Now that the NBA and NHL have faded from view for the summer and NFL training camps are still weeks away, all local sports fans have to focus on are the Red Sox, the World Cup (which admittedly involves a small portion of fans), and the MSL (an even smaller portion). Because baseball will take center stage the rest of the summer, let’s take one last look at what else is going on in the wide, wide world of sports other than the daily grind of watching the Sox being chased by the Yankees. Or — shudder — vice versa.

• Patriots. Call me naïve, but I’m not sure I quite get it. One of the major topics circulating around national sports radio as we approach the opening of NFL camps is: were the Patriots a fluke? Did they have no business being in the Super Bowl last February, and were they just plain lucky to win it?

Patriots players and fans alike have every reason to be in an uproar about this. Didn’t New England win nine in a row, and 11 of 12, to finish off the season? Didn’t they beat every AFC playoff team except for Baltimore at least once during the season, including Pittsburgh and the Jets on the road? And as I recall, the Rams led the Super Bowl 3-0 in the first quarter, but never led again. Starting in late December, the Pats defeated Miami, Carolina, Oakland, Pittsburgh, and St. Louis. Other than the Panthers, are there any gimmes there?

Yet look at the latest lines posted by numerous oddsmakers for the 2003 Super Bowl: St. Louis, 5-2 to win it; Pittsburgh, 7-1; Philadelphia, 8-1; Oakland, 10-1; and the 49ers and Pats both at 12-1. The World Sports Book has Tampa, Miami, Indy, and Denver all at better odds than the Patriots, who are given the same odds as the freakin’ Redskins! The Redskins were 8-8 last year in a division where they played the Giants, Cowboys, and Cardinals twice!

Okay, I’ll give you this: New England will face a much tougher schedule this season than it did last year — a slate that will include Pittsburgh, Tennessee, Chicago, and Green Bay along with its AFC East foes. Nonetheless, have the Patriots gotten worse this past off-season? On the contrary, I think they have greatly improved themselves, and can still bolster their roster in the coming months because of ample salary-cap room available. Losing Drew Bledsoe and Terry Glenn was certainly not costly and most likely will be viewed as addition by subtraction, since we’ll be spared the soap-opera high drama that would likely have played out throughout camp, and we’ll ultimately benefit from the draft picks secured by those transactions. In addition, the Patriots have definitely strengthened their tight-end and receiving corps, and lost only Bryan Cox from the high-octane defense that shut down the Rams.

Pittsburgh’s the team to beat, eh? Well, the Steelers signed only one new player who is expected to step in and become a starter, but they didn’t really lose anyone, either. Nonetheless, if you are going to hitch your Super Bowl wagon to Kordell Stewart and Jerome Bettis — whose chronic groin injury is expected to debut around week four — I’d suggest you pull out your crying towels early. Yes, they’re still wailing in the Steel City about the berth in New Orleans that they were certain was theirs, but I seem to remember that the unheralded defense outplayed the vaunted one in that AFC title game, and so did the special-teams crews — and Pittsburgh lost at home with Bledsoe leading the Pats, not Tom Brady.

Were the Patriots a Super Bowl fluke? We’ll show you a fluke.

• Celtics. The news regarding the team raising its ticket prices should not have come as a surprise, since the organization had not done so in four seasons. Not that it should have, with the uninspired product it was putting on the floor as recently as two years ago. But local fans should be delighted the team’s performance this past season, along with its surprise march to the Eastern Conference Finals. In the upcoming months and seasons, however, we may have to deal with the frustration of the team’s recent showing being the best thing that will happen in quite a while.

Rodney Rodgers, a key contributor to this year’s team following his trade from Phoenix, is waiting for some team to show him the money, and that’s where the free-agent forward will hang his hat. He’s pretty much said that. No allegiances, no hometown discounts, no wanting to play for a contender. Highest bidder wins, just like on eBay. The Celts can’t afford him, nor do they expect to re-sign the surprising Erick Strickland, and will have to let them both walk. That’s what happens when you’re paying $24 million annually for the Paul Pierce–Antoine Walker tandem alone. Furthermore, as well as Kenny Anderson played (at times) this past season, he’ll be 32 years old when the season begins, and starting his 12th season. One has to expect that his best days are behind him, despite this being the season for him to strut his stuff for any free-agent shoppers in 2003. Nobody can tell me that Tony Battie, Mark Blount, or Vitaly Potapenko is the answer at center, and both the latter and forward Eric Williams will be damaged goods this fall when they return from off-season surgery.

