Contract years, Developing Talent & Front Office Subterfuge

The work of a General Manager is easy to criticize, yet hard to fully quantify. Team owners are like dragons sleeping on their hoard of gold coins and other priceless treasures. Coaches want to build winning resumes. Players want to get paid. The GM has to be the go-between that gets all these parties (with differing motivations) on the same page. The GM has to get a coach the players he needs to win. The players want the promises they need before signing on the dotted line (salary, role, playing time, etc). And for the team owner, well, the GM has to placate this obstacle on a near daily basis and convince the owners not to devourer the GM on sight -- while suggesting that parting with part of their hoard (on the 1st and 15th of each month) is the smart thing to do.

At times the NBA can be distilled to purer components, of winning and losing, and of the honesty of the game. Yet, at other times the NBA can expand into a complex juggling act more akin to micromanagement in a strategy game, or a RTS click-fest. For players, the game is the game. It's simple in that way, and relies on skill, speed and quick reflexes -- a Video Game analogy would be the first person shooter. For coaches, it's series of complex decisions, not unlike the original turn based strategy game called "Chess". (you may have heard of it) The GM, though, has to delve into the previously mentioned RTS click-fest:

But instead, imagine dealing with salaries, egos, scouts, coaches, players and injuries . . . also less cannons, probably . . .

*Ahem* Back to the point . . . a GM's job is rarely done perfectly because of how difficult it tends to be. Some GM's are great talent evaluators (for example, there's Isiah Thomas, just look at the player's he has drafted in his career, most of them have been All-Stars or award winners in some regard: Vince Carter, Tracy McGrady, Marcus Camby, Damon Stoudamire, David Lee, and so on) but poor on other sides of their job description. Other GM's have good connections with other teams, and always seem to do business with them (look at Kevin O'Connor and all the deals he has made with Philly over the years). Some GM's are really good with managing money, while others are known for turning things around in short order. At the end of the day, though, the GM is a salesman. He is essentially selling his services to a consumer -- in this case the team owner. Part of sales is to buy low and sell high. Another part of sales is to be consciously deceptive in just what your wares are. That last part does not really apply fully to the GM - Team Owner relationship, but rather to the GM to GM relationship. Sometimes you get a lemon, but you have to pass it off as a safe family sedan. Other times you (as the GM) are working not against the team owner, the other GM's, but the actual assets -- the players and their agents.

You want to keep a good player on your team for the least amount of money it's going to take to keep him there. All Team Owners expect the GM to be able to do such a thing. This part of the job ties in directly with the buy low/sell high and deceptive doctrines. If the first step is acquiring a player (via a Trade, Free Agency or the Draft), then the next step is evaluating that player (though, we hope that some evaluations have taken place before the player is traded for/signed/drafted). The next logical step would be to give playing time to that player and develop him. The last step? Making a decision on that guy -- sign him again when his contract expires, trade him, or let him walk. Parts of the last step depend greatly on each of the previous steps.

• For example, say the team acquires player A. They evaluate him, see some things they like, some things he needs to improve on, and play him accordingly. He either gets better or worse. If he does well, he becomes more valuable to the team -- and more valuable as a player. His asking price may go up, and making the last step (in this case: deciding to keep him) harder to do. An example of this Jazz fans may be familiar with would be All-Star Mo Williams.
• Player B, on the other hand, does not appear to have much upside, does not make the most of his chances on the court, and is not in the future plans of the team. They can get rid of him in a variety of ways, the team's disinterest in retaining him opens up options for his removal. An example of this Jazz fans may be familiar with would be Kris Humphries.

It's not always this simple, though.

• What about Player C . . . the team that drafts him knows him best, and knows that there is hidden potential deep inside. If they go about normally giving him playing time, allow him to develop openly (instead of only during closed practices and workouts with the team), then other GM's may wish to pry him away. Even if the original team wishes to keep him, retaining him may become very difficult as the exposure led to quicker development, which led to a greater player value. This would be repeating the same mistake with Player A all over again. What if, instead, the team decides to develop him secretly, give him less exposure, drive his asking price down, remove interest other GMs would have in him, and basically, keep him on the "down low".

This is pretty much the only way to retain those people that you think *can* blow up (in a good way), without having to give them a lot of money to make them stay. Deron Williams deserves the contract he got. It's an expensive contract though. Some teams are forced to over-pay to retain their talent (don't need to look farther than a young, uninjured Andrei Kirilenko half a decade ago). In general, you want to avoid doing that. If anything, I think we can clearly place the curious case of C.J. Miles as an example of a Player C scenario.

At the end of C.J.'s first season he was getting more playing time, and in the last game of the season he played really well. How well? 23 points (8/13 fg, 2/5 3pt, 5/8 ft), 6 rebounds, 4 assists, 2 blocks, 1 steal -- as a rookie with extend playing time playing against a tough Western Conference team. Every off-season since then there have been fishy things going on. He was a consistent no-show in future summer leagues, but instead opted to work on his game by himself. During times of injury he would be pressed into the starting line-up, only to return to the end of the bench only a few days later. C.J. should have played more than he did in when he was on his rookie contract. The clock struck 12 on C.J.'s contract though, and the Jazz simply put themselves in a situation to match whatever contract someone threw his way by virtue of him being a restricted free agent. No one really bit, not knowing what they would be getting . . . until Oklahoma City offered him a 4 year $15 million dollar contract. We all know how that story ended, as the Jazz eventually matched. Was $3.75 million per season too much for C.J. Miles? Perhaps . . . but at the same time, it's a lot less than it could have been had C.J. been playing like he is now at this time last season. (or perhaps, getting the playing time that he is getting now at this time last season) Back then I thought the Jazz were (in chronological order) a) not developing C.J. enough, b) using him only for spot duty, c) giving his playing time to guys who did not deserve it.

This season Ceejay has been everything from a solid deep threat, a versatile 2nd option on offense, to invisible . . . sometimes all in the same week. This is his 4th season in the league, and his first where he has averaged over 11.5 mpg. I'm sure he would be better, more seasoned player than he currently is if he was playing 20 mpg every season after his rookie campaign. I'm also pretty sure that he wouldn't be on the Jazz then. In effect, one could directly point to a systematic way in which the Jazz brass (Sloan and O'Connor mostly) lowered interest in a prospect, sequestered him from exposure (he only got one short stint in the NBA DL), yet did not develop him for fear of losing him. At the end of the day the Jazz have C.J., but not the C.J. he could be right now, and C.J. is not earning as much as he perhaps thought he would be after his rookie contract expired.

The Jazz financial situation is horrible right now. If it does not improve shortly than there may be a few more Player A type situations in the future with key contributors Paul Millsap and Ronnie Brewer. The Jazz would love to keep them for reasonable contracts, though their development (and production) have elicited quite a bit of exposure. Good for their bank accounts, perhaps not so great for the Jazz.

That's where the micromanagement comes back into play. You want your players to be good, productive and develop . . . but you do not want to lose them to other teams after you put in all the hard work to make them useful. Gilbert Arenas comes to mind, he was drafted, developed, and then left to get paid in free agency. Right now the Jazz are playing the "front office subterfuge game" with some other young players that could possibly be helping the Jazz right now.

