The summer of Free Agency.

That's what 2010 has been branded as by several people who cover and love the NBA.

For 2-3 years, teams throughout the league have shed money and taken on expiring contracts with the hopes of, this summer, landing LeBron James, or Dwayne Wade, or Chris Bosh, or Amar'e Stoudemire or some other top-flight free agent.

The players listed above, and the likes of Joe Johnson, Carlos Boozer and David Lee will all be looking to sign maximum contracts in the coming weeks, which would guarantee them about $16.5 million/season - for a maximum of six seasons - beginning with the 2010-11 campaign. If any of the players decides to sign with their current team, they stand to make about $30 million more than they would if they opt to sign with another team, according to the "Larry Bird exception" area of the league's collective bargaining agreement, which gives a monetary advantage to a player's current team.

For the same amount of time that teams in the NBA have said, "screw winning, we're gonna suck for two years and hope we can get LeBron," it's been reported and speculated that a number of those players are planning on joining forces when free agency officially begins Thursday. Players can sign their new deals July 8.

If this happens, and, say, James, Bosh and Johnson end up in Chicago together, I truly believe this summer could signal the end of the competitive spirit flowing through the NBA.

Save the friendships for the offseason
When I was younger, I idolized Michael Jordan. His work ethic was second to none. He needed to be on top at all times; and he enjoyed beating the other players who were considered the best. Back in the 80s and early 90s, it was known that some players were friends (Jordan and Charles Barkley, Jordan and Patrick Ewing, etc.), but they wanted to embarrass their friends when the ball went up in the air. They hated each other on the court and were close off it. They could separate the two and it seems like guys today can't do that.

Is that trait lost in today's player, save for, maybe Kobe Bryant and Kevin Durant? I realize Kobe campaigned for "better" teammates for some time from 2005 until Pau Gasol was gift-wrapped for the Lakers in February 2008, but he never openly lobbied for Lakers' owner Jerry Buss to sign an in-his-prime Kevin Garnett or Allen Iverson.

When Garnett, Ray Allen and Paul Pierce decided to join forces in Boston in 2007, that was understandable. Each of them, for years, attempted to carry teams and franchises to titles and failed. All three of them were at least 10 years deep in the league, too; so, to them, it made sense to team up for one last title run, which they completed. Gasol is a good player, which Bryant needed in L.A. But he's isn't James or Bosh. Gasol can be dominant at times, but, it's been proven (his teams in Memphis were 0-12 in three playoff appearances) that he's much more of a complimentary player than a "star."

Who wants to be a leader?
But James, Wade, Bosh and the other free agents are all in the prime of their careers. If all of the talked-about supergroups are formed, are all of these world-class athletes, who are supposed to be as competitive as two girls going after the same guy, essentially admitting they can't lead a team to a championship? These (possible) moves make it look like each of these super-talented athletes are giving up on being leaders of their own teams and looking for the easiest road to a title.

A team that features Wade, Bosh and Johnson would be primed to make a run at the 1995-96 Chicago Bulls record 72 wins. But it wouldn't have the same feeling as that stretch did.

What made the 72-10 season so special to me was every time I checked a box score and saw names like Kerr, Kukoc, Wennington, Longley, or Harper - role players stepping up and making plays. Say Wade, James and Bosh do all come together and go on a run like that, how much fun is that going to be for fans outside of the city they play in? What person wouldn't look at that group and say, "You're supposed to win all your games! You have three of the best 10 players in the league on your team!"

Sure, the Bulls had two of the best 30 players of all time and the finest defensive player (Dennis Rodman) of my generation, but the rest of that roster was made up of journeymen and castoffs. When you see something like that 1995-96 season come together, to me, it means more than if the whole thing is manufactured. And that's what a run next season by 2-3 of these free agents, put together, would be.

No room for two Type-As in one locker room
It would be different if it were players who complimented one another joining up. But what makes Wade and James - two guys who absolutely need to have the ball in their hands to make things happen - believe they can play together for 100-plus games a season for the next six years without some Alpha Dog issues surfacing?

