the game outside the last two minutes doesn’t count.)

I could see a counter argument if the above method wasn’t statistically proven to be extremely ineffective. It is tough to score in those situations, for anyone. Since 1996-1997, Kobe Bryant, considered by many to be the most clutch player out there, has shot just a hair over 30% when trailing by one or two or tied in the final 24 seconds of a game. I’m sure he’d be the first to tell you that he wouldn’t have a handful of rings if not for the likes of Robert Horry and Derek Fisher hitting clutch buckets.

Kobe’s missed big shots. So has Michael Jordan. Just like Tom Brady’s thrown key interceptions and Derek Jeter’s struck out in huge spots. Not every failure in pressure moments is choking, just like not every success is rising to the occasion. Do people how realize how stupid it is to simplify it to such a degree? (I feel like I’m taking crazy pills!)

Obviously, the case study for all this talk is LeBron James. And LeBron has had some performances that warrant the choker label. Last year’s NBA Finals and game five against Boston two years ago being the chief examples. There is no defense for how nonexistent he was for stretches in those games and it is easy to understand why many would dub him mentally weak as a result.

But failure is easy to find when it’s the only thing you are looking for. LeBron’s had plenty of performances that warrant the opposite label. Historically, he’s been statistically excellent in what the NBA dubs as “Clutch Time” (the last five minutes of a five point game). In this postseason alone he’s already had a 17 and a 16 point fourth quarter. Then there was shutting the door on Boston and Chicago last year down the stretch of games, that whole scoring 29 of his team’s final 30 against the Pistons in ‘07 and the fact that he’s hit a better percentage on game tying or game winning shots in the playoffs than clutch-master-mamba Kobe Bryant.

The point is, the analysis is not so cut and dry. That’s why to me, clutch has become a dirty word. Every time I hear it used the way it currently is, I want to give up. Kind of like LeBron in a high pressure situation.

It was the night before the Super Bowl. I was at Madison Square Garden. The Nets were in town and Mike D’Antoni’s job was rumored to be on the line (that just got delayed). It was the birth of Linsanity.

As I watched Jeremy Lin repeatedly drive by Deron Williams and get into the lane, I was thinking to myself, I have to be here for the next game; I have to make sure that was real. Sure enough, it continued and the next two weeks were amongst the most fun sports stories I can remember.

It’d be awesome to attempt to recreate that. However, it’d be Linsane (sorry). Let’s forget about Jeremy Lin the story for a second. Let’s focus on Jeremy Lin the player. Because it seems like he has become more of a narrative than a human being at this point.

Jeremy Lin has missed more than five weeks following knee surgery. His game is predicated on explosive movements and cuts. (I’ve always said Lin’s number one attribute is his first step and ability to get into the lane and attack the basket.) In order for him to be effective, he has to have full trust that his knee is sound. How could he at this point? Expecting him to swoop in, make a rusty return and have an impact against the Miami Heat in their building is absolutely asinine (asLINine?).

Also, Lin has his future to worry about. As he should. Here’s a guy who wasn’t drafted, was cut by multiple teams and who was unsure about his future in the NBA just a few months ago. Don’t forget, the Knicks were on the verge of cutting him too. He doesn’t owe them anything. (In fact, the opposite is true. He generated a ton of money and could do so in the future, yet another reason not to risk his health. That and the whole he could be your starting point guard next year thing.) Is it really reasonable to expect him to jeopardize the health of his knee and a possible payday around $20 million when he’s nowhere near 100%?

Think about this situation logically for a second. In what scenario do the rewards of activating Lin outweigh the risks? Do any of those scenarios include the Knicks coming all the way back to beat the Heat? That line of thinking is delusional. Bringing a hobbled Lin back just to participate in tonight’s likely gentleman’s sweep in Miami would be about the most shortsighted thing I could possibly imagine.

The Knicks finally ended their playoff losing streak. It’s time to look to the future. And that future does not include a miraculous comeback in this series.

When Nick Fury appeared after the credits of the original Iron Man and said he was looking to put a team together, I knew Marvel was attempting to pull off something that would make guys like me who pretended to be super heroes as kids giddy (I used to put popsicle sticks between my fingers to pull off Wolverine and my grandma made me a Hulk costume). They were going to build a comic book universe on screen, one that would eventually lead to multiple heroes appearing in the same film. Well, that film is finally here in the form of Avengers.