Morris Almond: He is a scorer's scorer, who despite having limited quickness and has played defense only once in his life, could be doing a whole lot more for this Jazz team. He's looked horrible in his rookie season with the Jazz where he never got to be involved in the plays that the regular rotation run that get swingmen easy buckets. He didn't play a minute with Deron Williams last year, and was relegated to garbage time spot up shooting from the corner. Reason for not getting playing time: He's behind a few key guys on the depth chart and doesn't rebound or defend as well as others. For some reason this has prevented him from playing one single second in the NBA-DL this season. Something fishy: Why hasn't he played in the D-League at all this season then, if there's no space for him on our current roster? Do the Jazz know that he's a raw gem that only seems to look better when he gets to play?  Utah is healthy now, so there's no real risk to put him in the game at all . . . maybe practice with the Jazz is better than games with the Flash? Or maybe they don't want him to get too much exposure right now? Utah has opted not to extend his contract, so seemingly he is out . . . but maybe they are trying to keep his going rate low so that they *can* still have a shot at retaining him for a while. After all, they scouted him, interviewed him, drafted him, are developing him . . . Harpring's contract expires next year, and the Jazz will need a wing player who can come off that Harpring curl and hit the mid-range jumper. Financial situation aside, that sounds like something the Jazz have in their laps right now with Almond. Alas, this is exactly not the contract type of year a young player wants to have (being buried on the bench). Co-incidentally, this is exactly the type of contract year the Jazz would want him to have . . . after all, they did the same thing with Ceejay, they know what they are doing.

Kyrylo Fesenko: Very large man (7'1, 300+ lbs.) with the same wingspan and standing reach as Greg Oden -- yet uninjured and a capable passer and interior defender who has, due to injuries, been pressed into defending the likes of Yao Ming to Andrew Bynum . . . and done so well. Very likely that he is more talented than the guy ahead of him on the depth chart (Jarron Collins), but lacks experience, familiarity with the system and seasoning. Reason for not getting playing time: Work ethic and personality appear to anchor this man to the bench, though at some level talent and ability should trump that. Something fishy: As a rookie, this wet behind the ears, 2nd round draft pick center joined the Jazz and played in 70 games, and played over 20 mpg. This player joined a playoff team that was contending for a championship. This player had no experience with the Jazz system prior (as a rookie) and ended up getting playing time over a limited, soft center who had much more experience in the system. This young player was Jarron Collins. What, did you think I was talking about Fesenko? Heck no, Fesenko has played only 200 minutes with the Jazz in his 2 year career, let alone played in 70 (@ 20 per) as a rookie. Why is there such a disparity between Collins' and Fesenko's early careers? I don't know, but it seems kind of fishy to me. Even more fishy is that Fes only had one stint in the NBA-DL this season (8 games), promptly did exactly what we'd want him to do (be a defensive presence who rebounded, blocked and changed shots, shot a high percentage and eventually was averaging a double double) . . . and was called back and never played again. Ever. Hmmmm . . . he improves, shows that he's good at what he does . . . and can be a free agent this season . . . 'need to reel that big boy in, and hide him somewhere!' (which was the original plan with drafting a little known, poorly scouted player from a minor European league in the first place) More so than Almond, I think that Fesenko has a future with the Jazz, or at the very least, in the NBA somewhere as teams always want size, and if the guy is talented, he's going to get a contract somewhere. If you gave him the playing time, I'm pretty sure that he'd be able to get Rookie Millsap type of numbers for sure.

Paul Millsap: Speaking of the 'Sap, he got some great exposure this season. He produced as a starter due to injuries to Carlos Boozer. He's a free agent, and he's going to get paid this off-season. No doubt about it. Interestingly enough, at the first whiff of a hobbled, rusty Carlos Boozer the Jazz sent 'Sap back to the bench and as his fantasy owners know firsthand, 'Sap just hasn't been the same since. Reason for being sent to the bench: Boozer was the starter before he got injured, the Jazz/Sloan doctrine on this is that you cannot lose your starting job due to injury. Something fishy: No one said anything about a starting job, but just let Paul start the first 4-5 games after Boozer comes back and then let Boozer slowly work his way back into playing shape, and then give Boozer the starting spot. A lot of teams do this, they bring a starter back from injury on the bench just to test things out a bit. Out of all of my conspiracies, this is among the weakest -- though I don't see why the Jazz didn't keep starting Millsap for 4 games while Boozer (who was playing limited minutes) worked his way back into starting shape. For one thing, this almost looks like a directed attempt to reduce Millsap's exposure (for the open market). It's probably not, but it just looks fishy -- during a contract year, no less.

Kosta Koufos: Let's just say that if this 19 year old was playing Brook Lopez type of minutes on a bad team we'd see Brook Lopez-ish production out of Kosta. Yet, a guy who is clearly more talented than Collins, and is a very hard worker (much more than Fesenko has shown), is completely lost on this team. Kosta isn't on the active roster right now, isn't playing in the development league, and isn't developing. Reason for not getting playing time: Apparently he doesn't know the plays. Sure, he's a smart shot blocking 7 footer who has a nice offensive game AND is a very hard worker who hustles . . . but he's not going to get to play because by playing him he would then be in a position to actually learn the plays, and then we would have even less of an excuse for why he isn't playing. He's almost a gestalt character that takes the size (mostly) and shot blocking of Fess, with the hustle and work ethic of Collins . . . and gets none of the playing time that he should. Something fishy: There is no good reason not to play this guy, develop him with real NBA minutes, or even send him to the NBA D-League for some in game action. He hasn't seen the developmental league at all in his career, instead getting better by wearing suits next to Carlos Boozer for 50+ games. That's another thing, he got some very minor playing time just because of injuries . . . this season was a prime season to be forced into playing and developing younger talent. Sloan had to work many games without being able to call on veteran bigmen . . . but still he elected to instead play Matt Harpring at power forward. Huh?

It's not that difficult to imagine that the Jazz are hurting their futures by risking not getting these guys playing time because they do not want to lose them to other teams . . . but they also get nothing out of these guys. Other teams play younger players during the regular season so that they may become contributors to that team . . . and even help them in the playoffs. Heck, our team did this with Paul Millsap as a rookie, or Shandon Anderson (more on him later), or Bryon Russell and a host of others. There's no doubt in my mind that if Fess of Kosta were getting 12-15 mpg this season that one of them would be able to contribute in the playoffs for us. Instead the development time has become much longer for a bunch of guys who could be helping us now. Also, it's not that difficult to imagine that the Jazz are hurting the values of their players by flat out burying them during contract years. No playing time = no exposure and no stats = bargain prices. They did this with C.J., and if they had a time machine, would probably like to do so with others as well.

