Carlos Boozer to English Dictionary -- Episode 1

Communication is essential in all group efforts; it doesn't matter if you work at a pizza parlor or a professional sports team -- if your communication skills are lacking then you may actually hurt your team. Carlos Boozer, I've come to believe, speaks his own language. How else can you justify his comments to the press and his in-game chatter? As a result I've taken it upon myself to translate some of what he says into what it means. Here's the first batch, enjoy!

5. "My _______ (injured body part) is fine. I'm ready to play!" Situation: Any given interview with Carlos Boozer that discusses his injury du jour. What this means:

"I'm so unbelievably brittle that at times I can make Tracy McGrady look like Cal Ripken Jr. I fully expect that ______ (injured body part) will never, ever heal, or will be surgically removed in the next few days. The pain I feel is a deep as an ocean. An ocean of pain, if you will. I will never admit that I am going to miss months of action for fear that it may interfere with any potential trades and/or my current contract year aspirations of becoming even more wealthy. In conclusion: don't hold your breath for me to return from my injury."

Example: Pretty much every few months / planned Boozer family vacations during the year.

 

 

4. "Memo!!! Get it!!" / "Memo!!! Grab it!!" Situation: Utah Jazz players are on defense and Carlos Boozer has just been beaten by his man, or failed to box out his man, or is himself boxed out and cannot effectively defend the play. There are several variations on this, depending on the in-game situation, for example, sometimes he says "AK!!!! Get it!!" instead of "Memo!!! Get it!!!" What this means:

"Memo! I suck at defense, grab the rebound before the other team gets it / rotate and end up fouling my man -- whom I was unable to stay in front of, yet did not wish to foul on my own!"

Example: Almost every game.

 

 

3. "And one!" Situation: Carlos Boozer, or any other Utah Jazz player has just taken a shot in the paint. This is proclaimed at all times: shot goes in, shot doesn't go in, ref calls a foul, ref does not call a foul, there is actually no foul, or there was a legit foul on the play. What this means:

"I wish to suggest strongly that I (or Jazz player who took the shot) was fouled, yet we still were good enough to score -- and I will continue saying this even in the event that the ref does call the foul, or in the event that the ball has no chance to go into the hoop. I'm so good at saying "And One!" that they should be counted as assists."

Example: Boozer scoring against the Golden State Warriors . . . this one is actually an example where the ball goes in, but if you watch as many Jazz games as I do, you know that the ball going in (or an actual foul being committed) is not a prerequisite for this exclamation.

 

2. "Rrraaaaghghaghghahghhhh!" Situation: Any play where Carlos Boozer exerts himself beyond the breaking point of any lesser man, or mortal who ever lived. This can be a tough rebound, a hard finish, or alternatively, whenever Boozer shoots a free throw that so obviously has no chance of going in, that he is forced to deflect some of the attention from the shot to the large man making noises at the free throw line. What this means:

"Hey! Everybody! Don't look at my horrible shot, look at me! I'm really sorry for missing, I usually make them, gimme another try! I can make animal noises!"

Example: A few highlight plays every game, or, 30.3% of his free throw attempts.

 

 

1. "Oohh! SH*T!!!" Situation: Carlos Boozer just committed an in-game infraction or otherwise made a bad play / is unable to react to a disadvantageous situation in any meaningful way except to announce that something bad just happened. What this means:

"Something bad just happened."

Example: Just watch this video of Chuck Hayes (of the Houston Rockets) shooting free throws . . .

In your face, Denver

Seriously . . . today was a crappy day. Crazy rush hour traffic to get to the airport, long flight filled with nagging all the way, end up arriving in Austin, Tx late . . . don't check into the hotel until around 3 am on Saturday (left on Friday), find out that I lost my cell phone somewhere between Detroit and Austin . . . (and it was a fancy $500 dollar phone) . . . but the Jazz beat Denver. So this is good news, and ultimately, a non-crappy ending to a crappy day.

Jazz had to fight for this one, and came from behind to win it. Memo and Boozer had really off shooting nights, but Deron was the hero (as usual). I did not see any of the game, but I did set up my DVR to record it. I will watch it when I get back. Ten in a row, baby!

GO JAZZ GO!

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.

Forward March!

The Utah Jazz finished February with their best record in franchise history: 10-1. It was a spectacular month filled with victories over the likes of the LA Lakers, Boston Celtics, New Orleans Hornets and playoff teams from both conferences. As good as February was, January was a travesty where the Jazz limped to a 7-8 record. There are only 23 games left in the regular schedule -- and only 23 games left for the Jazz to make any solid moves up in the standings. March sees the Jazz playing in 15 games, and April has the Jazz playing in 8 regular season games. They are on the road 14 times, and at home only 9 times.