When I see a movie like this for the first time, one that I’ve been anticipating for years, I’m both excited and nervous (I don’t want to experience that feeling of sheer disappointment). As a result, it’s almost difficult for me to give my best review after one viewing (I really seem like a nerd now) but here goes…

The biggest challenge for a project like Avengers is concocting a reasonable plot as to why these powerful characters need to come together in the first place. After all, it takes a mighty large threat to require Hulk AND Thor AND Iron Man AND Captain America to stop it. There’s nothing too original about the plot here. A crazy, power hungry bad guy (Loki) decides to threaten Earth with a super powerful weapon, kind of just because.

However, if you were looking for a revolutionary plot point as the impetus for the team’s formation, you were expecting something different than I was. It’s everything that happens after Loki threatens the world that makes this movie the spectacle it is. And it is spectacular.

There are three things that allowed it to live up to my enormous expectations. The first is the characters. You can tell director Joss Whedon deeply cares about staying true to the spirit of the larger than life personalities he is asked to juggle. And he does it successfully, with every single one. They are all given their chance to shine and they all have an iconic type moment.

The second standout from Avengers is the dialogue. It is as snappy as can be. Tony Stark is his charismatic self, Captain America defines leadership without being corny, Loki and Thor’s demigod rivalry plays well, the Black Widow is deadly and sexy and Bruce Banner is more accurately portrayed here than he ever has been on the big screen. There are incredible exchanges and hilarious moments throughout the two and a half hour run time (which flies by).

The third aspect that propels Avengers is the action. It is out of control good. There are impossibly powerful super heroes fighting and somehow it looks believable while still maintaining an epic feel. And unlike previous Marvel movies, the climax here feels bigger than the buildup.

To sum up, if you are a human being who likes things, Avengers is for you. I’m already looking forward to my second viewing.

I was watching SportsCenter and some hockey highlights came on (I know, weird right?). I just had the TV on as wallpaper but something caught my eye, and not in a good way. It was a fight. A fight that wasn’t as much entertaining as it was silly. One that made its sport look like a joke.

I immediately tweeted out, “Fighting in hockey is the stupidest thing I’ve ever seen.” The hockey cult took umbrage to that remark. Replies started pouring in ranging from, “it’s a part of the game”, to “your stupid” (notice the irony in the fact that no one online seems to be able to properly conjugate you are). People were ready to check me into the boards.

Let me address the part of the game argument. Yes, it has been a part of the game. But is it a good part of the game? Doesn’t the fighting culture allow guys into the league who are more goons than they are quality players? Doesn’t that damage the quality of play? Plus, how does fighting impact the game other than resulting in players being put on timeout?

Then there’s the people watch for the fights argument. If true, that is a huge problem. First, because I’m sure the league would like viewers to tune in for entertaining games, not amateur fisticuffs. Second, and even more problematic, not that many people watch. I don’t mean to take a cheap shot but the fact is that NHL ratings are not in the same stratosphere as those of the NFL, NBA or MLB, to name a few examples. So saying people watch for the fights holds no weight.

Also, I think there may be some racial undertones involved with the acceptance of fighting in hockey. Would it be as celebrated in an organized team sport that isn’t predominantly white? I often hear hockey fights and even baseball brawls referred to as fun. However, when a basketball player shoves another, the word thug tends to be thrown out.

Look, I’m no hockey expert and I don’t want to come off as preachy. But despite not being an avid hockey consumer, I appreciate the speed, skill and athleticism involved in the game. I simply believe fighting takes away from it. And recently, the most interest I’ve seen from the casual fan regarding the sport came during the Olympics. No fighting there.

I keep hearing that Tim Tebow is a great football player. I also keep hearing the Jets made a terrible mistake in acquiring him. Those two sentences don’t make sense consecutively.

If the Jets acquired Tebow to steal attention from the Giants, it’s a mistake. But if they picked him up to properly utilize him, it could work. Their offensive coordinator ran a successful wildcat formation in Miami with Ronnie Brown. Maybe Tebow doesn’t throw like an elite quarterback, however, he certainly passes better than a typical running back.

And now all the sudden everybody is worried about Mark Sanchez’ psyche? There were people who wanted to wake Mark Brunell up from a nap to put him in the game over Sanchize last year. Wasn’t it going to be worse this year no matter who was behind him? It’s up to Sanchez to bury that talk, not the organization. Play well and it goes away.