The way that the Jazz develop talent seems to be highly unequal. Some young guys get regular burn, while others don't. This time is directly proportional towards development. I think that Jazz Brass feel the financial side to all of this needs to take precedence over the immediate development and returns from the players on the roster. The Jazz gave good minutes to a solid player (Shandon Anderson) as a rookie, and eventually left the team, the Jazz get nothing in the long term for it. The Jazz gave good minutes to a very talented player (Andrei Kirilenko), and end up having to really over-pay to keep him on the team. The Jazz don't want to get into anything like that again, and now underplay most guys during the span of their rookie contracts, so they they do not have to over-pay.

C.J., only after the Jazz matched an offer he got from another team, is finally getting playing time -- but as a 4th year guard with the potential that he had when he was drafted, he is behind where he should be. They seem to be guilty of doing that with Almond and Fesenko by not playing them in the NBA, nor allowing them to rack up stats in the D-League . . . which would have been a great way to audition for other teams during contract years -- or you know, actually get better and be able to help OUR team.

Some Jazz apologists feel like the practices the Jazz have are of greater value to a younger player than actually playing in the development league, or even playing in the NBA on poorer quality teams. I think that this is a very haughty thing to say . . . especially with how closely the Jazz *can* keep an eye on things with their development team being only a few miles away and the coach of that team is related to Jerry Sloan -- it almost seems like a no-brainer to send the kids down at least once each when none of them are even on the active roster with the Jazz. They threw C.J. a bone once by doing that, by giving him a chance to play, and that improved his morale. Why not do the same for a younger player this season? Sloan even goes out to harp on how great the D-League is, and how he wishes they had that when he first came into the league. If it's so great, why not use it, now that the rest of the guys are healthy?

As for how great the Jazz practices are . . . they rarely get a chance to practice on the road (they only practice on days off, and now at the end of the season, with the playoffs coming up, there may be less than the regular number of practices on off-days), so the younglings are getting even less time to improve than normal. This clearly is the case where the GM, at the behest of saving the team owner money, works with the coaches to screw the players out of money / job satisfaction. Or maybe that's by design, especially in their contract years?

Dollar$ and Cent$: Just say 'No' to the 2009 NBA Draft

First of all, if you are a Pete Maravich/Ricky Rubio fan, then you don't need to worry about this draft. Secondly, if you are the Utah Jazz, you don't want nothing to do with this one either, but for an entirely different reason: money. Money is a huge big deal in the NBA -- and in more than that art imitates life type of way. People want to get paid. (Even if they don't deserve it) Utah -- when healthy -- is a pretty nice team. In order to keep this team together the Jazz Brass (particularly Jazz GM Kevin O'Connor) is going to have to get new team owner Greg Miller to open the, how do you say, "cheque book". The salary situation is bananas. (but not in the "it changes every day" type of way) Just take a look for yourself. This off season the Jazz may have to ink new deals for Carlos Boozer, Mehmet Okur, Paul Millsap, Jarron Collins and Kyrylo Fesenko -- essentially all the bigmen on the roster except for Andrei Kirilenko and current rookie Kosta Koufos.

Boozer	Okur	Millsap	Fesenko	Collins
$12.7 mill next year, looking for more according to interview he gave weeks ago to ESPN	$9 mill next year, looking for more (according to Turkish media)	Making less than $800k, Restricted Free Agent will be offered 10x that on the market at least	Team option for less than $900k	Somehow making $2 mill this year

That's not all the free agents though, as the Jazz will need to figure out what they are doing with their point guard situation (both back-ups, Brevin Knight and Ronnie Price, have expiring contracts) and that Morris Almond guy . . . well, it's a damn shame what happened to that guy. The year after that (i.e. the Off-Season of 2010) there needs to be some money for Ronnie Brewer (who's qualifying offer is going to be at a hair under $4 million per season), Matt Harpring (who, for whatever reason, we are incapable of getting rid of) and anyone else who didn't get taken care of this off-season.

The 'best' thing is to find out which guys we really want, and develop a strategy to keep them. Out of all of those names the most important free agents (right now) are Boozer, Okur, Millsap, Brewer and Knight. Championship teams do not depend on the services of guys like Jarron Collins, or Ronnie Price. Brewer does not need a new deal until next season. Mehmet Okur has not made any waves about opting out, unlike Boozer, so both of them 'could' still be on the books for the next year. (At the rate of $9 million and $12.7 million respectively) If all three are on the books then we only really need to worry about Knight and Millsap. The back-up PG situation can be handled with part of the exception. (I could be wrong, as I'm not a cap-ologist) The rest of the money can be used on Millsap. (What money? Where is this money coming from? The Jazz are already over the cap . . . there IS no more money!) The closer to reality we get (and hence, the closer to actually dealing with the cap) the closer we get to recognizing that this situation sucks.

There just isn't enough money to go around. If you bare bones it, have Boozer opt out (and not be resigned by the Jazz), let Collins and Price walk, jettison Fesenko with the team option on his contract -- then you'll have enough money to go around for Millsap, Okur, Brewer and Knight over the next two season . . . but only have 9 players on the roster. You're not allowed to have only 9 players on your roster. The Jazz will have to pick up a few low cost scrubs in order to fill out the roster -- not a bad move, but still, there's no guarantee that Boozer will opt out now (even though he said that he would), and secondly, the Jazz may not (for whatever reason) get rid of Collins, Price *or* Fesenko. Under Larry H. Miller, R.I.P., the Jazz were a small town family more than they were a business. Guys like Harpring and Collins had expiring contracts a few seasons ago, and they were given (back then) seriously over priced golden handshake deals. It should have ended there, but I don't know if it really will. So, okay, let's scratch that idea of the Jazz actually going to 'not' sign company men. I really do not have a great solution to the Jazz financial situation, but, I do know where some money can be saved: the 2009 NBA Draft.

Right now the Jazz are not going to go over the hump with a late 1st round pick and a late 2nd round pick. Especially not from this upcoming draft. The last thing the Jazz need is to use money on a guaranteed contract that'll eat up some of the money that would be better served being spent on the likes of Millsap or Brevin Knight. Luckily, the Jazz are in just the position to get rid of their draft picks this year. We owe Philly a 1st round pick (from the Korver trade), and Philly owes Minnesota a 1st round pick (Rodney Carney trade). If the Jazz pick lower than 22nd in this year, Minnesota will get our pick. That helps out everyone involved, especially the Jazz. The hard part, though, is getting a good enough record to finish the season with so that we are picking at 22 or lower. The Jazz will need to finish with one of the top 9 records in the league when all is said and done. Where are we today? Sitting at #10, percentage points behind New Orleans. If Utah can leapfrog New Orleans, Portland and Houston we'll be in the clear -- while keeping Dallas, Atlanta and Phoenix behind us in the standings. Sounds very plausible, and while I'd love to give up on a very late 1st round draft pick and save money, I don't know how possible this is going to end up being. The longer we hold onto the pick that we owe Philly -- that they'll give to Minnesota -- the better the pick can possibly get (going upwards from #22 to getting near the lotto if we hold it till 2013). Better to get rid of it sooner, rather than later.

