As a thought experiment having no actual meaning, except for being the kind of thing that makes sports fun, my friend challenged me recently to name the top ten basketball players I'd choose to start a franchise with, keeping age in mind. My list, with comments is as follows.

1. Lebron James

Can there be any debate? The King is just 24 and yet will almost definitely be named MVP and led the Cavaliers to the #1 seed in the east and a sweep in the first round of the playoffs. He is a scoring machine, and he does everything, from scoring almost 30 points a game, to averaging over seven rebounds and assists each a game. Simply put, he's the best there is, and I don't think there's all that much debate about that.

2. Dwight Howard

The Magic center who led his team to significantly overplay its talent in the regular season is just 23, and still developing. Size is something that can't be improved upon, and Howard is a true center in a league where there don't seem to be too many of them anymore. Howard won his first defensive player of the year award this past season, and led the league in rebounds and blocks. Hard to top starting your team with that kind of defense and rebounding in the middle.

3. Chris Paul

We follow with the NBA's best point guard, Paul, who led the league in his share of marquee categories as well, assists and steals, while leading the Hornets to a disappointing seventh in the west, which wasn't really his fault. He checks in at just 23 as well (though 24 in a week to be fair) and would be ideally suited to lead your new team. I think these three would more or less universally be the top three (or am I wrong) with the combination of age, skill, and position that the others, although great, don't have.

4. Kevin Durant

Unlike most of the other players, he hasn't won at all yet. But he's all of 20 and has already shown the crazy kind of talent that dominated college basketball and is already making the Blazers regret selecting Greg Oden with their #1 pick. In his second year he improved his field goal and three point shooting percentages dramatically along with his rebounding numbers and increased his point per game average to over 25. It's not his fault his team is awful.

5. Dwyane Wade

Wade led the NBA in scoring this year while leading the Heat back to the playoffs (albeit in a first round loss to the Hawks) with over 30 a game while dishing 7 and a half assists per game as well. Wade is the second best player from the great draft of 2003 and would be even higher on this list (as if 5 isn't high enough) if he didn't have a little bit of injury history and wasn't 27 (makes it sound like it's old - it's not, but it's not 20, either).

6. Brandon Roy

No superstar is quite as under the radar as Roy. (well, not under the radar so much as a player, but as being a superstar). Just watching the end of the Rockets-Blazers series, Ron Artest claimed Roy was the hardest player he had ever guarded, and that he was the only player to put up 40 points on him (not sure I want to go through the work to check that out, so let's take Artest on his very reliable word). Whether that's true or not, the fact is that Roy, the best pick of the the not so great 2006 draft (Patrick O'Bryant at 9? Oof - though Rondo at 21 was a steal) emerged in his third year as the best player on a rapidly improving young Blazers team, and increased his field goal percentage at points per game at a ripe young age of 24.

7. Kobe Bryant

The senior member of this list, there's really not much that need be said - he's probably the most famous person in the NBA right now (well, him or James anyway, but James has yet to be embroiled in a rape scandal), and not without reason - he's the premier scorer in the NBA as well as a lockdown defender, and his points per game have only gone down as his team as improved around him (the acquisition of a second all star in Pau Gasol and the emergence of Andrew Bynum). Basically, he's this low just because he's 31, though he still has years left of the same thing in him.

8. Yao Ming

Ming often suffers from Carlos Beltran syndrome (maybe I'll write a full article about this - but really Joe Posnanski created it here), kind of the focus on what Ming doesn't do instead of what he does - be the second best center in the NBA today (he's not Howard), score 20 points a game with a very high field goal percentage and rebound 10, while being a defensive presence. Sure, he has injury problems, and yes, people will always wonder what more he can do, but he's done a pretty good job anchoring the Rockets, and maybe this, their first first round victory since 1996-97 will show he's the heart of the team, and not McGrady (though I don't think some of the detraction on McGrady is unfair, but that's something else entirely). He's not extremely young at 28 but he's not old either.

9. Derrick Rose

The youngest player on this list at 19, he is also understandably the least polished, and this pick relies more than any of the others on upside, but what he's shown so far has been impressive enough. He is the rookie of the year by a good deal and he has shown in the first round playoff series why - making brilliant plays on both ends of the floor, none perhaps more so than a block of Rajan Rondo in the final minutes of Game 6 against the Celitics which the Bulls won to advance to a game 7. Expect to see his numbers increasing in the next couple of years, and there's no reason why he can't be up top in the CP3 class of point guards in the NBA.