Plus, who says that Sanchez has to be the starter and Tebow the backup? Ideally the Jets defy convention. There’s no rule that says you can’t play two quarterbacks. Why not a wildcat-esque package for Tebow and a more traditional package for Sanchez? And God forbid (couldn’t leave God out of a Tebow piece) installing sets that utilize both. There’s no team in a better position to do so. Tebow has his limitations as a passer and Sanchez doesn’t have the gravitas to complain.

Going by the book all the time is silly to me. In baseball guys are dubbed closers and as a result, teams sometimes don’t utilize their best relief pitcher when he’s needed because it isn’t his proper time to come into the game. Lunacy. The same thing would hold true for naming Sanchez first string and Tebow second string simply due to convention.

Tebow’s an unconventional player. Use him that way. And if he does prove to be the better option at quarterback, what do the Jets have to lose? (Other than Mark Sanchez’ confidence?)

This is not a Mike D’Antoni defense piece. If D’Antoni had been fired after last year’s playoffs, I would’ve thought it a bit unfair but wouldn’t have batted an eye. And if D’Antoni was canned after the Knicks 8-15 start, I would’ve understood. He had up until that point failed to win with the combination of Carmelo Anthony and Amar’e Stoudemire.

But then something happened. Linsanity, you may have heard of it. Something we are all apparently supposed to ignore now. Personally, I can’t ignore the team’s level of play during that time period, nor the sheer joy they obviously felt while playing. I also refuse to dismiss it as a total fluke.

I was there for Jeremy Lin’s breakout game. It wasn’t what he did, it was how he did it. I had to be in the building the next game to make sure what I saw was real. Well, it continued for a nine game stretch. It appeared that the Knicks had struck oil. A team devoid of a point guard had found one who was cheap, through a unique combination of factors was a marketing dream and who just happened to be a perfect fit for their coach’s system. They were playing well and nothing on Earth was more fun to watch.

Then Melo returned. I wasn’t one of those guys who thought he would mess it up. No, I was pondering just how good the team could become. After all, they were essentially replacing Billy Walker with Carmelo Anthony. As Lin’s production would inevitably come down, Carmelo would pick up the slack and do what he was brought in to do.

Well, it didn’t work out that way. Not at all. The numbers are staggering. Excluding Wednesday’s win over Portland, since 2/20 the Knicks averaged 109.8 points per 100 possessions with Anthony on the bench, 97.6 per 100 with him on the floor. And that’s not all. They allowed 107.1 points per 100 possessions with him on the floor and just 95.1 per 100 with him sitting. The team was significantly better both offensively and defensively without him. That is not my opinion, that is a fact.

Those numbers cannot be brushed aside, particularly when you couple them with what I was watching. Maybe Mike D’Antoni’s system was not the right fit for Melo. But I’m not sure he ever tried to fit it. I watched a guy who was not giving his all. A guy who refused to dive for loose balls, who didn’t run back hard on defense, who seemingly deliberately broke the scheme in what amounted to somewhat of an on court mutiny. And that’s not even factoring in his mannerisms and body language. He said all the right things without ever backing them up with the correct actions.

It was painfully obvious that he was the one guy not buying into D’Antoni’s system. Even more obvious that he and D’Antoni were not going to coexist. And it was relayed to me that Carmelo would do things like skip shootaround and hit the showers before D’Antoni addressed the team following a game. Those are not the actions of a superstar.

Forgetting superstar actions, he has also lacked superstar production (if that title even befits him), far from it. As of now, Anthony is averaging a career low in points per game and field goal percentage and is producing at a paltry rate in isolation plays, the type of plays he has apparently been craving. He has played poorly, plain and simple.

Perhaps, this change was needed. Mike Woodson has preached the word accountability, something Mike D’Antoni was never good at enforcing. D’Antoni just expected guys to do to the right thing, a player’s coach in the truest sense, as in a way, he allowed the player’s to coach themselves. Which doesn’t work when one of your best players is setting a bad example. Perhaps a more regimented system, a tougher coach, one that he feels believes in him more than the previous one is what Carmelo and the team required.

Although, I think it’s just as likely that Melo is simply not as good as advertised. Something I always feared. I hoped a move to the team and city of his choice would maximize his talents. After all, he was a part of 50-win Denver teams and he did win a Gold Medal and a National Championship. I feared he was simply a volume scorer who doesn’t bring much else to the table. A player with an attitude that would remind many of the Stephon Marbury era Knicks. A star in name only.

