NEW YORK, January 2, 2007 -- Walt Frazier is without a doubt the greatest Knicks guard, and more than likely the greatest Knicks player, of all time. The charismatic Clyde was never the fastest or the quickest, or the highest leaper -- just the greatest. So when this master of intangibles writes a book called “The Game Within the Game”, you pay attention. You read. You listen. And you discuss.

TOM KERTES: What does your title, “The Game Within the Game”, refer to?

WALT FRAZIER: We’re talking about mental strategies, especially psyching out the opponent, exploiting mismatches, just trying to stay one step ahead of the opposition. “The Game Within the Game” is also embellishing the old-school virtues such as substance over style, communicaton, a lot of respect yourself and for others. It’s about a tenacious work ethic. Today you see a lot of young players, whatever their weakness is, they never improve throughout their entire careers.

TK: And that’s kind of astonishing.

WF: Well, style over substance. That’s what the game has become, entertainment. Players shoot better from 25 feet away than from 10 feet away. And guys can’t make a free throw from 15 feet away. It’s all about the work ethic. Team work. Discipline. And coaching – coaching is a very big aspect of intangibles.

TK: Would you say that “The Game Within the Game” was much stronger when you were playing 25-30 years ago?

WF: Very much so -- that was the WHOLE game, in fact. It was all about savvy. If you couldn’t defend, right away they were going to clear the side – until you defend it. That’s why Bill Bradley had a tremendous time, Cazzie Russell…Teams were aware of your weaknesses. When they came into the game, they cleared out the side. Make these guys play defense, which they knew they were weak at. Today teams don’t really look to exploit those mismatches, often not until the playoffs.

TK: Why do you think that’s not being done?

WF: Some of it is coaching. Only the old-school coaches continue to look to do that, Jerry Sloan, Don Nelson, guys from back in that era.

TK: So are you saying that those teams, 25-30 years ago, were better than today’s teams?

WF: In that respect. Today the guys’ size is just so overwhelming. They’d have plenty of mismatches against us – but would they look to exploit them? That’s the thing. Another thing is shooting, the lack of the mid-range jumper today. It’s become a lost art, like the hook shot. And that’s because there’s no glamour in it. You can’t make ESPN shooting a hook.

TK: Kareem Abdul-Jabbar was not glamorous enough?

WF: Apparently not. Though thirty-eight thousand points sounds pretty glamorous to me. But it’s old school. Players don’t want that.

TK: It’s interesting that you are writing this, though, because while you were a great point guard and oh-so-fundamental in your approach, you were a glamour-guy, too. But I guess your glamour was more off the court.

WF: Exactly. I loved defense, I loved passing, those non-glamorous things were the things I really wanted to do. Today everybody just wants to score primarily.

TK: Would you say that these changes in the game are reflective of changes in society?

WF: Of course. Everyone’s promoting himself, trying to get ahead over the next guy, a more selfish attitude in a more selfish society. That’s the way players grow up, that’s all they see – and that’s unfortunate.

TK: Who are the greatest players in your opinion, the ones that really had “The Game Within the Game” going for them?

WF: Any of the guys from 1965 on up the1980-s, Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson, Hakeem Olajuwon, those type of guys. Bob Cousy, Bill Russell, Oscar Robertson, Jerry West.

TK: Was Wilt Chamberlain more today’s type of player, in that he just overwhelmed everybody with his size and talent?

WF: Well, yes. But he did play smart, though. He had a method to his madness.

TK: Who are today’s players who you feel are the closest to mastering that intangible aspect of the game?

WF: Most of the superstar players, they can make the transition to any era. Kobe Bryant, Dwyane Wade, Shaq, LeBron James, these guys have a lot of smarts and versatility.

TK: LeBron plays a little bit like Magic, right?

WF: Yes, he’s a student of the history of the game. Most of today’s players don’t know the history or the tradition. They came into it for the money.

TK: Why did you decide to write the book?

WF: I thought it was timely. The evolution of the game and how it’s gone…People are always asking me what’s the difference in the game today from yesterday? So I thought it was very apropos.

TK: The fact that the rest the world has kind of caught up to the U.S. in basketball…

WF: …is because of all the things we’ve been talking about. The European and South American teams have gone back to the ‘60-s and the 70-s, where we used to be. They can all shoot the mid-range jumper, they’re team players, they make their free throws, not so much style over substance.

TK: Who are some of the foreign players you admire?

WF: Dirk Nowitzki is real tough now, then Manu Ginobili, Tony Parker…

TK: Your two Knicks championship teams were probably the ultimate “Game Within the Game” teams. What were the main factors behind that?

WF: Mainly savvy. Knowing the opposition’s tendencies for turnovers, personal fouls, anything you can capitalize upon. Then, options. We used to have a certain play. We’d call the play and then if the guy would not be open we’d have a second option, a third option like a backdoor play. That team was personified by intelligence.

TK: Do you ever get frustrated watching today’s game, seeing all that physical talent and knowing that players don’t get most out of that physical talent?