That all-star roster worked in the 2008 Olympics because there were no endorsements involved, no statistical incentives to shoot for. But in the NBA, you can't have a team set up like that because of egos, money, etc. But, if that somehow did happen, Wade would be the alpha dog of the squad, in my opinion, and I don't think Jame's ego could take that. Wade's the one who led a team to a title. James hasn't done that. And LeBron has always said one of his main goals is to be considered the best player of all time. How's the supposed to happen if he ends up playing most of his prime with Wade?

Hopefully, competitive juices begin to flow again and rosters next season don't look like video games when the "salary cap" function is disabled.

For players who will be selected in tonight's NBA Draft, it's almost like a graduation.

The athletes are ending one act in their lives (college) and embarking on another (the NBA).

Prior to most graduation's there's usually a list, compiled by classmates, of who they think is most likely to do what.

You could also do that with tonight's draft picks.

2010 NBA Rookie Most Likely To...

Win Rookie of the Year: John Wall
Win an MVP Award: Evan Turner
Lead a team to a title: Turner
Make the Hall of Fame: Turner
Become a coach: Greivis Vasquez
Contribute right away: Ekpe Udoh
Be unfairly compared to an all-time great: Gordon Hayward
Be out of the league in three years: Cole Aldrich
Have an ESPN "40 for 40" focus on him: Wall/DeMarcus Cousins
Beat up a teammate/coach: Cousins/Jordan Crawford
Become a major player on "Basketball Wives": Wesley Johnson
Take a Dave Chappelle-esque trip to Africa: Cousins
Eat his way out of the league: Cousins

Last night's game seven between the Lakers and Celtics is quite possibly the ugliest thing of beauty I've ever seen.

Statistically, that was L.A.'s worst game in two years, as it won, 83-79, despite shooting 32.5 percent from the floor.

Surprisingly, the one Laker who played well is the one who should be on a steady supply of meds: Ron Artest, who chipped in with 20 points, 5 rebounds and 5 steals, along with several great quotes after the game.

The win leaves the Lakers just one title behind Boston, 17-16, for most in league history.

The game has also left a lot of questions to be answered.

Which is the greatest franchise in NBA history?
Although the Lakers trail the Celtics in number of titles, a strong case can be made that L.A. is home to the best franchise in the history of the league.

The Lakers have appeared in the Finals 31 times to Boston's 21. While Boston has a far superior record in those Finals series - 17-4 vs. 16-15 for the Lakers, Los Angeles has been more of a consistent winner. Eleven of the Celtics 17 titles came before 1970, while the Lakers have won titles in 5 different decades and dominated three of those - the 1950s, 80s and 2000s.

Boston also endured a 22-year title drought from 1986 to 2008. Los Angeles' worst stretch lasted 17 years from 1955-72. The Celtics made the final round once during that dry spell (1987), while the Lakers appeared in eight championship series during theirs (1959, 62, 63, 65, 66, 68-70).

L.A. has also missed the postseason just five times in 62 seasons, while Boston has failed to make the playoffs 16 times in 64 seasons. The Lakers also have the most wins in league history (2,970) and the highest winning percentage (.617).

Is Phil Jackson the greatest coach of all time?
Here's Phil's resume: 11 titles (more than any other coach); a .700 win percentage in the regular season and the playoffs; thirteen Finals appearance in 19 years as a head coach.

Compare that with legendary UCLA coach John Wooden, who didn't win his first title until his 16th season in Westwood; or revered Celtics coach Red Auerbach, who didn't hoist his first trophy until his seventh season in Boston. Scotty Bowman, of NHL coaching fame and nine Stanley Cup titles, lost in the championship round three times before winning his first title. Jackson has only lost twice in 13 appearances in the NBA Finals.

Even greater than that has been Jackson's ability to manage egos. His two greatest players, Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant, are two of the most egomaniacal, bull-headed people on the planet. At points in both of their careers, Jordan and Bryant were known as players who only cared about themselves, yet Jackson has been able to get them to focus on the greater goal (most of the time), allowing the two to reach great heights. He's also been able to corral two of the stranger people in the history of sports: Dennis Rodman and Ron Artest, who passed Rodman on the "crazy-o-meter" last night.

