It is easy to say that Michael Jordan is the best player (ever) in the NBA. It would be wrong to say that he is the entire Chicago Bulls.

It may be difficult for many people to remember, but when Jordan entered the league in 1984 the Bulls were nowhere near the championship-caliber team that they are now. In fact, they were pretty bad, even during the years in which Jordan was averaging better than 34 points a game.

Not until Scottie Pippen arrived in Chicago did the Bulls post a winning record in the Jordan era. And even with two All-Stars, the Bulls were not able to win it all until they acquired all the right pieces to the puzzle.

Well, folks, it is also easy to say that Allison Feaster is the best player (ever) in the Ivy League. It would also be wrong to say that she is the entire Harvard Crimson.

Many of you might be thinking to yourselves, "Is this guy seriously comparing Feaster to Jordan?" I'm not saying Feaster is the greatest women's basketball player ever, and last time I checked, she hadn't dunked from the foul line.

However, Feaster is to the Ivy League what Jordan is to the NBA--by far its most dominant player, with the potential to dictate the outcome of a game. To describe Feaster's play as "Jordanesque" would not be a stretch.

But I diverge. My point is this: some people claim that the Crimson would be nothing without Feaster. Those people are wrong.

Just as Jordan needed his Paxson, Cartwright, Kukoc and Harper; so does Feaster need her Basil, Janowski, Seanor and Miller. Jordan has Rodman, Longley, Buechler and Brown; Feaster has Russell, Sturdy, Kowal and Brandt.

The Harvard Crimson has more depth than the Mariana Trench. The players do not have to rely on Feaster to win games.

"If that's true," say the nonbelievers, "then why do they give Feaster the ball so much?"

Because, as Harvard Coach Kathy Delaney-Smith so eloquently puts it, "Why wouldn't we?"

If you played with the nation's leading scorer, you'd give her the rock too. However, it is not necessary for Harvard to go to such measures because the Crimson has plenty of talent.

Consider the fact that although Feaster is averaging nearly 29 points per game--leaving fewer points for her teammates to score--nine other Harvard players this season have set or tied their career-high totals for points scored in a game. Junior forward Sarah Russell, who plays Feaster's position, has accomplished the feat twice.

In rebounds per game, another area in which Feaster ranks among the top 20 in the nation, 12 different members of the Crimson have matched or bettered career marks. Russell, Suzie Miller and co-captain Megan Basil have each done it twice.

As for steals, a category in which Feaster owns the Harvard career record, eight other Harvard hoopsters have equaled or improved upon their highest single-game totals. What does all this personal achievement mean?

It means that although Feaster is putting up "Jordanesque" numbers, her teammates are still finding ways to excel. If Feaster actually were the entire team, how could so many other players rack up these career-best numbers?

They couldn't, so Feaster must not be the entire team. It's that simple.

Yes, Feaster probably makes her teammates better, as all great players do. But ultimately, Sarah Brandt has to bury her own shot from beyond the arc as the rest of the squad must do.

The bottom line is that the Harvard Crimson is not limited to what Allison Feaster can do. Like Jordan's Bulls, the Crimson needs all the links of its chain to be strong in order to take the next step toward success.

For Harvard, that next step is capturing the school's first ever NCAA Tournament win. With Feaster's so-called "supporting cast" turning in Emmy-caliber performances, 1998 could be the year that the Crimson's visit to the Big Dance becomes a victory dance.