The 2nd round pick is an entirely different animal, as the Jazz may be willing to keep it in plans of a draft and stash with another International (most likely European) player. This way the money for that guy is not on the books, but we still keep the rights to him. We're currently doing this with International Men of Mystery Tadija Dragicevic and Ante Tomic. As far as I am concerned, we have enough European bigmen to last a few seasons. I don't think that European swingmen are the answer to our problems. Nor do I think that our future back-up PG is going to be a European point guard. Sure, we could draft and stash *any* International player, but I don't know how great our scouting of South America is. (If we're not getting a Euro, he'll be from the Americas somewhere -- don't see us drafting an Asian or African player -- I really don't think we're actively scouting those parts of the world) The answer here, again, appears to be giving our pick to Philly, as we still owe them future considerations in the 2nd round because of the Fesenko-Hill trade a few years back.

We skip the draft this season, focus on the players we have, and save some money right now. I think that's not a bad idea at all. Plus, then the next year's draft (2010), we'll have plenty of picks that we can use as assets for trades, or well, you know, draft picks. We may have a few holes to fill two off-seasons from now. We'll have two 1st round picks (our own, hopefully a low pick; and the Knicks unprotected, possibly lotto, pick). I'm sure both of those picks could be traded to a bad team if we wanted to move up in the draft . . . I dunno . . . if we actually find someone that we'd like to add to the team.

In completely unrelated news, doesn't this kid look like Fesenko's younger brother? This guy is Donatas Motiejunas, a Lithuanian center that projects to be a lotto pick in the 1st round of the 2010 NBA Draft. I don't know much about the kid, but I do know that unless he's the reincarnation of Wilt, I don't want the Jazz to ever get close to drafting this guy. We have enough young center prospects that we're not developing already.

Things to look for this season: Carlos Boozer

Boozer is in a special group -- no, I'm not talking about him being one of the very few people to average 20 and 10 over the last two seasons -- I'm talking about a productive player for the Utah Jazz that Jazz fans love to hate, and hate to love; yet the rest of the media and fans seem to think he's a pretty good player. It's easy when you're a good player, and loved -- and thus any flaws in your game that you may or may not have are forgiven. Guys like John Stockton, Jeff Hornacek and Deron Williams fall neatly in this group. It is also easy when you are a bad player, and hated -- and everyone knows that you are a "bad guy", or crappy. Guys like John Amaechi and lovable loser Greg Ostertag fit the bill.

There is this one other category, though, where fans don't really know what to make of them. They are very talented players . . . but somehow their flaws are not absolved like those of other players in higher regard. This group is filled with the Karl Malones and Carlos Boozers of the franchise. Take Malone for example . . . he's not loved all over the world, but no one doubts his abilities as a player. No one usually, except Jazz fans who are divided into thinking that he was "Awesome" or alternatively, "Not Awesome Enough". Stockton is a flawless God, while Malone is regarded as the guy who held him back in some circles. I find this ridiculous . . . because we've seen point guards on bad teams put up good numbers but not win shit (Andre Miller in Cleveland, for example) just like scorers on bad teams who put up good numbers and don't win (Like Carmelo Anthony in Denver). Stockton needed a guy who could put the ball in the basket, and Karl did that better than any other player in NBA history save for Kareem Abdul-Jabbar.

What does this have to do with Carlos Boozer? Well, for starters, Boozer is a high scoring power forward whose offensive contributions to our team wins games. His defense has been a shadow of what it was when he played in Cleveland though -- and more over, his contributions to the team as a whole, have been greatly reduced in some sort of NBA fan revisionism. Easily one can see that Carlos Boozer isn't perfect . . . but a lot of teams would still start him -- including our team. (Even if he isn't adored but all)

This looks to be a big year in the life of Carlos Boozer -- not only is it a make or break year for the team financially, but it's a year where he can opt out of his contract and demand a max salary. Does he deserve it? Probably not, but when teams are willing to pay Rashard Lewis $14.9 million dollars for less than 5.5 rpg (BTW, Lewis plays the 4 for Orlando apparently) one can imagine a guy who rebounds more than twice that amount per game would earn himself a considerably large contract. Double doubles pay the bills in the NBA. So what can we expect from C-Booz this year?

1. Unless he gets a season ending injury, he's opting out: This is going to happen. Deron Williams even commented on it during the summer that it's purely a financial move by Boozer that he would do, if he was in his place. The only way that I see Booz not opting out is if he has a season ending injury that would limit his max asking price on the open market. Otherwise, he's going to have a contract year like no other in recent Utah Jazz history.
2. He's going to score and rebound like crazy: We tend to focus on the negative as fans. Let's take a look at what Boozer has given us over the last two seasons: over 800 rebounds per season and over 1500 points per season. His career stats are 17 and 10, which is what Memo averaged for half a season, only in the games where he played over 35 mpg. It's hard to win the game if you don't have the ball. One of the most frequent ways a team gets the ball is through rebounds. Carlos rebounds. It's hard to win the game if you don't put the ball in the basket. Carlos has averaged 8.75 FGM and 3.5 FTM in the past two seasons, for a combined 21 points (at the very least average) every game. I can imagine that he's going to go a little nuts during a contract year and get something like 25 and 12 this season. It may be a lofty goal, but I can easily see him putting up the shots to get 25 for a season -- especially when money is on the line.
3. Nothing increases the size of your next contract like winning: Yes, Boozer *may* be about the money (I don't know how true this is), and people everywhere doubt his sincerity . . . but if there is any season for him to be all about winning it is this season. If the Jazz get through the 2nd round it will be because of many reasons. One of the largest reasons would have to be Carlos Boozer, and a rediscovery of how to play interior defense. Yes, Boozer *can* play defense . . . we've seen how quickly he can move on offense, and his fundamentals . . . he used to block shots back in Cleveland in addition to being a good one on one post defender. Jerry Sloan has made it a point this season to stress defense, and you can see for yourself that Carlos is being more active on defense, and putting up more resistance to people scoring on him. For the Jazz it may mean the difference between 6 playoff wins and more than 8 playoff wins. For Carlos Boozer it may mean the difference between a big phat contract, and one that eclipses the Gross National Product of some developing nations.

Things to look for this season: Jarron Collins

We'll get to Jarron in a minute, but first we have to look at how we got to Jarron in the first place. Jarron is a product of the Utah Jazz scouting team and has developed during his entire career as a product of our system. This, invariably, causes a player to have more relative value in our system, than in any other. (Look a guys like Greg Ostertag, Bryon Russell, and countless others) He would have a hard time finding a spot on another team -- especially with the suggestion that refs will call flopping more seriously this season. What is Jarron Collins? He's a 6'11 molasses footed center who does not rebound, does not play defense, and does not play offense. Really, he is only good at the mental aspects of the game -- pretty much the only things he has done right on the court have been to flop, and get offensive fouls called on Shaquille O'Neal back in the day -- which would make Shaq frustrated, and have him make more mistakes down the road. If we were smart, we'd get rid of him. We just may get that chance as Jarron is in the last year of his insane contract extension that he got a few seasons back -- insane in that he got one in the first play. During this 2008-2009 season Jarron Collins will make approximately $2,074,302. (More than double what Paul Millsap expects to make this season.)