The major problem I can see, when looking over the schedule, is that fatigue is really going to set in late. Hopefully this is the case with all of the teams in the running for the playoffs -- but the Jazz have a particularly tough task. First of all, there's another extended Eastern Conference road trip that needs to happen, one that will span 8 days, and have the Jazz playing 5 times. (we already know how poor the Jazz are on the road, and how poor they are against the East . . .) The Jazz will face off against Toronto, Indiana, Atlanta, Miami and Orlando. The games against Atlanta and Orlando are both the 2nd night of back to back sets; furthermore, the game against Atlanta would be the 3rd game in 4 nights. If the Jazz win three out of those five games I'll be bouncing off the walls.

The second, and perhaps larger, problem is the cumulative effect of all of these games. The Jazz play 8 back to back sets still. (15 of our last 23 games are either the first or second game of a back to back set, or 70%) If that was not enough, 9 of these last 23 games will be the 3rd game in 4 nights for the Jazz. (@ Atlanta, vs. Washington, @ Portland, @ Denver, vs. Minnesota, @ New Orleans, vs. Golden State, vs. LA Clippers, @ LA Lakers) Do any of those look like important games to win? I see a few there.

The largest obstacle will be around the end of March and the beginning of April where the Jazz will play Houston at home, then the next night fly to Phoenix to take on the Suns. Two days later the Jazz face the Suns at home. I don't know the exact injury situation with Phoenix, but as far as I can tell, they will either be in full tank mode, or swing for the fences mode. The next week the Jazz will face the Knicks at home, then fly the next night to play the Blazers -- one of the previously mentioned 3rd game in 4 nights sets. This will be the last game of March, and it goes all downhill from there. The Jazz then fly over to Denver to play the first game of a back to back set, which is also the 3rd game in 4 nights, and yes, the 5th game in 6 nights. How often do you get the 5th game in 7 nights? Very rarely, but only when you play a game the very next night, at home against Minnesota, that's the second night of a back to back, and ultimately, the 6th game in 7 nights. Yes, this is how the Jazz start off April -- playing 6 times in a week, with one of our last remaining 'gimmie' games at home against a non-playoff team being scheduled at the worst possible time. [EDIT: This is incorrect, the Jazz game vs. the Timberwolves will be the 5th game in 7 nights, not 6th in 7]

To add insult to injury, the Jazz play again, on the road in New Orleans on that Sunday, a single game that does not look too hard, but will be the 3rd game in 4 nights, and the 4th game in 6 games, 5th game in 7. The Jazz will have a needed two day rest, and then finish the last 5 games of the seasons @ Dallas, @ San Antonio, vs. Golden State (2nd game in a back to back set, 3rd game in 4 nights), vs. the LA Clippers (3rd game in 4 nights), and then on the road to face the LA Lakers (2nd night in a back to back set, 3rd game in 4 nights).

I really pray that this is the case for all teams right now, and that everyone will be equally tired to finish the season. The Jazz play against a Top 10 team in the Western Conference 13 times (out of 15 remaining Western Conference games) to finish the season. The Jazz are shaky on the road . . . hopefully Boozer will be full of energy from that mid-season holiday he took.

Just because I am insane, here it all is in chart form:

	Game	Opponent	Location	Date	Conf.	Playoff Team	Part of B2B Set?	Other:
March	1	Golden State	Road	March 1	West		2nd game
	2	Houston	Home	March 4	West	Yes		Season series 0-2
	3	Denver	Home	March 6	West	Yes		Season series 1-1
	4	Toronto	Road	March 8	East
	5	Indiana	Road	March 10	East		1st game
	6	Atlanta	Road	March 11	East	Yes	2nd game	3rd game in 4
	7	Miami	Road	March 14	East	Yes	1st game
	8	Orlando	Road	March 15	East	Yes	2nd game
	9	Washington	Home	March 17	East			3rd game in 4
	10	Oklahoma City	Road	March 20	West
	11	Houston	Home	March 24	West	Yes	1st game
	12	Phoenix	Road	March 25	West	?	2nd game	Season series 1-1
	13	Phoenix	Home	March 28	West	?
	14	New York	Home	March 30	East		1st game	Last game vs. East until Finals
	15	Portland	Road	March 31	West	Yes	2nd game	3rd game in 4
April	16	Denver	Road	April 2	West	Yes	1st game	3rd game in 4 4th game in 6
	17	Minnesota	Home	April 3	West		2nd game	3rd game in 4 4th game in 5 5th game in 7
	18	New Orleans	Road	April 5	West	Yes		3rd game in 4 4th game in 6 5th game in 7
	19	Dallas	Road	April 8	West	Yes
	20	San Antonio	Road	April 10	West	Yes	1st game
	21	Golden State	Home	April 11	West		2nd game	3rd game in 4
	22	LA Clippers	Home	April 13	West		1st game	3rd game in 4
	23	LA Lakers	Road	April 14	West	Yes	2nd game	3rd game in 4 4th game in 5