10. Tony Parker

Parker, at 26, is both properly rated as among the best in the game, and overlooked sometimes, mostly because he is the only player on this list who has a teamate who is better (well, at least was - Parker will ascend past an aging Duncan if he hasn't yet, but Duncan is an inner-circle Hall of Famer), while he does have the spotlight on him as a member of the Spurs, who have been so successful in recent years. In fact, because of that success, it almost seems as if he's older - he's been playing since he was 19, and has been on the three championship teams. Parker is one of the best shooting guards in the NBA, scoring 22 a game while shooting over 50% and it will be him on which the future of the Spurs rests.


Honorable Mentions Include:

Deron Williams - just shy, still a very promising and talented young point guard, with a little less talent than the guys on the list

Dirk Nowitzki - he really is a great player, he's just too old to justify putting here (I still think the Mavs should have won that NBA Finals)

Joe Johnson - he has blossomed into a star and the Hawks are good again after so many bad years

Carmelo Anthony - couldn't justify him in the top 10, but he's still a fine and young player and an excellent scorer


Note: Unfortunately, at this point in time I am loathe to admit I don't understand advanced basketball statistics nearly as well as I do with baseball statistics. I am attempting to rectify this problem as soon as possible. If anyone has advice, or I make any glaring errors, I would enjoy being informed.

The Matchstick Men situation

Warning: DO NOT READ IF FOR SOME REASON YOU HAVE NOT SEEN MATCHSTICK MEN YET AND ARE CERTAIN YOU WILL SEE IT AND DON'T WANT THE END RUINED

Okay, we can proceed.

Basically, Matchstick Men is about neurotic con man Nicolas Cage, and the first three quarters at least of the movie are about him dealing with his neuroses, and working with his partner Sam Rockwell and his daughter Alison Lohman to complete a giant scam. Oh, but wait - you get to the end and things aren't as they seem at all - in fact it's Nicolas Cage being conned by Sam Rockwell and the person who he thought was his daughter but is not after all - she was just brought in as part of the con. Of course, they're not the only ones in on the con - who Cage thinks is his psychiatrist Bruce Altman and who he thinks is their intended target underrated character actor Bruce McGil.

Basically, the upshot of this is that an insane exact number of things had to go right for their incredibly elaborate con of Nicholas Cage to work, rendering the entire movie implausible, and not just regular implausible, like any con movie would be, but even con movie implausible. If just one thing went wrong - if Nicolas Cage made just one slight move that they hadn't predicted exactly, the entire con would go up in smoke, but of course, that's not what happens.

There are other examples of the Matchstick Men situation at work - one notable one is The Game - in which another underrated character actor James Rebhorn using tests of Michael Douglas's psyche to explain away how they knew exactly how he would respond to every course of action. (By the way - giving someone a gift of a Game that ends up in making you want to kill yourself - that's a terrible fucking present. I hope my brothers read this.)

DO NOT READ FURTHER IF YOU ARE NOT UP TO DATE ON 24 AND ARE PLANNING ON WATCHING

Anyway, so this otherwise mostly forgettable film represents a paradigm that is being played out again in 24 this season - as it seems Tony is evil again - it presents us with a scenario in which one thousand separate little things would have had to gone right to put him in the situation he is in. It's 24 so continuity isn't paramount, and not the main reason to watch the show but still, I'll have to try not to think about it, as it just makes my head hurt.

AL Central

Now, a couple weeks into the season, but same difference.

I have no idea who's going to win this, and honestly, neither does anyone else. I, like probably, more than half of people, have the Indians, but that's not based so much on confidence in them as much as the glaring deficiencies of the other four teams.

I have no idea what to expect from the Indians starters - I think Cliff Lee will remain solid, though not approach last year, which of course, is not saying much. I am relatively doubtful of Fausto Carmona getting back to his 2007 form, though I honestly have not a clue what to expect from him at all - what I will predict I suppose is something between last year's disaster and 2007, but slightly on the worse side. And that's the certainty in the rotation. Left are Scott Lewis, Carl Pavano, and Anthony Reyes. Ouch, this pick does not sound so good. On the positive side, the lineup has some potential. Grady Sizemore is one of the best players in the entire American League, possesses, power, speed, patience at the plate, and plays an excellent defensive center field. If Travis Hafner and Victor Martinez produce at all, it will be improvements from last year, even if not up to their 2007 numbers. Jhonny Peralta, while far from a star, is one of the better offensive shortstops in the American League, and Mark DeRosa is a decent pick up for the team, though it seems as if he should be playing 2nd, Asdrubal Cabrera shortstop and Peralta third.