There are several obstacles which prevent us from making a clean break from Jarron though. First of all, he's pretty much well liked by the rest of the team. He's like the token nerdy/smart guy that you keep around when you are having trouble with your Digital Video Recorder, or when you need someone to set up your wireless Internet at home. Heck, he's a member of the Kappa Alpha Order . . . how do you replace someone like that? Most likely the same way that we got him -- through scouting, drafting and developing his replacements.

I've love to just let him walk, but if what we've done with Harpring is any example, he's probably going to get some ridiculous golden handshake deal for all of his services to the franchise over his career. He was drafted in 2001, and as a Rookie he started in 68 of the 70 games he played for the Jazz. He's going to turn 30 years old this season and has played in over 450 games for Utah. The first 5 seasons here he was averaging 20 mpg, and these last two he's hovered around 10 mpg. He has made a stink about this though. (Apparently the Internet cannot currently support my argument, but I've read it that he was unhappy with having his minutes slashed in half) That said, what are three things to look out for this season, from the man we affectionately call Tree?

1. What you see is what you get: Jarron Collins does not improve, and actually, you can argue that he's only gotten worse over the past 7 seasons. He shot nearly a career low last season (43.9 fg%) and did manage to shoot a career low from the ft line (62.2 ft%). His rebounding numbers extrapolated over a 36 minute stint are 1.5 rebounds less than when he was a rookie. Collins is not going to improve vastly this season, one can only hope that his play continues to slide (in this, a contract season) that the Jazz Brass decide to just roll the dice on Kyrylo Fesenko, Kosta Koufos and Ante Tomic next season.
2. Must work hard on transition: Do I mean he has to work hard running up the floor to get transition baskets? No, I mean he has to work hard on developing into a veteran coach in the locker room type of guy. He needs to hang out with Coach Ty Corbin quite a bit and find a way to tap his vast storehouse of NBA Lore and use it to teach younger players. Jeff Hornacek did not have to do any of this, he just retired and called it a career. Then he became a coach after. Collins probably still wants to earn an NBA paycheck for another few seasons . . . hence, the need to transition. By Drafting/Trading for three guys 7 foot and above in the past two seasons it's pretty clear that they aren't going to be hoping to keep Collins around as a player for the next 10 years.
3. If he plays 70 games again this season, it is bad news: He played in 70 games last season. That is a lot games to go out and manage to grab a sum total of 116 rebounds, or score 118 points, or block 6 shots. 70 games, wow! That tells me a few things -- that for whatever reason, we had to use him and instead of playing Fesenko for 10 mpg, Kyrylo was sitting behind the bench in a suit. If guys like Koufos and Fesenko spend this next season with DNP-CD's and DNP-INJ's then it is bad news for the Jazz. Collins just isn't that good. And if he continues to play in games (stifling the development of our younger centers) then it just may very well mean that Kevin O'Connor is going to offer Jarron a contract next off season.

If Jarron Collins isn't playing with Gordan Giricek in Europe next season, it means we are in deep trouble, Jazz fans . . .

Things to look for this season: C.J. Miles

Ceejay had a newsworthy summer -- like last season, but even more absurd this time around. As a quick recap, C.J. opted not to play in the Rocky Mountain Review Summer League for the Jazz for the 2nd straight year (something which made life hard for him under Jerry Sloan the next season); the Jazz made him a restricted Free Agent anyway by offering him the minimum that they had to; he didn't sign that contract and played the waiting game; eventually Oklahoma City offered him a multi-million dollar, multi-year contract ($15 mill / 4 years); the Jazz then waited a full week; before finally matching the offer sheet, which it was concluded was dirt cheap. I can only hope that his 2008-2009 season will be more eventful than his off-season -- which really was 'much ado about nothing'. (He was a young RFA who was offered a pretty cheap contract for 4 years and was matched)

The next step, now that he has some level of financial security (unless his financial planner is MC Hammer), is to actually work on getting that next contract after this one that he just signed. He does have his work cut out for him this season has he has to develop from a 'that guy who plays when we have injured starters' to 'that guy who always contributes'. Sure, the Jazz have a legion of swingmen who can give other teams several looks: Ronnie Brewer (6'7) -- starts at the 2, and can play 3 Andrei Kirilenko (6'9) -- starts at the 3, and can play 2 Kyle Korver (6'7) -- can play the 2 or the 3 Matt Harpring (6'7) -- can play the 3 or the 2 Morris Almond (6'6) -- can play the 2 or the 3 Paul Millsap (6'8) -- can play the 3 Ronnie Price (6'2) -- can play the 2 But . . . there is only 96 minutes at the swing spots to give out to those guys -- and one other guy -- C.J. Miles. For him (or anyone) that's a lot of competition.

One thing that C.J. has going for him is that in his 120 game career (+8 in the playoffs), is that he just turned 21, and is the youngest out of that entire crew. Additionally, aside from Harpring and Kirilenko, he's been with the team the longest (this will be his 4th training camp with the Jazz). Essentially, he has the most NBA experience with the Jazz out of that younger shooting guard crew, while being the youngest.

Another 'thing' that C.J. can be happy about is that the Jazz seem to do well in games where he actually starts (9 - 4 last season, 5 - 1 in the last 41 games of the regular season). In those games he has scored 11, 6, 7, 6, 8, 2, 7, 9, 2, 13, 4, 7, 29 -- which averages out to 8.5 ppg in 20 mpg. That's a nice improvement over his season averages of 5 ppg off of 11.5 mpg. He spreads the floor pretty well, and shot the ball at a very acceptable rate for a shooting guard last season: 47.9 fg%, 39.0 3pt%, 78.8 ft%. When extrapolated to playing 36 mpg he (statistically) becomes a 15.5 ppg scorer who also gets you over 4 rpg, nearly 3 apg, and nearly 2 spg. (And yes, for those who wanted to know, that's basically what Hornacek was giving the Jazz in those glory years) Should C.J. be playing 36 mpg next season, or even start for the Utah Jazz? Mostly definitely no, but he does have the tools to be a solid contributor.

What are three things we should look for this season?