Is Pau Gasol destined for the Hall of Fame?
Prior to joining the Lakers in February 2008, Gasol led the Memphis Grizzlies to the playoffs three straight seasons in the middle part of the decade. That should be enough to answer that question right there.

Since joining L.A., Gasol has been the second best player on two title teams, adding toughness and grit to his game in the process. Gasol has made two all-NBA third teams the last two seasons, averaging about 18 points, 10 board and 1.5 blocks in 2008-09 and 2009-10. His career averages of 18 and 9 are better than Hall of Famers Kevin McHale and Dave DeBusschere. He's tied with DeBusschere in the championship department and one behind McHale.

His offensive skillset, coupled with his awesome passing ability and that newfound grit make Gasol the best big man in the league today; and, unless Dwight Howard starts watching old VHS tapes of David Robinson, Gasol will keep that title for the foreseeable future.

What happens to the Celtics now?
Three of Boston's top four players (Ray Allen, Kevin Garnett and Paul Pierce) have a combined 40 years of playing experience. The team's best post defender (Rasheed Wallace, who has 15 years in the league under his belt) may retire. Allen and Pierce are free agents this summer. Kendrick Perkins, the Celtic's starting center, tore two ligaments in his right knee early in game 6 of the Finals. And head coach Doc Rivers may not return to the sidelines next season.

Boston brass has a lot of decisions to make this offseason. The team has - if Pierce decides to exercise his more than $21.5 million player option - more than $63 million tied into six players. The Celtics could use the mid-level exception, slated to be around $6 million for 2010-11, to sign a player, but it looks like Boston's roster will look the same as it did last night. Pierce will be a priority, as could Allen, but Allen would likely be offered a deal of no more than two years and $10-$12 million.

Rivers is the wild card here. He has said he'd like to spend more time with his family and be able to watch his sons, Austin and Jeremiah, play college basketball. Rivers, however, has one year and $5.5 million left on his contract. If the team believes it can make another deep playoff run, why wouldn't he come back? But some things are more important than money.

Where does Kobe Bryant rank among the all-time greats
Baseball measures it's greats by stats. Football determines legends by Super Bowl titles. Basketball seems to be the only one of the major American sports that takes both of those things into consideration when choosing who belongs among the best ever.

Despite Kobe Bryant's horrid shooting performance in Game 7, Bryant belongs in the discussion of greatest players of all time. It'll be tough for him to crack the top spot - Michael Jordan's butt is super glued to that seat - but Bryant can make a case for the top 5.

He has as many titles (5) as Magic Johnson, who I rank at No. 2. He has more titles than Larry Bird (3), Wilt Chamberlain (2) and Tim Duncan (4), who I had at Nos. 4, 6, and 7, respectively, prior to the start of the Finals. The win brought Bryant's record in the Finals to 5-2, while Magic finished 5-4 and Bird went 3-2. His offensive numbers are better than Magic's, Duncan's and Bill Russell's (No. 3 on my list).

Bryant's 12 all-NBA selections (8 first-team honors) trail only Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (6th on my list), who was tabbed 15 times; Karl Malone and Shaquille O'Neal (14 selections) and Tim Duncan (13). And, defensively, he's light years ahead of Magic and Bird, reflected by his 10 all-defensive team selections.

Yes, I know he took Game seven against Phoenix off in the first round of the 2006 Finals. But people act like he's the first star to do something of the sort. Chamberlain asked out of Game 7 of the 1969 Finals, with 5 minutes left, because of an injury. You can bet that, so close to the ultimate goal, Bryant would play on one leg.

Many people (still) contend Bryant ran Shaq out of L.A. in 2004. Kobe doesn't sign any checks or make any personnel decisions. And I think it's safe to say the team's decision to stick with Bryant has paid off.

While Bryant at times frustrated Jackson to no end, he's no coach killer. It's been said that Magic Johnson wanted his first pro coach, Paul Westhead fired. It's also been speculated that Johnson wanted out of L.A. at some point in the first five years of his career. It's been said that Jordan played a key role in getting Doug Collins ousted after the 1989 season.

Several people have said "Kobe never won a thing without Shaq." Well, Abdul-Jabbar never won without Magic or Oscar Robertson. Jordan never won without Pippen. Bird never won without McHale and Robert Parish. It's a proven fact you need more than one top-flight player to win a title, so this is a moot point.