It’s now time for Melo to show and prove. He has no more excuses. Otherwise, we may look back at all this as the time when the Knicks struck oil and plugged the hole themselves. Because when Mike D’Antoni and the team parted ways, the Knicks elected to put all their eggs in the Carmelo Anthony basket. You just hope when it’s all said and done, there are still some eggs left.

The Knicks lost to the Nets mainly because Deron Williams hit a bunch of threes and Tyson Chandler was in foul trouble. However, if you overreact and take quotes completely out of context, you can make it sound as if it happened like this…

I’m a Marvel guy, making it obvious where my allegiances lie. There’s almost no competitor I would take over Iron Man, Thor, Captain America and Hulk in the same movie at the same time. Plus, they’ve been building toward this flick since the first Iron Man.

Tony Stark > Bruce Wayne. And an assembling Avengers is certainly greater than a mumbling Bane and a growling Batman. Who’s got your vote?…

This was fun to watch live.

Here goes (1-1 for Conference Championships, 7-3 for playoffs, 135-122-1 on season)…

Giants (+3) over Patriots: My head says Giants. My gut says Pats. The G-Men are rolling. They have the better defense. They are as close as you can get at quarterback. And there’s a chance Hakeem Nicks and Victor Cruz totally dominate the New England secondary. After all, those guys are a big step up in class from the Broncos and Ravens air attacks. Still, something feels wrong about the confidence surrounding New York. The Patriots were 13-3. They still have Tom Brady and Bill Belichick. Their defense is improving and not nearly as bad as people are making it out to be. And they never beat themselves. I’m extremely tempted to go that way but I’ll stick with my initial logic and go with the Madden result, a lot of work goes into that game, they have to know better than me…Giants 27 Pats 24.

Off to Indy…

I see a rematch brewing (3-1 last week, 6-2 for the playoffs, 134-121-7 on the season)…

Giants (+2.5) over 49ers: If you read my post a couple entries below, you’d know who I’m taking in this game. The 49ers are an excellent team all around. They went 13-3, weren’t blown out all season and beat the Saints in the playoffs; that speaks for itself. However, the Giants are playing like a borderline dominant team right now. They’ve taken four consecutive must-win games by a combined score of 121-50. They dominated the 15-1 Packers and their historic passing attack. I’m just not sure what San Francisco does better at the moment (other than have the edge in the kicking game). As good as the Niners defense is, they narrowly defeated New Orleans despite getting five turnovers and Drew Brees still managed to throw for 462 yards and four scores. I think the Giants are the better team.

Patriots (-7.5) over Ravens: Much like New York, I believe New England has improved as the season has gone along, particularly on the defensive side. Meanwhile, the Ravens have a stout D but I don’t think its a special one. And then there’s the Tom Brady-Joe Flacco matchup.

I frankly cannot believe the level the New York Giants are currently playing at. It was just several weeks ago when I thought they weren’t of much greater quality than the Washington Redskins. Then they lost to the Redskins (for the second time this season). That was the end of the slightly above average Giants team.

Something happened after that game. Actually, many things happened. It would be too convenient to attach one reason for such a drastic improvement. In the Helen Keller movie I watched in school, Helen was having trouble learning due to her handicaps and her teachers were growing frustrated. Until her instructor signed water into Helen’s palm while holding her hand under a pump. I think it would be too simplistic to define one such breakthrough moment for this Giants team.

This was a group that was dead-last in rushing offense, 27th in total defense and 25th in scoring defense. Simply put, they weren’t very good. However, those statistics are no longer relevant. Through some combination of playing the Packers tough in the regular season, getting healthy at the right time (perhaps the most important detail), winning the much hyped New York bowl (probably the singular psychological factor I would point to), beating Dallas in an elimination game and steam-rolling through the Falcons, the Giants became a beast of a squad.

The Packers were 15-1 and didn’t belong on the field with them. Aaron Rodgers and a historically great passing attack got crushed despite having an incredibly favorable call go their way. They were inferior. Just like every other team might be.

The San Francisco 49ers have a great defense but the Giants D is playing at an elite level right now. After all, they held Atlanta and Green Bay to a combined 22 points. And with the way Eli Manning is playing and the weapons he has on the outside, their offense can go toe-to-toe with anybody.