1. Just be on the floor more -- Play in 75 games, and averaging greater than 13 mpg for the season should be a good start for Miles. His career has gone from 23 games to 37 games to 60 last season. The Jazz coaching staff should try to get him playing in almost every game by at least, the 2nd quarter -- after all, the Jazz Brass didn't sign him to a $15 million dollar contract just so he could continue collecting splinters on the bench. Kyle Korver can become a free agent, and really, the Jazz should focus on a guy like Miles who can become an okay defensive player instead of giving playing time to the pacifier that is Kyle Korver (he shuts up an immediate need, but may slow down progress in other areas).
2. Be a better shooter -- Again, the main competition for playing time right now appears to be Kyle Korver. I do love seeing Korver knock down threes, but I do believe that the future can be Miles. In order for Miles to be on the floor more one of the things he needs to do is become a better shooter -- particularly from three and from the free throw line (two Korver specialties). For the majority of the season CJ was shooting around 43 % from three, but it tapered off as the season finished. He needs to finish above 40% to be considered a really good three point shooter. Additionally, as a guard he needs to be hitting above 80% from the free throw line. I'm not expecting him to become one of those 88-92 ft% shooters, but he needs to be better than Deron Williams for sure. (If he's not, then there's no point in having him in the game at the end of the game when the other team is fouling) If he's going to get playing time at all, it should be at shooting guard, and if he's going to get playing time at shooting guard, he has to be at least comparable to his competition there. He needs to be a high 40%/40+%/80+% guy. Right now he's a high 40%/high 30%/high 70% guy. Korver's career averages (5 seasons) are 40+%/40+%/high 80%. [With the Jazz last season Kover was a 47.4 fg%/38.8 3pt%/91.7ft% guy] For Ceejay to take some of Kyle's minutes, he's going to have to shoot that efficiently, or near to it.
3. Continue getting better on defense -- One thing that Ceejay can get better at is on defense. He's only going to get increasingly stronger, and right now is miles (if you excuse the pun) ahead of Korver in terms of foot speed, quickness, lateral quickness and athleticism. For example, Korver plays more minutes per game, but gets less steals than Miles. At some point, Jerry Sloan is going to buckle and end up playing whomever can play defense better . . . and Miles has the tools to get better (especially when you factor in that he's only 21 and he's going into his 4th season in the NBA), Korver is going to be 27 by the time the playoffs roll around this season, and he's not getting any younger, or quicker. Eventually C.J. Miles should get better at defense (keep improving at his current rate, he doesn't need to make a quantum leap), and he should eventually start to play more regularly, and more minutes per game.

Basically, what we need to look for this season is the continued improvement of CJ, he's a young player still, but he's not a rookie, or someone who doesn't understand the game. He's going into his 4th season, and as such, his expectations should be higher than that of someone like Morris Almond. Look for improvement, and if he is able to display said improvement, he should get more playing time. Deron Williams is a huge CJ fan and suggests that we should expect as much. [They were both picked by the Jazz in the 2005 NBA Draft, and both were raised and went to high school in Dallas, Texas]

Adrian Dantley -- better late than never

No doubt by now we've all heard the good news -- that Adrian Dantley is now, finally, a member of the Basketball Hall of Fame. In one of the great mysteries of the cosmos, he has been overlooked for this honor for quite a long time. In respect for that abnormality I am posting this article about it a few days late (in solidarity of him being in the Hall a few years late). Either that, or I've been busy lately. Anyway, it's pretty ridiculous that AD "was a finalist six times before finally getting at least 18 votes from the 24-member Honors Committee," (Steven Luhm, via the Salt Lake Tribune, 2008). It's ridiculous, but after looking over how generally insane people are with how they vote on sports, it's not far fetched. But just so everyone is up to speed on what he accomplished in his career, let's review:

* Career averages of 24.3 ppg (54.0 fg%, 8.7 FTA/Game, 81.8 ft%), 5.7 rpg, 3.0 apg, and 1.0 spg * "Glory years" between 1979-1980 season and 1985-1986 season where he averaged 28.0 ppg, 30.7 ppg, 30.3 ppg, 30.7 ppg, 30.6 ppg, 26.6 ppg and 29.8 ppg in consecutive seasons * Scored over 23,100 points in his career (23rd best all time) * Career average of 24.3 ppg (17th best all time) * Top 5 in PPG 5 different times: #3 (1979-1980), #1 (1980-1981), #3 (1981-1982), #1 (1983-1984), #2 (1985-1986) * Career average of 54.0 fg% (20th best all time) * Career True Shooting percentage of 61.7% (4th best all time) * Made 6832 free throws (6th best all time) out of 8351 takes (11th best all time) in his career * Career Offensive Rating of 119.3 (8th best all time) * NBA Rookie of the year in 1976-1977 * 6 time NBA All Star (1979-1980, 1980-1981, 1981-1982, 1983-1984, 1984-1985 and 1985-1986) * All-NBA 2nd team (1980-1981, 1983-1984) * 1976 Olympic Men's Basketball Gold Medal * NCAA AP All-American 1st team (1974-1975, 1975-1976)

Photograph: Deseret Morning News Archives

So, if you didn't already know, he was a beast. He was "The Man" for those Utah Jazz teams and bridged the gap between those early, pathetic New Orleans Jazz teams and the Stockton and Malone powerhouse Utah Jazz teams of the late 80's and beyond. More than any of his stats, Adrian Dantley brought the wins. Who was The Man on the first Utah Jazz team to win the Midwest Division title? Dantley was. [since then the Jazz have been among the leaders in Midwest and Northwest Division titles] Who was The Man on the first Utah Jazz team to make the playoffs? Dantley was. Who was The Man on the first Utah Jazz team to win a playoff series? Yeah, that's right . . . Adrian Dantley. [Pistol Pete didn't do any of those things] In his later years he did take some time to mentor younger players (this is a 3:48 minute video of his career, btw) like Karl Malone and Joe Dumars, and teach them about, among other things, hard work and discipline. For all his NBA greatness, he was under-appreciated as a player -- and his career has been overlooked for quite some time.

Back in college he was destroying people -- and averaged 28.6 ppg and 10.2 rpg in 1974-1975, and in his last season of NCAA ball he averaged 30.4 ppg and 10.1 rpg. He was named National Player of the Year in 1975-1976. He was a huge part of their program, yet when he was informed that he would finally be making the hall the news hardly caused any ripple at all back there. (In fact, they actually picked up on a news report from the Deseret Morning News for their information. Isn't he an alumni member? Don't they even care for their own?)

After being The Man on a Gold Medal winning team in the Olympics he was the NBA Rookie of the year for the Buffalo Braves. The majority of his best playing days were with the Utah Jazz -- but even they seem to share part of the blame for over looking Dantley. (A crime that not only the Hall of Fame board selection committee is guilty of...)

"It's long, long, long overdue. It's an absolute disgrace that he's had to wait this long. It's terrible. I just think it's a disgrace that it didn't happen long before," said Tom Nissalke, who was Jazz coach when then-general manager Frank Layden traded Spencer Haywood to Los Angeles for Dantley in September 1979, just a few months after the Jazz moved to Salt Lake City and before they played their first game in the old Salt Palace. (T. Nissalke, via the Deseret Morning News, 2008)

Frank Layden adds that "It's long overdue and well-deserved," (Desert Morning News, 2008) but is quick to admit that part of the reason could be because Dantley's number was not even retired by the Jazz up until two years ago. (Probably should have been the 2nd or 3rd retired Jersey, but ended up being the 8th -- and most recent -- retiree in Jazz franchise history) How's that for being overlooked?

Though the Utah contingent of Layden and Nissalke are equally quick to point out that even if Adrian never played a single game in the NBA, that he should have been in the Hall of Fame because of his ridiculously outstanding High School, Collegiate and Olympic career -- and that his status of his jersey being retired is a highly invalid reason for not voting him into the Hall of Fame earlier. (btw, his High School record is 52-7) That said, he was an invaluable part of the Utah Jazz franchise, and we are all glad that he did play in the NBA.