When you put personal feelings aside - and I know that's hard for people to do with Kobe - you realize just how great he is. His work ethic is only second to Jordan's. He's added new moves to his arsenal nearly every season he's been in the league. Last summer, he worked out with Hakeem Olajuwon (No. 13 on my list of all-time greats) to improve his post game. Doesn't that sound like something Dwight Howard or LeBron James should do?

Former Blazer and Celtics great Bill Walton in a book I finished reading a few months ago made a great point about Bryant. He said that while Kobe may not win the way people want him to, he still wins. Winning is the most important thing to Bryant, Walton added, so why does it matter how he wins as long as he gets it done?

So how would I rank the 10 best players of all time, one day after one of them eclipsed another career milestone?

1. Michael Jordan
2. Magic Johnson
3. Bill Russell
4. Larry Bird
5. Kobe Bryant
6. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
7. Wilt Chamberlain
8. Tim Duncan
9. Oscar Robertson
10.Jerry West

In the end, Michigan State head basketball coach Tom Izzo opted to stay with the girl who has been so good to him for a number of years, and who he's had more highs than lows with instead of leaving for the new girl with the fake ... you know.

Izzo tonight said he'll be a Spartan for life. And with that, Spartan Nation breathed a big sigh of relief. Myself included.

A number of MSU alums and fans said they wouldn't be mad if Izzo, the winningest coach in the history of the school, did decide to take his coaching acumen to the NBA, but I wouldn't have believed any of them had they told me they wouldn't shed a tear.

But he didn't. Now, instead of putting his future in the hands of some grown men who may or may not take his coaching lessons to heart, Izzo will return to a lockerroom full of kids who know what listening to his lessons can lead to.

But what made Izzo, who has spent nearly enough time in East Lansing that he could earn a pension, decide to stay with the Green & White? Why didn't the fiery coach leave for "greener pastures."

What went through in mind during this process?

Was it the recruiting trips? One of which led him to a player he would name his first son after.

Was it the thought of leaving everything he's built in East Lansing, including the Berkowitz Basketball Complex?

Was it the desire to remain an institution in a city and state vs. becoming just a coach in a league?

Was it knowing that, by staying, he'd continue to help turn boys into men, teaching discipline and teamwork vs. babysitting millionaires who only care about themselves?

Was it the run he made to the Final Four with his team this spring?

Was it all the lessons all the players learned about each other and themselves during that run?

Was it knowing he'd be returning to the majority of the major parts of that team, which will likely be favored to win the 2011 National Championship?

Was it knowing winning that championship, his second, would put Izzo in select company?

Was it knowing he can get titles 3, 4, and 5 in short order?

Was it realizing college coaches are loved and remembered for ages and many things beyond winning, while pro coaches are known just for winning?

I'm sure all those things and then some went into Izzo's thought process. Whatever it was, he made the right decision.

Yesterday I wrote that I would totally understand if Michigan State basketball coach Tom Izzo left his job in East Lansing to coach the Cleveland Cavaliers. With news coming out that Izzo is in Cleveland meeting with Cavs officials, it's looking more like Izzo is going to take his shot at coaching in the NBA.

I wouldn't be happy with it, but I'd understand. With the job he's done at MSU, turning it into a consistent winner and a nationally-recognized program, Izzo has earned the right to chase him dream.

But the cons may outweigh the pros. The biggest con may be the success rate of coaches who left winning college programs for NBA jobs.

Larry Brown, who has coached nearly every team in both the NCAA and NBA, is the only coach in history to win a title in both the NCAA (with Kansas in 1988) and the NBA (Detroit, 2004).

For every Larry Brown, there's 10 Tim Floyds. Izzo, who I believe to be the best coach in college basketball, has a chance to succeed like anyone else would. But the college and pro games are too different - which is a key reason in why great college coaches seemingly never live out their NBA contracts.

In college, your Xs and Os are vital to team success. The NBA in recent years has turned into an isolation league - pound the ball into the court for the first 17 seconds of the shot clock, then give it to your best player and hope he makes something happen.