As a team, they believe if they play their game, they can’t lose. I’m not sure they will. The only team I’m uncertain they are better than is New England. I think that’s where we’re headed; a rematch of one of the more memorable Super Bowls ever.

Tebow, Tebow, Tebow. Just trying to meet my quota (131-120-7 on the season)…

49ers (+4) over Saints: We are enamored with the Saints because we just saw them dust Detroit. But the Lions were allergic to tackling, San Fran isn’t. The Lions also dropped some sure interceptions, San Fran won’t. New Orleans is virtually unbeatable in their dome but outside of it, they’ve lost games to the Rams and Bucs. The 49ers are built for this and as long as they don’t turn the ball over, I like them to win outright.

Broncos (+13.5) over Patriots: I refuse to doubt Tebow anymore. And Denver was good enough to build an early lead last time these two played. If they are aggressive, they’ve got a shot. However, the Patriots have shown they could care less about playing from behind (49 straight against Buffalo a few weeks ago). I’ll take the Pats by ten.

Texans (+7.5) over Ravens: The only major advantage Baltimore has is at quarterback and Joe Flacco’s performance this year has been questionable at best.

Giants (+7.5) over Packers: Perhaps my judgment is clouded having just seen the Giants, while Green Bay is more out of sight, out of mind. But there was a time when the G-Men could not run the ball and were terrible on defense. That time has passed. I actually believe they are the more well rounded team. Will that be enough to topple Aaron Rodgers and Pack’s historically great passing attack? I’ll say yes for the heck of it.

If you haven’t seen Ricky Rubio play yet, you need to.

Rookie guard Iman Shumpert brings the Knicks and mixtapes together in an enjoyably terrible fashion. (Originally aired on ESPNNewYork1050. )

I’ve yet to pick a playoff game wrong (7-9 last week; 128-119-7 on the season)…

Texans (-3) over Bengals: Houston defends and runs the ball better than Cincy does anything. I won’t give the Bengals rookie quarterback a big enough advantage to go with them.

Saints (-10 1/2) over Lions: New Orleans has won its last eight and by an average of 17 points. Plus, Detroit got torn up by Matt Flynn last week. I’ll roll with Drew Brees and company.

Steelers (-8 1/2) over Broncos: I don’t have complete faith in Pittsburgh’s offense considering the health of Ben Roethlisberger. But I have 100% faith in their defense going against Tim Tebow and the Denver offense. You can’t give a consistently dominant defense that allowed only 14 points per game just one dimension to focus on. The Steelers defense is going to treat Tebow and the Broncos offense like a killer whale does a baby seal or like the Incredible Hulk does purple pants.

Giants (+3) over Falcons: If I could pass on any game, it’d be this one. I’m not sure about the G-Men. Are they getting healthy and everything is clicking for them at the right time? Or did they simply beat a Jets team in disarray and a Cowboys team that lost four of five (with the lone win coming against the Bucs)? Are they still the team that lost to the Redskins three weeks ago? If they beat Atlanta (who I’m not really sold on either but are certainly solid), they can count me as a believer.

Boris Diaw is the latest player to benefit from the world’s best basketball improvement technique. (Originally aired on ESPNNewYork1050)

It would take an epic failure in order for me not to finish with a winning record (8-8 last week; 121-110-7 on the season)…

Bills (+10.5) over Patriots: Something tells me N.E. goes into cruise control.

Saints (-8) over Panthers: I’d pick Cam and company on a neutral field given the points but New Orleans has been a monster at home.

Vikings (-1.5) over Bears: Joe Webb > Caleb Hannie?

Packers (+3) over Lions: Meaningless or not, it’s rare when the pack get points.

Colts (+3.5) over Jaguars: Indy is rolling now.

Dolphins (-3) over Jets: Not sure they aren’t just better. (Reggie Bush’s injury changes things but I’ll stick with the choice for the heck of it.)

49ers (-10.5) over Rams: Know they are better.

Titans (-3) over Texans: Playing for their playoff lives.

Bengals (+2.5): Same deal but in their own building.

Eagles (-8.5) over Redskins: Just because.

Broncos (-3) over Chiefs: Only because it’s in Mile High.

Steelers (-6.5) over Browns: I can’t remember if I’ve ever picked Cleveland.

