HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: u_nique@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Jerray Wei)
Subject: Re: 76ers need BIG-time help!!!!!!!!
Organization: HAC - Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1992 00:35:09 GMT

In article <1992Dec18.225502.1@wharton.upenn.edu> reille85@wharton.upenn.edu writes:
>HERE'S A TRADE....
>
>The Philadelphia 76ers badly need many, many, many things.  They happen to have
>an overabundance of "2" guards (Hawkins, Hornacek, Dawkins)   So, here goes.
>How about...
>	Jeff Hornacek, Armon Gilliam, and Johnny Dawkins to Cleveland for
>Mark Price, "Hot Rod" Williams, and a #1 draft pick.
>
>     or Hornacek, Gilliam, and Dawkins to Seattle for Payton and McKey.
>
>THE 76ers need help BADLY!!!!

Both of these trades are pretty unrealistic.  Hornacek and Price could be
called even (neither team would benefit much here, Horny can play point
pretty well), but the Cavs would be foolish to trade their power forward of
the future (Nance is old) in Williams for oft traded Armon Gilliam.  As
for the Seattle trade...Gary Payton sucks.  Philly needs Hornacek if you
haven't noticed, he's definitely the MVP so far.  He's a better point guard
and millions of times better scorer than Payton.

Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
From: eriksa@techbook.com (Erik Anderson)
Subject: Re: Suns and the Salary Cap
Organization: TECHbooks of Beaverton Oregon - Public Access Unix
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 03:13:41 GMT

koehnema@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (Harry Koehnemann) writes:

>In article <42113@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> cs161feu@sdcc10.ucsd.edu (Anthony Minkoff) writes:
>>So far this season, the Suns have waived Ed Nealy ($800,000
>>guaranteed salary) and Kurt Rambis ($1,100,000 guaranteed salary).
>>If I'm not mistaken, this gives Phoenix $1,900,000 under the salary
>>cap to work with.  Does anybody have any clue what they're planning
>>on doing with it?

>I'd hold on to it for next year - remember they own Philly's #1 and that's
>likely to be a high lottery since they have the second worst record in the
>league currently.  Who else thinks that Jason Williams was worth the second
>pick in the next draft?  Philly has the worst front office in the league.

I wish that was true, but it's inaccurate.  The Sixers will retain their
'93 pick if it's a lottery pick.  If it's not a lottery pick, then the
Suns will get it.  If the Suns don't get the pick this year, then they
will get the Sixers' '94 first round choice no matter where it is in the
draft.

So cheer on Philly to be very close to the lottery "borderline" so
either Phoenix gets the best possible non-lottery pick this year or so
Philly gets a lousy lottery pick. :-)


-- 
eriksa@techbook.COM  Not affiliated with TECHbooks
Erik Anderson : SLOBBER Rotisserie League NL Champion 1991.
Hey, I have to brag about *something*, don't I? :-)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
From: byau@jarthur.claremont.edu (Ben Yau)
Subject: Re: Lakers?  AAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRGGGGGGHHHH!!!!!!!!
Keywords: Lakers
Organization: Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA 91711
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 00:10:20 GMT

In article <42680@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> kompella@cs.ucsd.edu (Vachaspathi Kompella) writes:
>

>No more arrogant predictions here.  The Lakers will have to prove to me that
>they are ashamed of themselves.  Who says it's just one game?  Why can't
>they show that they are the Lakers to the Kings, the Mavericks, the nobodies
>of the league?  Why pick on Chicago and Portland?  Can they stick it to them?
>Oh yes.  Can they pound the stuffing out of the Mavericks?  Sorry, sir,
>no can do.  The good thing is that there aren't too many bad teams to lose
>to: the Kings, the Mavericks, the T-wolves, the 76ers, the Heat, the Nuggets,
>the Bullets.  Let's see that's about 18 games they are going to lose, straight
>off!
>

so which is better?  losing to bad teams and beating good teams? or losing to
good teams and beating bad teams (sonics.. :(

at least 76rs, dallas, nuggies, etc.. won't be in the playoffs to take the
Lakers out of it ;)

ben
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ben Yau		    byau@jarthur.claremont.edu	          SHHHTEENKEE FOO FOO