That said, you can only imagine the quality of the other teams in the division.

The White Sox are a year older for their aging bats - Paul Konerko, Jim Thome, Jermaine Dye and AJ Pierzinski. Carlos Quentin should hit well, but maybe not as well as last year. They have absolutely no viable option in center field (anybody missing Nick Swisher?) and their second base options are limited as well. From their pitching, it seems unlikely they will get repeat seasons from John Danks and Gavin Floyd, , though Denks is far more likely to continue than Floyd, and they lose Javier Vazquez.

The Twins can't hit. They have one of the best players in the majors Joe Mauer, though he's now injured, and an above average first baseman in Justin Morneau, and beside that they're absolutely brutal. Denard Span might have the potential, but aside from that they're lucky to have average hitters at their positons - Nick Punto at short is particularly wasteful. Their pitching staff features Twin specialties of young-guys-who-don't-throw-that-fast-but-don't-walk-a-lot-of-people-and-greatly-rely-on-the-team's-defense, like Nick Blackburn and Scott Baker, so I have a hard time believing the ceiling is all that high for this team - but they do have depth among these types of pitchers, so it shouldn't be that low either, which probably puts them , in this division at a just over .500 record.

The Tigers have tried everything they could to replicate their 2006 success - this time going away from on offensive approach by placing two putrid hitters but sparkling defenders on the left side with Adam Everett and shortstop and Brandon Inge at third base. The remaining guys can still hit okay - Miguel Cabrera is one of the best in the league, Placido Polanco is an above-average 2nd baseball, Curtis Granderson improved his walk rate significantly last year, and Magglio Ordonez, while never replicating that magic 2007 season can still hit. What it comes down to them is the pitching, and their utter lack of it. Crucial to the Tigers chances are Justin Verlander coming at least close to his 2007 form, which I think there remains a good chance of, but there is every likelihood Armando Galarraga will regress, though he hasn't yet in this early season. If they can get decent performances from stud prospect Rick Porcello and one-was-stud-prospect Edwin Jackson, and their bullpen to keep it together, they can compete in this division.

Ah, the Royals, their record has slowly improved for a couple years now, and unlike in the past, they have some nice parts - though for some reason general manager Dayton Moore insists on taking one step back for every two steps forward. Gil Meche turned out to be an utter steal - and Moore deserves credit for that, but Jose Guillen was an equally obvious bomb. Locking up ace Zach Greinke was an excellent move, but signing Kyle Farnsworth and Willie Bloomquist were mind-boggling. Even more remarkable is that at this point in the season, Farnsworth with 3 losses, has more than the rest of the team combined (2), and this is with one of the premier closers in the game in Joakim Soria sitting on the bench crying out to get 4 or 5 outs at the end of games. These Royals are better than they used to be but I don't see them crossing the .500 barrier just yet - their bottom of the rotation is too sickeningly awful - Sidney Ponson and Horacio Ramirez, and they don't get enough offense to make up for it. Oh, and once and maybe again potential star 3B Alex Gordon is out for half a season. If I was a Royals fan I would just be happy I don't have to see Tony Pena at the plate.

For some reason, Pat Rapp came up in my dream last night...I have absolutely no idea why

Okay, so the Wang Chung song Dance Hall Days has come up twice in recent pop culture, probably the most clustered Dance Hall Days revival since the 1980s - appearing (can I song appear? is appearing by definition visual? probably, but I'm going to try it out here and see how it sounds) both in the movie Adventureland, which takes place in the '80s, and in the MLB2K9 commercial in which Tim Lincecum telsl his computer-generated doppleganger that "we don't listen to this." (Why Dance Hall Days? Where is he just hearing this on the rad.io? That is seriously unnecessary - I didn't know Dance Hall Days had such a polarizing effect).

