Even so, both of these guys have large holes in their respective games.

Let's start with Lee: He always hustles and relentlessly attacks both boards. But he can't shoot. His offense consists of elementary drop-steps. And he can't defend.

Also, the Knicks' barely controlled chaos generates more scoring opportunities for Lee than he'd find on a more disciplined ball club. For him to be a starter with a legitimate team, Lee would need to play beside a shot-blocking big man who would also need to be double-teamed whenever he received the ball in the pivot.

In other words, Lee is strictly a very limited role player. A 20-minute-a-game player off the bench for an excellent team. As such, he's not nearly worth the humongous contract that he has been seeking.

Robinson, on the other hand, is a freakish player who, barely 5-foot-8, can create makeable shots against virtually any defender. His range is outstanding, and he can sometimes single-handedly rally a team from a deep deficit.

But, like Lee, he plays inferior defense. And, despite his diminutive stature he's absolutely incapable of not only running an offense, but also of executing plays under pressure. In truth, he's a grossly undersized shooting guard.

Bad shots. Either silly- or non-passes. And a total focus on his own numbers. That's what's wrong with Robinson.

Not to mention that his foolish adolescent behavior on and off the court routinely alienates his teammates.

I take exception to your recent article that brands Chris Paul as being overrated. Also, how can you claim that Slater Martin was the last "pipsqueak" point guard to lead his team to a championship? What about Avery Johnson and Isiah Thomas? — Versal Mason III, Durham, N.C.