============================================================================

   ---------         -----------     The more you study, the more you know.
				     The more you know, the more you forget.
			             The more you forget, the less you know.
                                     So why study?
                 | 	
				     The less you study, the less you know.
				     The less you know, the less you forget.
      --                   --        The less you forget, the more you know.
        ---             ---	     So why study?
             ----------

============================================================================
From: rjs@citi.umich.edu (Robert J. Skrobola)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
Subject: Re: Rodman's Rebound Stats....
Date: 14 Dec 1992 18:20:19 GMT
Organization: Center for Information Technology Intergration, University of Michigan
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: bodwin.citi.umich.edu

In article <BywGyB.EtL@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, yzg9890@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Ye Zomsik) writes:
|> I am always puzzled by Rodman's rebound number. He is a great rebounder as his
|> stats shows, but I hardly find a game with Pistons having the rebound edge over
|> its opponents. Is that because rest of the Pistons cannot rebound?

When Rodman was out, they were outrebounded and lost 7 in a row. He is back,
and they are now outrebounding their opponents in every game. They've won 
6 in a row. So I guess I'd get a magnifying glass to check those boxscores
if I were you.

|> I've checked the Pistons stats for this season, and there is no major difference
|> on rebound production between Rodman's absent and present.

See the other thread on this. Stats were compiled for this year with and 
without Rodman. They show a difference of +6 or so on the rebound margin
when Rodman in. So what you say is just plain wrong.

|> 
|> An article from SI last year quoted a NBA GM saying something like, Rodman took
|> a lot of credit from his teamates, such as put his hands on the ball which had
|> been controlled by his teamates.

I wonder if this was one of the many GM's who tried to trade for this
worthless player over the off-season (until his attitude took a nosedive)...

Hey look, you're all right..Rodman sucks. When he gets 20+ boards against
your team and you lose, tell yourself its because he is selfish. You'll feel
better.

		Rob



-- 
-----------------------------------------------------
Rob Skrobola      Institutional File Server Project
Normal Disclaimer: I speak only for myself
-----------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
From: tamada@cheshire.oxy.edu (Michael K. Tamada)
Subject: Re: Who are the tallest point guards?
Organization: Occidental College, Los Angeles, CA 90041 USA.
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 01:08:10 GMT

In article <1992Dec19.004032.9648@muddcs.claremont.edu> byau@jarthur.claremont.edu (Ben Yau) writes:

>HOWEVER, someone who i think is overlooked is Seattle's point guard, not 
>Payton, but NATE MCMILLAN!!!!  this guy is awesome!  he is improving so much
>every year.. in fact, Magic Johnson was quoted as saying
>"The guy who gives me the most trouble night in and night out is Nate
>McMillan." .. 
>
>and he is, i believe 6'9".
>
>He has been used at the point for as far as I can remember.

     Right idea, but McMillan's listed at 6'5".  You might be thinking of 
the equally versatile McKey, who was I think listed at 6'9" but is now
listed at 6'10"  (I wouldn't be surprised if he literally grew, he was
only about 20 when joined the Sonics.)
     McMillan I think still plays the majority of his minutes at point,
but with Payton's improved play, Payton is seeing more minutes at PG
than McMillan has been.  So if you had to choose the one player who
performed the most PG chores for the Sonics, it'd be Payton.  But if
we include backup PGs in this list, you'd certainly want to add
McMillan.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
  |__	       o
  | W			   Mike Tamada
		  |\	   Institutional Research Office
		   \O	   Occidental College
		    |      tamada@oxy.edu
		   /|
		  | |
From: jblixt@neon.cdc.com (Jon Blixt)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
Subject: Re: NBA brothers?
Date: 11 Dec 92 15:52:36 GMT
Article-I.D.: shamash.50337
Organization: RUBL  Commish- Real Usenet Basketball League