"He carried us, he was the franchise," recalled Mark Eaton. "He was the guy you could count on for 30 [points] every night -- the one bona fide All-Star we had." (Mark Eaton via The Salt Lake Tribune, 2008)

Eaton would know, because Dantley scored enough for the both of them in the early part of Mark's career. AD was much more than just a scorer for the Jazz. The Jazz franchise had just moved to Utah -- and were still in financial trouble. (Which is why they traded their draft rights to Dominique Wilkins to Atlanta for cash back in 1981) They even played an entire season without a location name on their jerseys because there were fears that they would quickly have to move to another city mid-season! Adrian's winning ways helped to build a fanbase in Utah -- and if it wasn't for him, perhaps the Jazz would have been playing in Oklahoma City all these years? Who knows . . . What we do know, is that Adrian Dantley is finally a member of the storied Basketball Hall of Fame.

Photographed by Scott Cunningham for NBAE/Getty Images

To that I say that: It's better late than never.

Photographed by Nathaniel S. Butler for NBAE/Getty Images

YouTube Tuesdays! Andrei Kirilenko is still a bad, bad man

Okay, let's get this right out there. Andrei Kirilenko is overpaid. He is overpaid like crazy. That said, his is not the worst contract in the NBA, nor is he the worst player in the world. He's still a productive player -- flat out amazing on some nights, like when he pretty much single-handily beat the LA Lakers when Boozer and Memo were injured -- just not a meal-ticket Max contract player. Part of this is due to his production. He's still quite efficient, but he doesn't get a chance to produce much on the floor because he barely plays 30 mpg because guys like Matt Harpring need playing time in Jerry Sloan's system, it's no big secret that when he plays 37 mpg he puts up All-Star numbers. That said ... Boozer can't defend like him, Memo can't pass like him, Millsap can't shoot like him, Korver can't tip passes away like him and cause defections, and Harpring can't cover ground and be a weak side shot blocker like him. Brewer gets eaten alive on man-to-man defense, while Andrei gets the call in the 4th quarter. Similar to how Deron is one of the best point guards in the league (pretty much within the Top 2 or 3), Andrei is still one of the best players on the Utah Jazz. Watch this video (NSFW, unless your work is cool with 2pac) for the video evidence of how useful he still is.

Andrei Kirilenko video [5:12] posted on YouTube by 8hanky8

Yeah. This video is all recent stuff and doesn't include him blocking guys like Yao and Dirk like he is apt to do on occasion.

The NBA's next target: India. Why India? Why not?

+

=

Anything is possible? Photo courtesy of Adidas . . . and yes, that's Kevin Garnett in Agra, India

I first heard about this story from a Tom Ziller blog @ the Fanhouse. It's taken me some time to really get my feelings about this subject, obviously so as this story is over a month old now. Really, how conflicted should I be -- my favorite sport to watch on TV is basketball, and I used to live in India and complain about the lack of NBA coverage there. (You can imagine me getting to the hospital late some mornings because I was waiting on ESPN's Java based monster to update the score of some meaningless Jazz/Sonics regular season game back in 2002 -- gotta love that +10:30 time difference)

David Stern has recently been talking up international basketball because of the Olympics. The NBA/China link is quite established, and plans for establishing a basketball league in that nation currently exist. "[Though] Stern said the [NBA] does not see China as an entry point to Asia. India could be next on the NBA's radar. Stern said NBA officials have met in Beijing with Indian authorities, and the league stages its first Basketball Without Borders events in India this summer. "We think that [India] is a very promising market." (Andrew Bagnato, AP sports writer via. CBC Sports) Getting involved in China seems like a slam dunk with their large population, potential economic force and active NBA players (Yao and Yi).

There are no major Indian basketball players knocking on the door to the NBA like Yao Ming (and others before him) did a few seasons ago. This appears to be a major obstacle for the provincialistic keepers of basketball, if not for the nation of India itself. When people talk about basketball on the international level, no one really even talks about FIBA Asia -- let alone a country that is getting beat down by Quatar and Kazakhstan by a combined 80 points. I guess the point that most detractors have is that a nation that does not display great skills at something may not be a big fan of it. Essentially, if India doesn't produce great basketball players, how will basketball ever be popular there? If I wanted to be smarmy, for a rebuttal I'd suggest that the United States of America seems to be in love with democracy, even if we currently don't really have one. (we live in a republic, deal with it) But let's not go there . . .

For all of India's historical records in the sport (last place in the 1980 Olympics; btw, Andrei Kirilenko's father-in-law / Masha's dad was on the USSR team in 1980 -- Andrei Lopatov); and apparent disinterest (if you're not playing Cricket, you better get your ass a book and study) -- the Indian subcontinent has one big thing going for it: Potential.

Like the risk/reward system of drafting an unproven high school kid, and how it used to challenge GM's (back when you could draft high school kids on the premise that they could become like a Kobe, KG, or LeBron), the NBA is basically drafting India based on potential. The first, and only really bankable potential that India has right now is the economic potential.

"[India] is the twelfth largest economy in the world, with a GDP of around $1 trillion (2008). It recorded a GDP growth rate of 9.1% for the fiscal year 2007-2008 which makes it the second fastest big emerging economy, after China, in the world." (Wikipedia, 2008)

India has one of the higher natural increase growth rates in the world, and already consists of one sixth of the entire population of the world: China's population is 1.3 billion, India's is 1.1 billion (CIA, 2008). India is on the rise, and there is a lot of money to be made there. Many Multi-national corporations (of which the NBA definitely can be classified as) have been going to India in the last few years -- you see McDonald's and Subway franchises there, Target retail superstores have come to India, and many more such companies have landed, or are planning on doing so in the near future. Adidas opened up stores there and sent Kevin Garnett to India in 2006-2007 to drum up hype.

KG in Delhi: the landing, the announcement, and the spectacle of the Big Ticket as he does everything from signs autographs to watching some Desi pick up ball in a gym. Click to see Agra (Taj Mahal), and Bangalore. Essentially, Adidas made some money.

"Expanding to the world's second most populous market hardly seems loony. After all, no American sports league has exported its brand better than the NBA, which sells more than $750 million in merchandise overseas annually. Its games are broadcast in 215 countries. And India offers a growing, tech-savvy economy with a billion potential consumers -- 60% of whom are below age 30 -- who could sop up NBA merchandise and follow their favorite players on NBA.com." (Sean Gregory for Time Magazine, 2006)

According to the CIA World Factbook entry on India, there are over 233.62 million cell phones in use there (5th in the world), and over 60 million Internet users (5th in the world). There are 562 TV broadcasting stations as well. That is a lot of potential exposure that the NBA could be getting -- and that exposure almost always results in someone making money. (Which TV exec wouldn't want to make an exclusive TV deal for a potential 1 billion viewers?) Money is reason enough, especially in a nation that proves to be so important in the future (not just as a big market, but as the largest democracy by population in the world, and as a possible pro-Western society that is neither Islamic, nor Socialist -- unlike the other big nations in FIBA Asia). India also has other reasons to be lucrative for David Stern and the rest of the head office boys at the NBA.