In college, you can get away with screaming and yelling at 18-22-year-old kids. In the NBA, you're dealing with millionaires. Chances are that if a coach takes the Bob Knight approach with a guy like Carmelo Anthony, he'll be cleaning out his office shortly thereafter that encounter.

In college, players actually (for the most part) listen in huddles. In the NBA, players routinely tune out coaches to look at eye candy in the stands.

In college, you can put your players on curfew so they stay out of trouble (even though that may not always work.). In the NBA, you have no say over whether or not your star player is shooting off guns at 3 a.m. on a Thursday in the parking lot of a strip club.

In college, players don't get burnt out on coaches because they know they'll only have to deal with the guy for a maximum of four years. In the NBA, players turn on coaches all the time. The Pistons turned on Larry Brown a season after they won the NBA championship. The New Jersey Nets, one of the worst franchises in the history of the league, a season after it made back-to-back Finals appearances.

I'm sure Izzo will take his time in making this decision. And I'll support him no matter what he decides. But, based on past results, the odds are stacked against him succeeding.

At 55, Izzo may not have too many more chances to make the jump. If he feels like this is the best decision for he and his family, Izzo should make the move to the NBA.

It is better to try and fail than not try at all, after all.

There comes a time in a lot of relationships when one party feels the need to explore other options. This can be for any number of reasons - see what else is out there, see what life is like without the person you're leaving.

Sometimes a couple realizes they can't live without each other. Other instances result in the two going their separate ways.

That line of thinking extends beyond dating. It can also apply to business and employment. And this has to be playing a role in Michigan State basketball coach Tom Izzo's thinking while he is being courted by the Cleveland Cavaliers.

Proven track record
Izzo has been a part of the MSU coaching staff since 1983. He took over head coaching duties from Jud Heathcoate - his mentor and confidante - in 1995. Since taking the reins 15 years ago, Izzo has made a helluva name for himself.

Izzo is currently the longest-tenured coach in the Big Ten. He is the winningest coach in MSU history. In 1998, MSU began a streak of 13 straight NCAA tournament appearances, which is the 5th longest current streak among Division I teams. During that run only Kansas/North Carolina coach Roy Williams has as many NCAA tournament wins as Tom Izzo (35). Izzo also joins Duke coach Mike Krzyzewski and Pittsburgh/UCLA coach Ben Howland as the only three coaches that have made three consecutive Final Fours since the NCAA tournament bracket expanded to 64 teams in 1985.

Izzo has coached his squads to six regular-season Big Ten championships, two Big Ten Tournament titles, six NCAA Final Four appearances, and one NCAA national championship - in 2000. Since he became head coach at MSU, every player he has recruited and who completed their full eligibility has gone to the Final Four. Eighty-two percent of his players who completed their eligibility left MSU with a degree.

No "What Ifs" allowed
It is because of all Izzo has accomplished in his time in my home away from home for five years - East Lansing - that I wouldn't be the least bit upset if he took the Cavs job he has reportedly been offered.

For all he has done for our basketball program, and school, Izzo has built up plenty of goodwill with the MSU fanbase and has earned the right to take a shot at coaching at the highest level in his profession - the NBA.

Sure, the odds of him succeeding are slim to none - if you look at the list of other college coaches who took the NBA plunge (only Larry Brown has won both an NCAA and NBA Title) - but I'd be willing to bet Izzo isn't the type of person who wants to be saying "What If" when he's 80 years old. The reported five-year, $30 million deal Cavs owner and MSU Alum Dan Gilbert has on the table for Izzo can't hurt, either. Neither can the prospect of coaching one of the 10 most talented/psychically imposing players in league history.

Stay on task
At the other end of the spectrum, you have the commitment Izzo has made to not explore any other head coaching opportunities until he leads the Spartans to a third national title, which would be his second as coach.

How much criticism would Izzo get for leaving a team that will likely be ranked No. 1 in every major poll going into the 2010-11 season? That same team, likely to be picked to win the 2011 national title, returns nearly every major cog in a squad that is coming off back-to-back Final Fours, along with what is arguably Izzo's best recruiting class. The Spartans will be a legit 13 deep this upcoming season - and 10 deep in 2011-12. These are all things Izzo knows.