In article <1992Dec10.184836.8973@alw.nih.gov} jwnagle@loglady.ninds.nih.gov (Jim Nagle) writes:
}}In article <OJT.92Dec9145514@gano.cs.brown.edu} ojt@cs.brown.edu (Oren J. Tversky) writes:
}}}What about Harvey Grant, brother of Horace Grant.  Although Harvey has
}}}better offensive statistics, they say Horace could put up even better
}}                              ^^^^^^^^
}}}numbers were he not overshadowed by Pippen and Jordan.
}}}
}}Who's the they in that's what they say?
}
}Not that Horace's numbers wouldn't be better on another team
}but whether they be much better than Harvey's is another question.
}Harveys been puttin up decent numbers of late in spite of being
}slightly under the weather.
}
}Although they are twins Horace got more of the muscle and less of the
}finesse. 
}
}-jim

Has it occured to anyone else that if you put Horace's rebounding, quick
hands and shot blocking ability together with Harvey's court vision,
and shooting range you'd have a player worthy of the Dream Team.

-Commish
--------
Jon Blixt                  "You so ugly I could stick yo face in some dough  
Control Data               and make gorilla cookies."                        
Minnepolis, MN                          Sanford & Son  Fred to Aunt Ester   
jblixt@neon.aqeng.cdc.com                                                      
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
From: jdt29225@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Jazzy J )
Subject: Re: 85-86 Celtics vs 91-92 Bulls.g
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 08:12:21 GMT
Keywords: Lakers, Pacific Division

iacurtop@ERE.UMontreal.CA (Iacurto Paul) writes:
>I hear that the 85-86 Celtics had a truly awesome team. Who
>would win a seven game series between them and the 91-92
>two peat Bulls?
>I am missing several players on the 85-86 Celts roster.

>92 BULLS                        86 CELTICS
>Coach: Phil Jackson             Coach: ??

>PG: John Paxson                 PG: ??
>SG: Michael Jordan              SG: ??
>C : Bill Cartwright             C : Robert Parrish
>SF: Scottie Pippen              SF: Larry Bird
>PF: Horace Grant                PF:

	It was Danny Ainge and Dennis Johnson at the backcourt positions,
	with McHale starting at Power Forward.

>Bench:
>BJ Armstrong                    Bill Walton
>Scott Williams                  Kevin McHale
>Cliff Levingston
>Will Perdue
>Craig Hodges
>Stacy King

	Off the bench for the Celtics, U had the likes of Scott Wedman,
	Greg Kite, Sam Vincent, Rick Carlisle...

	Jazzy J
 
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   " I try to discover a little something to make me sweeter..."   --Erasure |
|   Jazzy J               jdt29225@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu         U-Illinois/Urbana |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: kompella@cs.ucsd.edu (Vachaspathi Kompella)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
Subject: Lakers?  AAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRGGGGGGHHHH!!!!!!!!
Keywords: Lakers
Date: 17 Dec 92 21:30:54 GMT
Article-I.D.: sdcc12.42680
Organization: CSE Dept., UC San Diego



Pitiful!!  They LOST to the Dallas Mavericks.  I heard the Laker color
man, Stu Lantz, say that no matter how bad the Mavericks were, there
was always a finite probability that they would win, and that the odds
of their winning were increasing because they had lost so many games.

I thought, "What an incisive mind!  What absolute balderdash!"  But,
just to show you that Probability is a real science, and to confirm
every idiot's interpretation of the Law of Averages, the Lakers had to
lose.  It was in the cards.  Bah!

So much for their triumphs.  I am most displeased.  A cakewalk, a piece of
cake, any way you slice it, the damn scoreboard says it all.  Brrrraaaackkk!
(My imitation of a razzberry).