Chargers (+3) over Raiders: San Diego spoils their playoff hopes.

Seahawks (+2.5) over Cardinals: No reason.

Falcons (-11) over Bucs: Tampa es no bueno.

Giants (-3) over Cowboys: I trust New York more, just slightly though.

This sports weekend is spectacular. Happy holidays everybody! (10-6 last week; 113-102-7 on the season)…

Colts (+7.5) over Texans: I deserve to lose this one. (I didn’t.)

Cardinals (+4.5) over Bengals: I think Arizona is just as good as Cincy at this point.

Ravens (-12.5) over Browns: Bounce back game for Baltimore.

Broncos (-3) over Bills: Buffalo is terrible and can’t stop the run.

Titans (-7) over Jaguars: Simply because they are at home.

Dolphins (+9.5) over Patriots: Miami deserves some respect for how they’ve been playing and the Pats have wrapped up the division.

Redskins (-6.5) over Vikings: In Grossman I trust.

Jets (-3) over Giants: The Giants are 7-7, have been outscored on the season and rank 28th in points allowed. Eli Manning is better than Mark Sanchez, everywhere else I think the Jets have a slight edge.

Chiefs (-2.5) over Raiders: Carson Palmer will throw some picks at Arrowhead.

Steelers (-11.5) over Rams: I don’t care who the quarterback is.

Panthers (-7.5) over Bucs: Tampa sucks.

Chargers (+2.5) over Lions: San Diego has their December super powers working again.

Eagles (+1.5) over Cowboys: If Philly has something to play for, they’ll dust Dallas.

Seahawks (+2.5) over 49ers: Seattle has been playing well, is at home and San Fran played Monday night.

Packers (-12) over Bears: Caleb Hannie.

Saints (-7) over Falcons: New Orleans seems unbeatable in the Superdome.

I just left the newly renovated Madison Square Garden following the Knicks and Nets second preseason meeting, my first taste of live basketball this season (yeah, I know it doesn’t really count). Despite the ugly nature of that particular game, I’m currently experiencing a state of antsy euphoria knowing the actual season is only a few days away and will gladly ignore a little post lockout sloppy play.

I feel like a kid fresh off a month-long grounding. There are simply too many stories to delve into come Christmas day. I’ll start with the two teams I just saw.

–Tyson Chandler is clearly going to have a significant impact on the Knicks. He is big, coordinated, active and athletic. He should improve their defense, keep attention away from Carmelo Anthony and Amar’e Stoudemire offensively and clean up the boards to limit teams to one shot (a huge problem for New York last year). His positive attitude also seems to be contagious.

With that said, their backcourt is currently a travesty. They’ve got absolutely no one who can break down a defense off the dribble. It’s probably not a good thing when Toney Douglas is the best guard on your team. Maybe Chandler’s positive energy can help heal Baron Davis’ back.

Another story to watch is the dynamic between Anthony and Mike D’Antoni. D’Antoni, considered an offensive guru, is coaching for his job. Meanwhile, Carmelo is attempting to justify his star status. Melo is a savant as a scorer but he’s never really made his teammates dramatically better like other top players (he’s been eliminated in the first round in seven of his eight playoff appearances–in an average of 4.7 games). D’Antoni promises to run the offense through him. Can they help each other get better? Will this be the year Carmelo becomes a true superstar?

–The Nets are currently Deron Williams and a bunch of scrubs. Brook Lopez is far and away their second best player and their third best player isn’t even known for basketball (the Garden crowd booed Kris Humphries vociferously, as if they were defending Kim Kardashian’s honor). *Brook Lopez’ injury was revealed after I wrote this and could make number two below the more likely outcome.*

No team has more at stake this year. It really is all or nothing for the Nets. Think about the two possible outcomes for them.

1. They acquire Dwight Howard. Then they would be heading to Brooklyn with two stars, an intriguing Russian billionaire owner, a mega star minority owner and a team capable of competing for years to come. They would actually matter and a fun rivalry would develop with the Knicks for the first time in New York basketball history.

2. They don’t acquire Dwight Howard. They continue to stink. They lose Deron Williams and move to Brooklyn with nothing. They remain irrelevant.