He also knows he has his office in the Berkowitz Complex as long as he wants it. And that the Spartan fanbase will always be in his corner. What he doesn't know, and what is the biggest wildcard in this entire situation, is if Cavs star LeBron James will re-sign with the team this summer. I'm almost positive that's why no one has heard from Izzo regarding Cleveland's attempt to woo him.

Say Izzo agrees to take the job later this month, but James signs elsewhere. Where does that leave him AND the Cavs organization? Izzo would then be saddled with a team full of less-than players, most likely playing in front of crowds no bigger than 7,500 on any given night. Yea, Izzo would have his $30 million, and nothing much else beyond that. But he most likely wouldn't make it to the end of his contract. If James decides Izzo's the man he wants to play for, it's a completely different situation.

So, no, I won't be upset with Izzo if he decides to test the NBA waters. But I do hope he sees what he has at MSU and decides that life is great in East Lansing.

At 31 years old, Los Angeles Lakers guard Kobe Bryant, in 14 seasons, has blossomed into one of the eight best players in the history of the NBA.

His career has been the epitome of "roller coaster ride:" winning the Slam Dunk Contest his rookie season; throwing up airballs in the playoffs against Utah in '98; his relationship with Shaquille O'Neal; winning three titles in a row from 2002-02; facing rape allegations in 2003 and watching his "Q" rating fall faster than Lindsay Lohan's after coach Phil Jackson took a sabbatical and Bryant "ushered" O'Neal out of L.A. supposedly.

But the shine has returned to Bryant's star the last three seasons, as he earned his first regular-season MVP award in 2008. He's also led the Lakers to three straight NBA Finals, something that hasn't been done since Bryant's Lakers accomplished it in 2000-02.

Bryant also won his fourth NBA title in 2009, answering a number of questions in the process: Could he win without Shaq? Could he lead a team to a ring?

But questions still remain for Bryant. Those could be answered in the next two weeks, as Bryant and his squad tangle for the 12th time in the Finals with the Boston Celtics, which hold a 9-2 advantage in the series.

What if the Lakers win their 16th title?
-Bryant will have earned his fifth ring, tying him with greats such as Magic Johnson and George Mikan. He would be just one behind Scottie Pippen, Bob Cousy, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and some dude named Jordan.
-He will have brought L.A. within one title of Boston (17 to 16) for most all time. The Lakers would be in good position to pass the Celtics sooner than later, too.
-Phil Jackson, without a contract for next season, would return to Los Angeles.
-Bryant's record in the Finals will go to 5-2. Johnson's was 5-4.
-Bryant's next 30-point playoff game would give him 76, placing him second all time ahead of Abdul-Jabbar and behind Jordan.
-Bryant will supplant Tim Duncan as the seventh best player in League history.
-The "is he as good as Jordan" talk will (foolishly) continue.

What if Bryant isn't able to best the Celtics?
-Bryant will be 5-4 in the Finals, 1-2 as The Man. Comparisons with Peyton Manning will start.
-Bryant turns 32 in August. He won't have many more shots at championship glory - or at moving up the Greatest of All Time ladder.
-Jackson may retire if he thinks the door is closed on L.A.'s title chances.
-He will have never beaten his franchises greatest rival for anything substantial.
-The "is he as good as Jordan" talk will (finally) cease.

Has there ever been so much on the line for one athlete? You'd think that, at 14 years in, Bryant's place in history would be secure. But when you become apart of any "greatest ever" argument, questions are always abound.

From what I know about Kobe, all of things are on his mind and will remain on his mind until this series is over. Anybody would fold under that type of pressure. But Bryant isn't just anybody. He's playing the best playoff basketball of his career.

It's almost like a revenge tour. By sweeping Utah, and knocking the Jazz out of the postseason for the third season in a row, Bryant exorcised the demons left by those airballs he put up in the Delta Center in 1998.

By vanquishing Phoenix, Bryant finally bested the squad that knocked his Lakers out of the playoffs in 2006 and 2007 - the only two seasons a Jackson-led team failed to get passed the first round.

And by beating Boston, Kobe and his teammates will be able to (somewhat) erase the memory of a 39-point beatdown in the clincher in 2008.