No more arrogant predictions here.  The Lakers will have to prove to me that
they are ashamed of themselves.  Who says it's just one game?  Why can't
they show that they are the Lakers to the Kings, the Mavericks, the nobodies
of the league?  Why pick on Chicago and Portland?  Can they stick it to them?
Oh yes.  Can they pound the stuffing out of the Mavericks?  Sorry, sir,
no can do.  The good thing is that there aren't too many bad teams to lose
to: the Kings, the Mavericks, the T-wolves, the 76ers, the Heat, the Nuggets,
the Bullets.  Let's see that's about 18 games they are going to lose, straight
off!

-Vach

Nevertheless, the Lakers to the playoffs!!  
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
From: smorshead@cc.curtin.edu.au
Subject: Re: Worst Management
Summary: worst mgt. is in teams that go nowhere
Organization: Curtin University of Technology
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 08:12:20 GMT

In article <7194@dove.nist.gov>, hira@cme.nist.gov (Ron Hira) writes:
> In article <1992Nov30.094402.71844@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu>, mlsa@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (MICHAEL LAUREN SHERMAN) writes:
> |> From: mlsa@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (MICHAEL LAUREN SHERMAN)
> |> Subject: Worst Management
> |> Date: 30 Nov 92 09:44:02 GMT
> |> 
> |> Washington Bullets, I could explain why but you all know Basketball, you've
> |> seen the Bullets, you know they suck, you know they've sucked for quite some
> |> time and you also know that they haven't contended for a title since I was
> |> about four.  Why does a team suck for long periods of time?  POOR MANAGEMENT.
> 
> The Bullets last won the championship in '78 (?). They made the playoffs
> for quite a number of years in the 80's and only in the past 4 have missed
> out on them, despite some real bonehead drafts in the early 80s. I would
> not consider the recent moves poor (acquiring Pervis for J Malone, drafting
> Gugs, etc). They haven't sucked as long and as poorly as the Kings or the
> Clippers, or a number of other teams.
> 
> They got caught up in the mediocre team syndrome, just barely making the
> playoffs w/ Moses, and then drafting in the middle of the pack. They
> also had a run of bad luck, injuries to Fatso and Bernard.
> 
> I think that Ferry made some bad moves, and I don't think that Nash is
> a genius, but their poor play cannot be attributed only to mgmt. And
> it has only been really poor recently.
> 
> Ron

The worst kind of management is best evident in teams like the Rockets.
The team gets stuck at only just being able to make the playoffs, has no depth
and has no decent draft picks for the future.  Basically they're stuck where 
they are.  At least teams like Washington are improving (and Dallas is getting
worse). 
Andrew
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
From: dwarner@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (David J.)
Subject: Re: Suns and the Salary Cap
Organization: Blue Riddle Productions
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 17:49:04 GMT

In article <42483@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> cs161feu@sdcc10.ucsd.edu (Anthony Minkoff) writes:
>In article <Bz4MAx.J96@techbook.com>,
>eriksa@techbook.com (Erik Anderson) writes:
>}koehnema@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (Harry Koehnemann) writes:
>}>I'd hold on to it for next year - remember they own Philly's #1 and that's
>}>likely to be a high lottery since they have the second worst record in the
>}>league currently.  Who else thinks that Jason Williams was worth the second
>}>pick in the next draft?  Philly has the worst front office in the league.
>}
>}I wish that was true, but it's inaccurate.  The Sixers will retain their
>}'93 pick if it's a lottery pick.  If it's not a lottery pick, then the
>}Suns will get it.  If the Suns don't get the pick this year, then they
>}will get the Sixers' '94 first round choice no matter where it is in the
>}draft.
>
>Damn.  I knew it was too good to be true.  Even Philly couldn't be
>*that* dumb.
>
>Well, '93 isn't supposed to be a very good draft anyway.  Maybe
>Phoenix will end up with a high draft pick in '94.
>

Anyone for a front court tandem of Charles Barkley and Grant Hill?  =^)
Go Sixers (for this year).