WF: Early on I was, but now I know that’s the way the game is. So I just learned to accept it, as most fans have. Today’s fans only like the “three-s” and the dunks because that’s what they are accustomed to. They don’t know the past so they are dealing with what it is now. That’s pretty much where I am.

TK: Now that we’ve defined the problem, what could the NBA, and U. S. basketball as a whole, do to look backwards, learn from the past, and make things better for the future?

WF: There is no solution -- because they don’t see it as a problem.

TK: They don’t see a problem when they finish sixth in the World Championships and third in the Olympics?

WF: No, they’re just thinking that they didn’t have the right players.

TK: But that’s not it?

WF: That was PART of it. They didn’t have defensive specialists, or three point shooters. I’m sure that was the best thing that could have happened to us, that we were embarrassed like that. So now they’re going to have those things we’ve alluded to.

TK: But you don’t see a return to the game within the game?

WF: No, because if you see the championship, nobody is emulating the Spurs. They are emulating Phoenix, run and gun. But then Phoenix is trying to be like the Spurs, because they are getting better defensively. So why don’t other teams do that?

TK: So would you say the Spurs come closest right now to playing “The Game Within the Game”?

WF: Yeah, the Spurs, the Pistons when they had Ben Wallace, those are the teams. They are team-oriented, they play “D”, no one cares who scores, they move the ball around.

TK: But you don’t see an overall movement toward a return to playing the right way?

WF: No, because it lacks glamour. It’s not going to happen, not as long as you have ESPN and video games.

TK: You mentioned in the book how frustrated you were being traded by the Knicks -- and how your status as one the greatest players in the game worked AGAINST you in Cleveland.

WF: I always hoped to end my career in New York, so it was devastating when they traded me -- and to Cleveland, of all places, which I viewed as tantamount to Siberia. Though, on paper, that was the best team for me – they needed a guard of my caliber. It took me a week before I absorbed that. But I was never really accepted -- I was still this guy from York, “Clyde”. My persona just preceded me. I was regarded as this outside New York guy by everyone, but mostly by the players. It wasn’t that blatant but I could feel it. They kind of tolerated me but I wasn’t embraced.

TK: You wrote in the book that when Willis Reed became the coach, you were hoping he’d name you his assistant.

WF: At that point if he would have approached me to help him with Ray Williams and Sugar Ray Richardson, I would have been amenable to that because I was only going to play two more years. Instead, I think he orchestrated the trade. I guess I was the last remnant of the championship years. But I never held that against Willis – I learned too much from him: professionalism, tenacious work ethic, how to conduct myself. I even copied his handwriting. He really was my mentor. There are many things I admire so much about him.

TK: It was interesting how you balanced “Clyde” off the court with the ultimate “Game Within the Game” guy on it.

WF: Clyde was the guy who liked to dress up and go out, 12 a.m. to 4 a. m. The rest of time I was just this quiet shy guy -- still am -- no entourage, or anything like that. People would say ‘4 a. m., that’s late’, but I’d sleep all day before I‘d go out.

TK: I was surprised that you didn’t feel Steve Nash should have won the two MVP awards back-to-back. And the reason I was surprised is because he is such a team-first point guard who probably has a lot of the “game within the game” going for him.

WF: I could see the first year. I couldn’t understand why they say he won the second one.

TK: Because Amare Stoudemire wasn’t there so they were amazed Phoenix did as well as they did.

WF: But no one else has ever won the MVP based on that.

TK: Over-achievement because of an injured player?

WF: Right. You just go by what is there. I thought the MVP was LeBron James. Now you’ll probably see him winning it because the voters feel guilty. Like a make-up call.

TK: Did you ever seriously consider going into coaching?

WF: I think it’s too late for me. I couldn’t really dedicate my life to it at this point. In the past, I saw many things I could help the players with, especially defensively. But then, no one seemed to be interested. So I was like, well, maybe I don’t know as much as I think I do.

TK: However, you were an agent for a couple of years.

WF: Yes, I was. We had Dr. J., George McGinnis, George Gervin, a lot of other guys.

TK: Why did you stop doing that?

WF: Because it’s a thankless job. Everybody’s whispering in these guys’ ears that they are worth more millions and they believe it. I also didn’t like the baby-sitting aspect of it.

TK: Which player on this current Knicks team comes closest to having the “Game Within the Game”?

WF: Stephon Marbury. He knows how to get into the paint, knows how to create. I think a lot of the criticism directed at him is unfair. He has a lot of savvy. I’ve always admired his game.

TK: How do you feel about the team overall?

WF: There’s a good chance for improvement because Isiah (Thomas) has the player’ respect, which is very important. But they have to get better defensively. You can’t just try to outscore the opposition. You look at the numbers: when they hold teams below 100, they win. When they have 20 or more assists, they win. Defense, you’ve got to demand it. If you don’t play “D”, you don’t play. If you don’t play as a team, you don’t play.

TK: Are you encouraged by Eddy Curry’s development?

WF: Yeah, he’s remarkable right now. And I see it continuing -- I don’t think it’s an aberration at this point. He will be able do it on the defensive end, too, one day, but he’s still learning the game. I’m astounded that he wasn’t taught that much in high school.