–Speaking of intra-city rivalries…how about the Clippers and Lakers seeming like legit competitors for the first time ever? The Lakers still have Kobe Bryant, Pau Gasol and Andrew Bynum making them ever dangerous. But Kobe is older (and hurt) and the team overall is slow. Plus, Josh McRoberts is their fourth best player. Meanwhile, the Clips now feature Chris Paul lobs to Blake Griffin, otherwise known as basketball pornography. Toss in the soap opera that was David Stern determining CP3’s trade destination and you have compelling theater. Jack Nicholson should just stay in his seat at all times.

–Then there’s that team in Miami. Will their chemistry continue to grow with experience or will they ultimately prove that simply assembling talent doesn’t guarantee results, even if you have the two best players in the world on the same team? (Or does it just prove that three great players need more than complete bums for a supporting cast?)

I’ll bet on them. And yes, I’ll still bet on LeBron James (even in the Finals). Give me Heat over Thunder in June.

I could care less about my record last week. I was up six points in fantasy going into the Sunday night game with DeMarco Murray going up against Victor Cruz. Murray’s ankle injury cost me my season. Thanks a lot DeMarco. Also, I wish you a speedy recovery and great success in the future, I don’t hold grudges (7-9 last week; 103-96-7 on the season)…

Falcons (-11 1/2) over Jaguars: I picked this. Trust me.

Bucs (+7) over Cowboys: Dallas hasn’t been impressive in weeks.

Redskins (+6 1/2) over Giants: Washington is actually playing well. G-Men by a field goal.

Eagles (-3) over Jets: With absolutely zero confidence. Jets offense shouldn’t be able to keep up with Philly but their physicality should be way too much for the Iggles to handle. I’ll just ride Philadelphia until they are mathematically eliminated.

Packers (-13 1/2) over Chiefs: Um, Kansas City was not impressive last week.

Saints (-6 1/2) over Vikings: New Orleans is better than Minnesota.

Seahawks (+3 1/2) over Bears: Seattle is better as currently constituted.

Dolphins (- 1 1/2) over Bills: The wheels have fallen off Buffalo’s wagon.

Texans (-6 1/2) over Panthers: That defense has been ballin’.

Titans (-6 1/2) over Colts: Indy hasn’t balled all year.

Bengals (-6 1/2) over Rams: One team is playing for its playoff life, the other sucks.

Raiders (+1) over Lions: At home.

Patriots (-6 1/2) over Broncos: Denver’s D and toughness on offense should actually make this close but I’m taking Belichick and Brady over the force of Tebow.

Cardinals (-7) over Browns: Arizona is kind of ok.

Chargers (+2 1/2) over Ravens: Say what you want about Norv Turner, he seems to have magical coaching powers in December.

49ers (-2 1/2) over Steelers: I’ll take that San Fran defense in their own building.

I’m still too consumed by all the NBA stuff to properly formulate thoughts on NFL picks. Chris Paul’s tweet said it all…in one word…WoW. Say what you want about David Stern, he’s not boring.

Here are the picks, devoid of any explanation whatsoever (9-7 last week; 96-87-7 on the season)…

Steelers (-14) over Browns (I lost this one)

Panthers (+3) over Falcons

Bengals (-3) over Texans

Ravens (-16.5) over Colts

Chiefs (+11) over Jets

Vikings (+10) over Lions

Patriots (-8.5) over Redskins

Titans (+4) over Saints

Eagles (+3) over Dolphins

Jaguars (+2) over Bucs

Broncos (-3.5) over Bears

49ers (-4) over Cardinals

Chargers (-7) over Bills

Raiders (+11.5) over Packers

Giants (+3.5) over Cowboys

Seahawks (-7.5) over Rams

*Update: The NBA killed the CP3 deal. Vince McMahon would be proud of them for this soap opera. Most of what I wrote below is no longer valid (it wasn’t any good anyway) as Chris Paul is the only player still in a lockout.*

The lockout is over and it’s like it never happened. There were so many gigantic moves in the NBA today that I can’t even process them yet.

Leave it to the Lakers to acquire a superstar that Kobe Bryant won’t even have to pass the ball to. Did they just form the best backcourt in history teaming him up with Chris Paul? Will trading away all their size but Andrew Bynum leave them with a huge weakness? Could they possibly still get Dwight Howard?

How about the Knicks who lost out on CP3? Tyson Chandler was exactly what they needed in the middle, defense and rebounding. But will they have to put a help wanted sign outside the Garden in order to fill their glaring hole at point guard?