Worse, the NBA finalist NJ Nets will be able to bring all their players back, and they still have a first-round draft pick (at #24) to use to improve their depth. The Celtics, accustomed to lottery picks in the last decade, will not pick until 50th in next week’s draft because of the Rodgers–Tony Delk acquisition. And the team has not exactly groomed last year’s picks, Kedrick Brown and Joseph Forte, for full-time action. Depth will again be a problem. Finally, even if the Green do manage to repeat this past season’s miracles, the Western Conference titans should again make mincemeat of their Eastern counterparts, as LA, Sacramento, Dallas, and even San Antonio remain far superior to anyone east of the Mississippi.

Walker and Pierce should continue to improve, and the team will no doubt provide many thrills again this upcoming season. But the standards and expectations have suddenly changed, and bigger things will be expected of the 2002-’03 Boston Celtics. After this past season’s improbable success, Celtic fans are spoiled, and playoff berths are now presumably viewed as a given. Too bad that the salary cap, injuries, age, and lack of depth will limit the team’s ability to take great steps forward.

• Bruins. Not much happening down on Causeway Street, and this does not bode well for the immediate future of the organization. GM Mike O’Connell is apparently unwilling to make preliminary financial pitches to Boston’s top-two free agents, Billy Guerin and Byron Dafoe. He’s allowing them to test the waters, rather than negotiating exclusively with the pair prior to the July 1 opening of the free-agent free-for-all. O’Connell asked the players’ agents what kind of money they were looking for, but the players didn’t bite, since they’d rather not potentially low-ball themselves when their market price could be much higher. Because of the potential for a labor stoppage in 2004, no team will offer either of these players more than a two-year deal, but Guerin will probably ask for, and receive, at least $10 million a year, and Dafoe, coming off a terrific regular season but a so-so postseason, probably will look for $6 million to $7 million per annum.

B’s fans, still seeing red as a result of the team’s performance in losing to the eighth seed in the opening round of the NHL playoffs, probably won’t be heartbroken if Dafoe is not re-signed, particularly if a Curtis Joseph could be signed in his place, but Guerin is a different story. In this day and age, a 40-plus goal scorer is worth $10 million, and the fact that he is Massachusetts born and bred makes him even more appealing. Would he take the proverbial hometown discount? Maybe. It would have be nice to ask, at least, especially since I can’t imagine that he’d be too keen on the idea of uprooting his wife and young children and moving for the third time in five years. Yet if he goes on the market, there is little doubt that the moneybag Rangers or another rich club would swoop in, and then what would the Bruins have left for scoring punch? Joe Thornton and Sergei Samsonov — though they’re still both shy of age 24 — along with veterans Glen Murray (a nifty disappearing act in the playoffs) and Brian Rolston, who will be 30 next February. And don’t forget that Joe and Sammy will both be up for new contracts at the end of this upcoming campaign.

Bruins execs need to start giving fans of the black and gold some reason to believe, to assure fans that management is doing everything in its power to make the team stronger this season. Yes, after the Patriots, Red Sox, and Celtics, it’s easy to forget that the Bruins were actually the best team in the East in the NHL last season (with Guerin and Dafoe arguably the team MVPs), but when you’re six and out to the hated Canadiens in the opening round of the postseason, then it’s difficult to dismiss the fact — in relation to the other three teams —that you’re the underachievers, the weakest link, and the "losers" of the bunch. The Bruins have to find a way to quell the fans’ anger, and not make it look as if they’ll just let the chips fall where they may. Otherwise, the Bruins will settle nicely into a role as the region’s fourth-most-popular team, and may start a disappointing acceleration into the depths of irrelevancy.

Spend the money. Sign Guerin. Sign Dafoe — or Cujo, or even Mike Richter. Hell, check with the Charlestown Chiefs on Reggie Dunlop’s availability. (Paging the brothers Hanson!) Just do something, while we still care.

Sporting Eye runs Mondays and Fridays at BostonPhoenix.com. Christopher Young can be reached at cyoung[a]phx.com.