Last nite instead Of watching the knicks lose I watched them lose 30 yeears ago.

I have been reading Mark Kriegl book "Pistol" based on the life of Pete Marovich.

I went to a book signing a few weeks ago and found it interesting. what was cool was some old writers came up from Clemson to join us. They new pete when he was in Jr. High.

Anyway I got on Amazon.com a video of the famous game where Pete laid down 68 on the knicks. All with no 3 pt line! I recall watching the game as a kid. Pete was amazing, and made it look so easy!

Its sad story about pete as he was so talanted by a manic depressive most of his life.

Knick lineup was:

Clyde
Earl
Tom McMillon
McAdoo
Jim McMillon

Off the bench was Bill Bradley (his last year) Butch Beard, Dean the Dream, Phil Jax and the ever popular Luther "Ticky" Burden! A great fro by the way!

McAdoo in his prime was Camby with a much greater variety of moves. Not much defense, but he could block shots and rebound.

Clyde was soon traded to the Cavs and really was not effective anymore. But he was so smooth!

Pete was 6-5 but dam long legs and arms. Crazy skills.

It was cool to see him perform one more time. Youtube has some nice clips. Was neat to see some vintage Knick video even if they lost. Seeing earl and clyde one more time was a thrill. Even Watching PHil Jax was a trip. Bradley's ass was getting huge by this time!

Knicks had some nice talant but looked out of synch. Kinda like the present day team!

Pete was a dam mess and got a bad deal in the NBA. Bad Combo.




[Edited by - nalod on 03-23-2007 4:40 PM]

You mentioned Phil, off the bench, and it made me think of Lee.

Phil was a better defender, a good passer and a very intelligent player (obviously by his successful after life). He wasn't as athletic as Lee, didn't get nearly as many dunks, put-backs or offensive rebounds, but he was a decent rebounder, a good defender and he had a better J and hook shot.

In short I think the two are probably of similar value and yet Phil was a career bench guy.

This notion that "if lee can develop a jumper he'll be a star" and is someone for us to build around is probably a lofty and unrealistic ambition at best.

Terrific bench guy on a contender? Sure. Starter on a contender? Maybe, if they're already a contender. An integral component to making us a contender? I highly doubt it.

I fully expect someone to bring up their respective PERs and tell me just how much, quicker and better Lee is, but I've seen 'em both and in my estimation Phil's defense, elbows, aggression and persona contributed in ways that stats don't measure- so the two are probably of roughly comparable impacts.

What do you think, Nalod?

Lee will be a more complete player than Jackson was, although Phil's game was affected by his spinal fusion surgery.