Anyway, as a Dance Hall Days afficionado, I wanted to use its brief, um, moment in the sun to pay tribute. It's, by chart placement, Wang Chung's third biggest hit (Everybody Have Fun Tonight and Let Go were top 10s while Dance Hall Days reached 16), but by my subjective judgment the second most well-known song after Everybody Have Fun Tonight, but sounds entirely different. Dance Hall Days sounds far more laid back, less in-your-face, and has kind of lounge sound, in that it would sound appropriate if you (or I were listening to it while just sitting sitting a cocktail).

I had a minor obession with Dance Hall Days while I was in Florence, Itay in the fall of 2004.

I love the staccato way in which certain words in the first two lines of the chorus are pronounced, the so, in, phase, dance, hall, days, and cool, on, and craze, which sounds far more distinctive and memorable than if they had just been song normally.

For some reason, I always through the line “we were cool on craze” was “we were cool on cries.” I really don't have a good reason for this, as it doesn't make a whole lot of sense, and it definitely doesn't rhyme, but I guess I thought there was something cool in the contradiction of being cool and crying, and honestly I'm not sure what being cool on craze means anyway.

The song has the rare ability to build tension without getting faster or louder (except towards the “share in what was true” part, I suppose), building and then reaching a climax during the last two lines of the chorus, “When I, you, and everyone we know/Could believe, do, and share in what was true”, and then deflates all the tension through the couple of seconds sax flourish which comes right after, but before the title line, “Dance Hall Days, love” (Why he insert the “I'm said” before saying it, I'm not sure – it seems like those words are unnecessary). That's about the only sax in the whole song except at the end of the song. I really like the winding out outro featuring the sax at the end of the song as well – I think it really goes with the whole feel of the song, taking it down slowly, brining down the remaining tension to a halt.

If there is any particular meaning to the song, it is beyond me, but the feel is very soothing, and reassuring, and maybe a bit nostalgic, as if these Dance Hall Days, were, a time when you could “take your baby by the heel and do the next thing that you feel.” Somehow, the song meanders a path between being sad and perhaps too nostlagic, but without being particularl happy or triumphant either, which in my mind are the two basic types of songs about memories, and this middle ground works for it.

So, there you go. My ode to Dance Hall Days – underated classic.

I want to break down my AL Central predictions, but first, I wanted to note - Sports Illustrated' web site had a bunch of features about Michael Jordan's attempt at baseball in 1994, and no matter how many times I think about it's still mind-blowing. I can't imagine another athelete doing the same thing before, or since. One at the absolute top of his sports retiring - well, that's been done - Jim Brown did it, Sandy Koufax (though for him it was barely by choice) did it, Barry Sanders more or less did, along with a small number of others I'm sure. But not only retiring, but then unretiring to take on a completely different sport they hadn't played since high school - that's unheard of, almost surreal looking back at it. Imagine Kobe Bryant retiring and deciding he wants to play soccer instead. Tom Glavine, less of a star, but who at least was a huge hockey prospect, retiring after his Cy Young to return to the ice. Tiger Woods retiring from golf and deciding his future is in tennis. And then beyond switching sports, is going from the center of the universe to a podunk town in Alabama (well Birmingham has 200,000 people, but I mean, compared to Chicago) and being completely mediocre at the sport you choose to play.

What makes this story even more amazing is one of the great sports unsubstantiated rumors surrounding it - the idea that this was not a voluntary decision by Michael, but rather was a forced suspecion by NBA commissioner David Stern due to Jordan's gambling problems. Of course this is both probably not true, and if it is it's unlikely we'll know for sure - there's yet to be a smoking gun, but all the pieces are there. Jordan lost lots of money at golf to a lot of shady characters.

There is simply no other example of someone leaving a sport they are on top of for another I can think of in sports - the closest recent example in pop culture which is not really close at all is, say, Joaquin Phoenix leaving acting to attempt a musical career. The only real comparable part though is Joaquin's medicore music career - obviously, while a successful actor, he was not on Michael's level - more like Terrell Brandon retiring to play baseball or something. Alas, all we can do is enjoy the moment, and as a Knicks fan who has always despised Michael Jordan to the core, and taken perverse pleasure at moments that do not deserve it (Jordan's gambling problems, his divorce) where Jordan simply didn't have what it took. Too bad he came right back and won 3 more championships.

Okay, an attempt at justifying my MLB record predictions. We start in the AL. Here goes.