>Tony

-- 
--David J.-----------------------*********************************************
--Blue Riddle Productions 1993---   "RAP IS AN ART/TURN UP THE MICROPHONE"
--dwarner@silver.ucs.indiana.edu-          Coming in 1993 from BRP.
--The Science is upon us...------*********************************************
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
From: sikorski@oj.miami.edu (Richard Sikorski)
Subject: Re: RUMOR mia Heat - Miami Arena News
Followup-To: rec.sport.basketball.pro
Organization: University of Miami, RSMAS
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 92 19:23:00 GMT

In article <sikorski-181292050750@drdoom.rsmas.miami.edu> amidst much other
verbiage, I wrote:
>
> Is any other NBA team out there playing on a court over
> ice?


So far Brian Edward Macmillan and Andrew Busa have come up with these...
Its funny being in a 'new' multi-sport town like Miami. I never really
wondered about shared sports-facilities, and y'all seem to have info
like this at your fingertips. Thanks Mac! Thanks Andy! I added some of
the arena names that these guys left out (so expect an error or two ;-)

Knicks and Rangers:   Madison Square Garden
Nets and Devils:      Meadowlands Arena (East Rutherford)
Celtics and Bruins:   Boston Garden
Bullets and Capitals: Capital Centre (Landover, MD)
76ers and Flyers:     The Spectrum
Bulls and Blackhawks: Chicago Stadium
Lakers and Kings:     Great Western Forum (Inglewood)


--
Richard Sikorski     sikorski@oj.miami.edu
                   r.sikorski@rsmas.miami.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
From: grubin@rap.ucar.edu (Rick Grubin)
Subject: Re: My A to Z list (N and K)
Followup-To: rec.sport.basketball.pro
Keywords: 'K'
Organization: NCAR, Research Applications Program
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 20:57:37 GMT



jscott@micom.com (James Scott) writes:
>> for K>
>bravo!  somebody got billy knight.  sadly, most nba fans saw nothing
>of the true billy knight, who was a terror in the ABA.

Billy Knight was a ballhog in the ABA just like he was later in the NBA.
He could shoot but that was it.  No defense at all.

>additionally, how about K> larry "special K" kenon?

A better choice that Knight.  Kenon was a better scorer and all-around
player, though his defense was a bit lax as well.  A good player though,
in NY and San Antonio.

-- 
Rick Grubin     grubin@ncar.ucar.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
From: jscott@micom.com (James Scott)
Subject: new jimmy jax rumor? 
Keywords: Jimmy Jackson
Organization: Micom Communications Corp., Simi Valley, Ca.
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 17:23:32 GMT

on KMPC (LA) last night i heard the following ...

seattle has a deal on the table which sends payton and doug christie's
rights to little D for JJ's rights.

also, david kahn (jim lampley calls him his "nba guru") said that "although
the pundits disagree," his sources tell him the sacramento offer is L-train
for JJ straight (no chaser).  he said he felt that JJ's dilemma would be
resolved in the next 10 days.

btw, as for the elliott to phoenix rumors ... SA folks say tark squashed
any deal for elliott.

later,

james

Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
From: jdm42241@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Doug Mraz)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
Subject: Tark is fired
Summary: tarkanian axed
Keywords: spurs
Date: 19 Dec 92 00:30:55 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana


    ESPN just announced on SportsCenter that Jerry Tarkaninan has been
    fired by San Antonio.  ESPN interviewed Tark and he said he wrote a
    letter to Spurs owner Red McCombs that the team needed to get a point
    guard badly.  He also said there was a difference of expectations between
    the two, but that the parting was amiable.  No word on who will be the
    coach tonight vs. Dallas.
       Frankly I thought Tark was in over his head when he took thhe job.
       Injuries have hurt the Spurs, especially losing Terry Cummings. He
       also said the losing got to him; that his blood pressure was rising
       and he was worried about his health.  This is not the first time 
       McCombs has been involved in some controversy; I recall last year
       David Robinson wrote him a letter pleading for the team to get 
       its own plane like the Bulls to ease the travel burden.

