When I ask that question on radio shows, some callers are quick to say "Michael Jordan and Scottie Pippen." Well, that may be the closest thing, but it's not that close. Michael Jordan didn't like Scottie Pippen and Pippen was jealous of Jordan, but Jordan was mature enough to know that the Bulls needed the childish, truculent Pippen and pressured management to keep him on the team.

Phil Jackson, of course, deserved a lot of credit for keeping the team together, especially after Dennis Rodman's arrival, but Jordan was the real glue. When he talked, which wasn't often, the team listened. And Scottie Pippen, for all his whining, knew he'd never be Michael Jordan, so he whined but he took the championship rings and played.

Right about now, Jackson, currently the Lakers' coach, might be considering asking Jordan to drop by the locker room for a pep talk. The Lakers have already lost as many games this season as they did all last season, and, worse, are on the verge of losing perhaps the game's top young player. How bad is it? I don't know if you hear the rumors where you live, but it was being whispered that O'Neal faked an injury to get out of the Lakers' game against the Knicks the other day -- his way, said the rumorist, of saying to Bryant, "OK, you're the man. Well, prove it." I think the rumor was silly, but the Lakers' thrashing at the hands of the Knicks ought to prove the point O'Neal has been making all year: He is the man.

I'm not taking Shaq's part in the argument. Both O'Neal and Bryant are being selfish and immature and hurting the Lakers by making this silliness public. More than that, they are hurting the NBA, which desperately needs a marquee team with instantly recognizable superstars. Right now the Lakers have the instantly recognizable superstars but not the marquee team.

Two seasons ago, the San Antonio Spurs had perhaps the two most dominant players in the game in the "Twin Towers," Tim Duncan and David Robinson. Those two were content to share the spotlight -- indeed, they forced the spotlights to grow larger to accommodate them. The same can be said of the Lakers of the Kareem-Magic era; no one was whining about whether the game should be played more inside (to Kareem's game) or outside (to Magic's). The Lakers just won, and when they did it seemed as if there were enough championship rings, accolades, endorsements and magazine covers to go around.

There are apparently not enough of these things out there to satisfy both O'Neal and Bryant, and that is the really unusual part of all of this. Usually, losing is what creates this kind of controversy. It's happening to the Lakers because they win. Or rather, because they won last year. The controversy isn't happening because they are losing more games this season; they are losing more games this season because of the controversy.

Who is wrong? Both men are. But Bryant is more wrong. The best way for the Lakers to win is to feed O'Neal on the inside, with Bryant becoming the man in the final minutes. That really shouldn't be an argument -- it was already proven last season. It can and has been argued that the Lakers' problem is the absence of Glen Rice and his outside shooting, but with all due respect to Rice, a Glen Rice is not going to be the difference between a team with Shaquille O'Neal and Kobe Bryant winning or losing.

Politics 2000: Unflinching daily political news, analysis and commentary.