I say it happens.

Lakers in 6.

One of the best all-around players in the history of baseball retired after 22 years yesterday.

Tonight marks the 12th meeting in the championship round between two of the five most storied organizations in the history of American professional sports.

Yet the news today won't be about Ken Griffey Jr. or Lakers vs. Celtics. Nope, everything will center around umpire Jim Joyce taking history away from Detroit Tigers pitcher Armando Galarraga last night, as Joyce's blown call cost Galarraga the 1st perfect game in Tigers' history. It also made Austin Jackson's running catch, where he made more like Reggie Wayne than Reggie Jackson, "just another catch."

This wasn't an instant where Joyce tried to make himself a part of the game as some umps and referees do at times. His call, on out 27 of 27, where it was clear the Indians Jason Donald was out by at least a step, was simply one of the most egregious blown calls in the history of baseball. Billy the Blind Kid from "Dumb and Dumber," who was sold a dead bird with a broken neck, could see Donald was out; but Joyce, feet away from the play, saw different.

To add insult to ... insult, Joyce is slated to serve as home plate umpire in today's series finale between the Tigers and Indians. With any luck, a number of foul balls will find their way to Joyce's groin.

I'm not upset over his blown call. Joyce, a 22-year veteran who's called games in two World Series, is human. We all make mistakes on our jobs. Sure, his was on a much larger scale, but Joyce is a man. We've been making mistakes since the beginning of time. He should be reprimanded, unless MLB brass believe he punished himself enough with his post-game bleep-filled rant last night. But Joyce shouldn't be fired, shouldn't be thrown from the Belle Isle bridge, and no flaming bags of anything should be left on his porch.

Joyce did what any real man would do. He manned up, talked to reporters and apologized to Galarraga and Tigers' manager Jim Leyland. Galaragga, the picture of class he has shown to be, even hugged a tearful Joyce last night.

But he shouldn't have had to.

And I should've had wall-to-wall NBA Finals coverage, and Tim Kurkjian giddily talking about Jr.'s place in history.

If there is a such thing as justice, Joyce will have forgotten to wear a cup today. And Austin Jackson will foul a pitch right off of his ... nevermind.

An ESPN.com Page 2 columnist, Bill Simmons, A.K.A. "The Sports Guy," was asked by a reader where he would put the World Wrestling Federation (I can't get with calling it "WWE) Hall of Fame. His answer was an interesting one that carries a lot of merit.

Q: You talked about a location for the WWE Hall of Fame in your WrestleMania diary. Where would you put it? I think it's gotta be where WWE people tend to go anyways, not a pilgrimage site like Cooperstown. My votes are either Daytona Beach, near a NASCAR track somewhere in Georgia/Tennessee or the Wisconsin Dells.

SG: I'd like to see Vince buy the Silverdome and turn it into the WWE Hall of Fame. We already have a nostalgic tie-in: WrestleMania III (in Detroit) had the best WrestleMania ever, the biggest wrestling crowd ever, the biggest match ever (Hulk versus Andre), and the greatest match ever up to that point (Savage versus Steamboat). Throw in the local economy boost and the Silverdome's price (dirt-cheap) and everyone wins. There will never be a bigger wrestling match than Hulk-Andre. It's sacred ground. Think I'm kidding? Two other things happened in 1987 at the Silverdome: Basketball Jesus (Larry Bird) punched Basketball Satan (Bill Laimbeer), and the Pope conducted a Catholic Mass.

That's a very interesting proposition. Historically, wrestling shows sell out extremely fast when they hit this area. Throw in the large Canadian following the WWF has, which would bring tourist dollars to the area, and it seems like a win-win. Something like a Hall of Fame would have many more long-term benefits than Monster Truck Rallies or any "one-night only" events, like one held at the Dome in April. Something like a Hall of Fame would, I'm assuming, be open year-round - and need year-round staffing.

Along with tourist money, a Hall of Fame would bring much-needed jobs, along with some positive exposure. Sure, it's wrestling (the WWE has total assets of more than $467 million), which I haven't watched on a regular basis in about 12 years, but it's better than a lot of other alternatives out there.

Are there even any other alternatives out there?