AL East:

Okay, well we know this much - the Yankees, Red Sox, and Rays are the class of the AL East, and very possibly the best three teams in baseball. All three have gotten better over the offseason.

The Yankees, who as we all know, didn't make thep layoffs for the first time since the strike in 1994, took advantage of contracts coming off the books (Giambi, Mussina) and picked up arguably the two best pitchers on the market, CC Sabathia (who was inarguably the best pitcher on the market) and AJ Burnett and the best hitter on the market in Mark Teixeira. That adds up to a hell of a lot of new wins, and their rotation and lineup are extremely strong. The only problems are a lack of a center fielder - Brett Gardner is pretty weak, most likely, but in the middle of the stacked lineup, likely something they can with live, and really, injuries - A-Rod out for a couple of months will hurt, and, while injuries can wreck any team's season, particularly AJ Burnett has been hurt, and some of the Yankees position players are older and have been injured in years past - Johnny Damon, Hideki Matsui and Jorge Posada. Some are worried about bullpen outside of Mariano Rivera, but while it may not be the best in baseball I don't think it will lose them too many games. I would have given them more than 93 wins, except that they play in this beast of a division.

The Red Sox of course I put ahead of them, because I think their core is more solid and they have less potential injury issues (mainly Beckett, though he's been mostly healthy during his time in Boston and JD Drew). They will likely suffer some downward regression from Kevin Youkilis, but Josh Beckett's ERA should be way down, as his peripherals were solid last year, and they have the deepest potential pool for reserve starting pitchers in case of injury. The Red Sox made smart low risk acquisitions of Brad Penny, Rocco Baldelli and John Smoltz. They will need Lester to at least come close to repeating last years performance, as it may be tough for him to top it, and hopefully to get some production out of their shortstop position, be it from Juilo Lugo or Jed Lowrie. That said, I still think they're the strongest team in the AL East, and in the majors.

The Rays have done nothing but improve over last year's team, albeit less dramatically than the Yankees. Pat Burrell was a nice acquisition at DH, and they should be the beneficiaries of a at least nearly full season of David Price, and the realistic potential for an improved season (not that he was bad last year, but with more power) from BJ Upton. I have them on the outside looking in, but it's definitely a crapshoot.

It's hard to think of a way the Blue Jays will not fall back from last year. Sure, they underperformed their Pytagorean record dramatically, but they're losing over 450 innings from their excellent pitching staff with AJ Burnett gone to the Yanks, and Shawn Marcum and Dusty McGowan injured. Their offense should be a little improved with full years from youngsters Adam Lind and Travis Snider, but it's tough to see them contending in this loaded division.

The Orioles actually have hope - which for them is a great thing, but I don't see it translating to wins just yet. They have a great chance at putting together a decent offense - Nick Markakis has become a legitimate star, and Adam Jones could be that as well. Oh, and they have the best offensive prospect in baseball in catcher Matt Weiters, who baseball prospectus is predicting to somehow be one of the best hitters in baseball this year. That said, their pitching is nowhere to be found, and their starting pitching is all extremely questionable outside of Jeremy Guthrie. They have two big pitching prospects waiting in the wings in Chris Tillman and Brian Matusz, but they probably won't have much impact until 2010.

Time to break out the ol' baseball records selections before the season starts:

AL

Boston Red Sox 96-66
New York Yankees 93-69
Tampa Bay Rays 91-71
Toronto Blue Jays 74-88
Baltimore Orioles 70-92

Central:

Cleveland Indians 87-75
Minnesota Twins 83-79
Chicago White Sox 80-82
Detroit Tigers 80-82
Kansas City Royals 75-87

West:

Oakland As 85-77
Anaheim Angels 84-78
Seattle Mariners 73-89
Texas Rangers 75-87

NL

New York Mets 92-70
Philadelphia Phillies – 90-72
Atlanta Braves 87-75
Florida Marins 70-92
Washington Nationls 68-94

Central

Cubs 98-64
Brewers 90-72
Cardinals 83-79
Reds 76-86
Astros 71-91
Pirates 69-93

West

LA Dodgers 88-74
Arizona Diamondbacks 85-77
San Francisco Giants 80-82
Colorado Rockies 74-88
Padres 62-100

Analysis later, but I wanted to put 'em in before the season gets underway. How off will I be?