As far as control of the globe is concerned, the NBA and FIBA are in a fight against FIFA, and the rest of those soccer/futbol playing nations. Some nations are able to be both basketball and soccer hotbeds (like Brazil, Argentina and so forth) -- but the NBA and FIBA really need to establish themselves in those nations that are still clearly undecided in the FIBA/FIFA war. India is one of those nations. Like the United States (with the love of football and baseball being huge) and Canada (with hockey), India is a place where basketball will have a hard time being number one. (Thanks to Cricket)

India has just recently started a cricket league (actually two, in some crazy, mixed up NBA/ABA issue that deals with cricket, instead of basketball, and a lot more legal action) -- and the popularity of that sport is only getting bigger. A few months ago I was eavesdropping on a conversation two Indian immigrants were having in line at the DMV here in Detroit. They were checking their Indian Premier League cricket scores on their cell phones and talking about it.

"Marketers got a glimpse of the potential of professional sports' in India earlier this year with the debut of the Indian Premier League, a flashy cricket [regular season and playoffs] that brought the sport's biggest international stars together with big advertisers, big crowds -- and big money." (Sam Dolnick, AP via The Nashua Telegraph, 2008)

FIBA/The NBA wants part of this pie, before an internal soccer league gets set up and popular in India. Part of the directed goals so far seem to actually revolve around making it easier for Indian cell phone users to check NBA scores from their devices -- which is so ironic when put in context with my DMV story:

"The NBA is talking to Time Warner about producing hoops-related programming on [Time Warner's children's channel on Indian airwaves] and to ESPN Star Sports . . .  about increasing the league's presence on the network's Indian sports channels. The NBA is also in discussions with Nokia about supplying league content on Indian mobile phones." (Sean Gregory for Time Magazine, 2006)

Still, India has more to offer the NBA head offices besides money and market shares. India is a very stratified nation. As far as stratified societies go, India is among the best in the world at it. While most people consider India to be one of the poorest nations in the world, 4 of the Top 10 wealthiest billionaires are Indian. That said, India has an emerging and important middle class. (Who do you think is watching all of that TV and using all those cell phones?) This middle class is seeking an identity.

The richest of the rich, highest class (nouveau caste, really) of modern Indian appear to be a much different phenotype than the rest of India. They are the ones who you see on Indian TV or in Indian movies that are nearly the personification of modern day idols and Gods on earth -- in India. The tallest, fairest, most un-Indian (yet distinctly Indian) Indian people around.

Aishwarya Rai was Miss World back in 1994, and owns it now	Bipasha Basu (a Bengali Beyonce) and boyfriend	Rani Mukherjee is a product of very selective breeding	. . . as is Hrithik Roshan	Diya Mirza is another  example of India's upper class "diversity"

Any of these Indians looks like someone who works in IT, a 7/11 or in your local ER? Nope. But out of a population of over a billion, you are bound to get enough people who look and live like they do. The richest people in India have the most advantages . . . and love to appear beyond that of the common rabble. Hence, they are clearly the market the NBA is after. After all, the NBA is already "seeking endorsements from Bollywood stars," (Sam Dolnick, AP via The Nashua Telegraph, 2008) of which the six above clearly are. Additionally, Indian films have been using subtle propaganda to establish basketball as something new, hip and elite: Parampara (1993) was the first time I saw basketball in Bollywood -- where the guys playing basketball used a soccer ball; Kuch Kuch Hota Hai (1998) uses basketball (with an actual ball, this time) as a story driven device; and Koi ... Mil Gaya (2003) has a "a nerdy hero [who gets] Jordaneqsue abilities." (Sean Gregory for Time Magazine, 2006)

"Basketball is most popular among cosmopolitan Indians, for whom the game carries a whiff of Western sophistication. America's ultimate gritty playground game has, in India, largely become a game for the children of the elite. "My students, they go to U.S., Europe, and there they have so much of a basketball culture," said Deepak Shukla, who coaches a basketball team at an exclusive New Delhi school. "They have Shaquille O'Neal shoes they get from [America] . . . my students are from (wealthy) families . . . [eventually] only the poor people will play cricket." "(Sam Dolnick, AP via The Nashua Telegraph, 2008)

While the poorer people can divert themselves with playing cricket, the Middle class wants to elevate themselves as well -- why not with the highest flying game on the planet? David Stern is cautiously optimistic:

"With [India's] middle class and some focus on the world's games, basketball is starting to get a little interest and a little traction . . . so we have to be respectful and realize it's going to be small steps up." (David Stern, as reported by Sean Gregory for Time Magazine, 2006)

Naturally, if David Stern is interested -- it's in the obvious best interest for the league. As such, this past summer before the 2008-2009 season they did have their first Basketball Without Borders trip -- among those who participated were Rony Turiaf, Kyle Korver, Linton Johnson, Pat Garrity and former players Dominique Wilkins and Sam Perkins.

New Delhi: The group poses after being greeted	Agra: Kyle Kover said that it was "like 150 degrees [outside]" (NBA.com, 2008)
New Delhi: Pat Garrity talks to campers	New Delhi: Sam Perkins asks where he can get that really good Buddha from
New Delhi: Rony Turiaf plays Karem with kids	New Delhi: Dominique Wilkins teaches a drill

Find more videos like this on www.truveo.com.

Dominique Wilkins and Kyle Korver (who is called one of the greatest to ever play, and smiles accordingly) are interviewed on CNN's Indian station (CNN-IBN). 'Nique likes the discipline the kids show, Kover suggests that you can still be good at basketball when you're short -- look at Iverson.

Basketball requires a lot more infrastructure than India currently affords their most rural areas. Additionally, when I last lived in India (2002) even the most exclusive sporting clubs and health spas were not a lock to have a basketball courts. Basketball without Borders programs increase awareness (and also do other things, these guys talked about everything from Zone defense to Aids prevention), and training of younger players. I fully expect the NBA to send players back in the following summers. It seems like the perfect sport to grow roots in India's growing middle class, if not also in their upper class as well.

New Delhi: Linton Johnson plays with his haar on.

So it is realistic to say that in the next 20 years, with proper time and development, India could be pretty okay at basketball -- and maybe have a much stronger international presence on the courts. Furthermore, the NBA in India makes a lot of fiscal sense. Will there be an NBA player who is Indian? Probably one day, as countless kids of Indian origin play basketball all over the world -- be they a street ball player from Australia, or any number of the countless Indian undergrad students in the USA and Canada who play daily. It's not outside the realm of possibility to see someone from India be NBA ready at some stage -- but it make take a genetic freak like a 7'5 player to first do it. And really . . .

Don't you want to see this guy in the Turban as an assistant coach for some team? He could even color coordinate his turban to if it was a road or a home game! P.S. I'm not making fun of you Punjabi Sikh guys at all, just *THIS* Punjabi Sikh guy.