Re: Are Stars Necessary?

[Dan Forant <dforant1@nycap.rr.com>]

The Knicks certainly are not better without Ewing. In fact their
struggling. I can't see how the Celts could miss at least the 8th playoff
spot. It would be a disaster in my belief knowing what we know about the
Eastern Conference now. 

At 08:13 AM 12/8/99 -0600, you wrote:
>Looks like the Detroit Lions are better after Barry Sanders left.  The
>Philadelphia Seventy-Sixers have performed better since Alan Iverson
>went down.  The Knicks are doing better, I think, with Ewing on the
>bench.  But, notice the careful wording.  Are these teams actually
>better without these stars?  Against the top competition, for the long
>haul, in the playoffs--are they really better?
>
>I don't know.  I hold on to my belief that we need Antoine because if
>he performs within the team concept he can do so many good things. 
>Without him we may produce better team play, have fewer turnovers,
>fewer technical fouls, etc.  But will we have someone to provide his
>various plusses in the crunch?
>
>So, I'm for him staying.  If he can't step up to the level of
>consistent production, I suspect something will be done.  
>
>Gene  (not confident about tonight)
>
>By the way, if we stopped playing altogether we might make the
>playoffs.  Notice how we move up in the standings when we're idle?
>
>