I partly agree with some of the other letter writers that the Spurs are not controversial, thus they cannot attract many viewers. However, there is a lot more in play that just their good behavior. Manu is unwatchable (he constantly flops on defense AND offense), Bruce Bowen is irritating, and Cheap Shot Brob deserves to be flogged for precipitating the biggest sports heist since that young Yankees fan stole the homer from the Orioles. I think it's absolutely disgusting that Horry will soon likely surpass the number of NBA titles won by Jordan. This guy could write a self help book on how to be in the right place at the right time.

However, I do LOVE Duncan. He is one of the most fundamentally sound basketball players of all time. I would certainly rank him as the greatest power forward of all-time, except he really isn't a power forward. Rather he has played his entire professional career on a team featuring a two-center lineup.

In regard to the Cavs, they are present in the Finals simply by the complete lack of decent competition in the East. Only the Pistons have a good squad, but they disqualify themselves by their patented arrogance and complacency. And someone please explain how Flip Saunders deserves an extention? This may be Dumars' worst move since drafting Darko. Please, please bring back Rick Carlisle.

In regard to LeBron. . . he is a great athlete and a terrific passer. Yet, he is far from a complete basketball player. His jump shot is mediocre at best and his defense is suspect. As big of a prima donna and ball hog Kobe may be, he is twice the player of LeBron.

Thank you for recognizing Duncan for what he truly is. A center. (I wrote that in response to your column on Monday.) Thus . . . perhaps Karl Malone is the greatest power forward of all time. (Certainly not the greatest crunch time p.f. however)

PS. Your column is consistently great.

In a society where obesity is so rampant that being overweight is the norm; in a culture that calls for the neck of a football player for treating his dogs the way your meat producer treats other similiar mammals, and in a nation with the largest carbon footprint in the world, there is but one solution. Go vegan.

BTW - I have seem feed to conversion ratios double what this author purports. (In other words, it takes a shocking 15 pounds of feed to receive a single pound of beef from cattle , 4 pounds of feed to acquire a pound of chicken flesh, etc . . .)

A few people have suggested wool as a reasonable replacement for clothes. (in lieu of cotton or man made fibers) The problem with wool is that the sheep are horrifically treated, and typically sent to the Middle East for slaughter. (to become food) If we are going to be concerned about how we as humans treat the planet, let's begin with how we treat living, breathing, feeling creatures.

This common expression in the subject line applies disapointingly towards the majority of American's reaction toward concerns over global warming and environmental degradation.

In an effort to protect its advertising revenue, the American media essentially avoided addressing global warming concerns until too many factors came to light. This change occured approx. 2-3 years ago. (To find out more, I recommend you read 'Boiling Point' by Ross Gelbspan.)

In an effort to catch up to the grave news that we need to dramatically reduce our carbon footprint in a relatively short period of time, our society has undertaken one of the most comical sets of disjointed actions to change our ways.

"Stop drinking bottled water" bellows the peanut gallery. Nary a word about bottled beer, bottled soda, bottled milk, or any beverage which are also completely unncessary. Yes, there are subsitutes for bottled water, yet is a coke necessary? A Miller Lite? A bottled 7-Up? Of course not. Either pick on all of the beverages or let it go. People sound like goofballs singling out one industry.

In the same vein, we have to stop looking at the SIZE of the car, and think of the miles driven per year. If one person drives a Hummer 8,000 miles a year and another person drives a Honda Civic 30,000 miles per year, guess who has a larger carbon footprint?

Furthermore, every bicyclist is prohibited from assuming they are better stewards of the environment if they continue to fly on planes. A mile flown on a plane is significantly worse for emmiting co2 than a mile driven in an automobile.

Also, it is better to buy one t-shirt that is not environmentally correct than 6 t-shirts that are. Minimizing consumption is more important than ensuring each purchase is perfect.

No one should also be permitted to speak a word about their environmental responsibility if they consume cows or their byproducts. The South American rainforests - one of the most crucial carbon sinks - is being decimated to grow cattle and raise soybeans. (to feed cattle) It takes more than 10 pounds of feed to receive 1 lb. of meat. Cows are also one of the greatest contributors to the two most powerful greenhouse gases - nitrous oxide and methane. (People generally are not aware of this impact because the media does not want to harm its relationship with its advertisers.)

Finally, enough with the China bashing already. The average American's footprint is four to five times the size of the average Chinese. Plus, contary to us Americans, the Chinese implemented population control. Sadly, due to the modern human lifestyle there is no greater step to reduce your c.f. than not procreating.