-- 
Bear Down, Chicago Bears...Here come the Hawks, the mighty Blackhawks!
"Sex is like politics. You don't have to be good at either one to enjoy it."
-Barry Goldwater.
Repeat-a-Bulls.
From: m1wcc00@fed.frb.gov (Wayne C. Cook)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
Subject: Re: Jimmy : outta  DALLAS
Date: 17 Dec 92 19:20:45 GMT
	<1992Dec15.162244.7817@u.washington.edu>
Organization: Federal Reserve Board
In-reply-to: tannerg@carson.u.washington.edu's message of 15 Dec 92 16:22:44 GMT

In article <1992Dec15.162244.7817@u.washington.edu> tannerg@carson.u.washington.edu (Glenn Tanner) writes:
Path: fed!uunet!usc!rpi!usenet.coe.montana.edu!news.u.washington.edu!carson.u.washington.edu!tannerg
   From: tannerg@carson.u.washington.edu (Glenn Tanner)
   Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
   Date: 15 Dec 92 16:22:44 GMT
   References: <1992Dec12.195545.18485@wam.umd.edu> <36990010@hpcc01.corp.hp.com>
   Sender: news@u.washington.edu (USENET News System)
   Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
   Lines: 21

   >Today's paper reported the Dallas Mavericks were ready to trade Jimmy
   >Jackson to Sacremento for Lionel Simmons plus next years No. 1 pick.
   >
   >It seems like a high price to pay since the Kings will probably have
   >yet another lottery pick this year and have the chance to pick up the
   >next "collegiate superstar."  Perhaps Cheaney (sp) from Indiana?
   >
   >Draft pics are to valuable to trade away for unproven talent and the Kings
   >would continue to dwell in the cellar of the Pacific Division if they lose 
   >Simmons and their next lottery pic.

   Excuse me, but isn't a draft pick unproven talent?  At least with Jackson, 
   they know who thet're getting.

   >Now, if they trade Simmons for Jackson straight up, go for it!

   Not even Norm Sonju is this stupid...I think.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Is it really net concensus that JJ will be better than Simmons?
Simmons is a pretty decent player.  Can the net gods tell me
what they expect out of JJ for all statistical categories? Even
if it is just a guess?  Thanks.
Wayne.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
From: bewillia@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Brad "Boomer" Williams)
Subject: Re: Best from A to Z
Organization: Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 92 20:58:24 EST

bis@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu (Bis) writes:

>Let's get the record straight: the *ONLY* difference between the
>Celtics' 78/79 and 79/80 starting lineup was that Larry Bird replaced
>Curtis Rowe at #3.  The only significant difference on the bench was
>Pete Maravich, and he was in the twilight of his career.  32 games is
>the single biggest 1-year improvement in NBA history (and no, Orlando
>will *not* beat it this year!).

	I think that San Antonio beat that record in Robonson's first year.
Of course, that was also the year that they added Terry Cummings and Sean
Elliott...

+=============================================================================+
|     Brad E. Williams     |        Syracuse         |     816 Euclid Ave     |
+--------------------------|       University        |   Syracuse, NY 13210   |
| bewillia@mailbox.syr.edu +-------------------------+------------------------+
+--------------------------|      "I am capable of hating selectively.  I     |
|   OOOOOOO   OO     OO    |  just never understood how basic reason and      |
|   OO    OO  OO  O  OO    |  common sense allow you to jump from hating an   |
|   OOOOOOO   OO OOO OO    |  individual to hating everyone who resembles     |
|   OO    OO   OOO OOO     |  him or her."                                    |
|   OOOOOOO    OO   OO     |  				- Bob Cousy           |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
|                Phone:   (315) 424-9331  or  (315) 423-7557                  |