Plus, the Heat signed a solid role player in Shane Battier and are giving Eddy Curry a shot. It’s too much. I don’t know what to make of it all. Ahhhhhhhh!!!!

So Marvel announced an X-Men versus Avengers crossover set for the spring of 2012. This is an awesome idea (the Mayan calendar better not mess it up). It’s also an excuse for me to ponder which super team will win this epic showdown…

Of course any discussion pitting Xavier’s School for Gifted Youngsters against Earth’s Mightiest Heroes is going to be largely dependent on rosters. Each team has had a revolving door membership over the years, with power level varying by the various makeups of the squads.

Where this becomes extremely relevant is in the case of wild cards like Magneto and the Hulk. The Hulk was a founding member of the Avengers but his mercurial nature has kept him from being a mainstay. Meanwhile, Magneto is the X-Men’s greatest villain but has also been a member on a number of occasions (as I believe is the case currently). With the Hulk being the strongest one there is and Magneto the master of magnetism, each is a one-man wrecking crew and could swing the battle greatly to one side or the other.

Now going with the consistent rosters, I think each team has one distinct advantage. For the X-Men, that is the realm of mental powers. Professor X’s telepathic abilities are unmatched and Jean Grey (if she’s alive for this one) and White Queen are no slouches in that department. For the Avengers, it is overall power. There’s no muscle on the mutant team that can stack up to Thor, Iron Man and the aforementioned Hulk.

There are a couple aspects of this showdown that should be considered dead even going in. One of these is in-battle leadership. Captain America’s reputation speaks for itself, while Cyclops is almost his equal in that regard and has much more potent powers. Another draw would be in the intelligence/technology realm where Tony Stark and the Beast would have a heck of a battle of wits.

Some other factors would be at play as well. No one on either side can match Wolverine’s ruthlessness and the fact that he is nearly impossible to keep down for good. The X-Men could add another unaccounted for gem with Storm’s ability to manipulate the elements. However, the Scarlet Witch nearly eliminated mutants in one fell swoop, so that’s a major trump card for the Avengers.

There are certainly many variables at play here, none bigger than roster composition. In the end, though I’m team X-Men at heart, the Avengers possess too much raw power not to assemble a victory.

Chris Paul wants to be a Knick. At least according to I’ve everything I’ve seen, read and common sense. And if that’s what he truly wants, he can make it happen. I’m here to make the case that it should happen before the start of the season.

Look, the Knicks don’t have much to offer New Orleans. Pretending they can put together an even deal is laughable. New York shouldn’t pretend otherwise. However, they do have one thing they can offer the Hornets; the chance to be terrible. Right now. Not in a year. Not later in the season. Immediately. From the opening tip.

Now you might ask, why would the Hornets want to be terrible? Because being terrible is preferable to being mediocre. The worst thing an NBA team can be is mediocre. No chance at a championship, no chance at high draft picks. Other teams with more valuable trade pieces than the Knicks are offering the Hornets the chance to be just that.

Think about some of the possibilities. There’s no way the Hornets will get a player in return that can replace a true superstar, in my opinion the best point guard in the league. They can only hope not to be embarrassed by what they get in return. Take the rumored Rajon Rondo deal. Rondo is an excellent player but his talents have been maximized playing alongside three future Hall of Famers. Put him on New Orleans and you have a really good player with a bunch of average ones, equalling…you guessed it, mediocre. Or how about the other rumored suitor, the Clippers? They could offer a package built around say Eric Gordon, a very good young player. He and some filler might make N.O. slightly above awful. Not exactly a recipe for success. (Remember, any draft picks they’d get from these teams would wind up being late, especially after those teams added CP3.)

By trading Chris Paul to the Knicks, the Hornets give him exactly what he wants without getting much in return. Doesn’t exactly seem fair. But they can’t get a fair deal. Their course of action should be to rebuild and the best way to rebuild is to bottom out and get a bunch of ping pong balls in the next draft (one that happens to be deep because kids stayed in school to avoid the lockout).

Drafting a stud is the only way they can approximate CP3 and they’d only have to suffer one year to do so. Then, their fans would have something to look forward to watching develop, with the draft pick, a couple of young complementary pieces acquired in the deal and a roster devoid of bad contracts (which the Knicks would take on).

By making this trade, by swallowing pride and agreeing to be terrible right away, their front office would have a shot at a do-over, a chance to succeed where they failed with Paul.