The Jazz are currently sitting at 36-23, and need 14 games to win 50 for the season. ESPN.com predicted that the Jazz would win 51 games -- a number that I thought was ridiculously low back in Pre-Season. I was so bold as to suggest that the Jazz would finish the season (including playoffs) with 65 wins this year. The last two seasons the Jazz won 60 games total (2006-2007: 51 regular season, 9 playoffs; 2007-2008: 54 regular season, 6 playoffs) -- so I felt like a 5 game improvement wouldn't be that far out of the realm of possibility. For my statement to be true (65 wins), and let's assume the Jazz win 6 playoff games (2nd round exit) the Jazz will need to win each of these last 23 games. As much as that would be awesome, I just don't see it happening. (In my defense, though, I could not know that the Jazz would miss over 150 man games to injury this year)

Instead of doing the whole 'poke holes into my ability to gauge how well my team can win games' game, let's move forward . . . into March. The Jazz have momentum right now, having won 7 games straight, 9 in a row at home, and 10 of their last 11. They need to keep it going, or else they may end up facing San Antonio or the Lakers in the first round of the playoffs. I'd take the Jazz' chances in the first round against any of the other teams in the West (Denver, Houston, Portland, New Orleans, Dallas, Phoenix), even without home court. The Playoff Push all starts tonight on the road to the Golden State Warriors -- who killed us last time we played them.

ESPN, and the fans who love to hate them

Okay, let's get something straight right off the bat -- ESPN (the self-proclaimed world wide leader in sports) doesn't like small market teams, and fans of those teams don't like ESPN. Why? Well, you're more likely to hear a story about Kobe, LeBron, the Yankees or the Dallas Cowboys twice before you even hear them mention the final score of the game your favorite team played last night in. There's really more money to make by appeasing the larger markets than they would get by (and I'm dating myself here), talking about an exciting 11 inning game between the Cincinnati Reds and the Montreal Expos. No one cares about that, we need to hear about the color and abnormal nitrogen content of Jeter's piss.

Thankfully, we have the Internet -- and no longer need big sports shows to tell us who won or who lost. Unfortunately, the liberation we (the multitude of fans who love teams that the big networks hate) should feel fails to exist in reality. As big as the Internet is, it's not immune to corporate domination. Take me for example, I've sworn off watching Sportcenter because of their decision (which is a logical financial move on their part) to shun giving major coverage to obscure, esoteric teams. I don't need to watch them spin a Jazz win into the other team losing the game, and then make excuse for that team --  okay, so the Lakers were tired, but the Jazz were playing without Carlos Boozer, Andrei Kirilenko and Brevin Knight -- obvious advantage to the Jazz there! Yet, my browser homepage (over the course of over a decade, and several computers) continues to be the ESPN.com NBA homepage.

Why do I even go there? It's more a self preservation based strategy really, as ESPN.com is a lot more user friendly than the labyrinthine navigation needed in order to actually get what you want out of the Official NBA Website. With a few clicks I can view, sort and analyze all the data from last nights games, or the last 5 years worth. The fact is that while they do a poor job of sharing the spotlight on the air, ESPN.com could be really great for the fans of all teams. Yet, they do an equally poor job over "the Internets".

Their website is a storehouse of just the information any fan needs in order to construct their own opinions, less the media biases that we all accuse them of having. [Just look at the comments section of any article that says something . . . ESPN then becomes a pro-Lakers, anti-Lakers, pro-Kobe, anti-Kobe, pro-LeBron, anti-LeBron, pro-Celtics, anti-whatever propaganda machine -- according to us, the unwashed masses of sports fans.] Aside from any perceived real (or imagined) biases fans see, some of their "experts" aren't "expert" enough. But that's not even the worst part of ESPN.com's Internet presence.

The worst part is that we fans -- who love ESPN or hate them -- flock to their webpage like sheep, and build their reporting and analysis up so much (in our own minds, perceiving that their statements carry a greater weight of authority over other statements over the 'net) as the antecedent to getting upset about those very same reports and analysis. In effect, we champion them with one action, only to vilify them with another. No one would care if someone with no more a sports authority than you said something bad (or even worse, didn't say anything at all!) about your team. Our threat assessment alarm only goes off when it comes from people who 'are paid to know their stuff'.

I don't get upset if Charlie Rosen writes something inherently flawed. I don't go into "monkey crapping into his hand, only so he has something to throw" mode when someone at work thinks differently about the Lions draft strategy than I do. Thus, logically, I should not care about what is posted at ESPN.com . . . nor should anyone. Yet, hundreds of people everyday go into monkey poop mode (albeit with their keyboards, not their actual poop) on any opinion piece they put up. Sports fans, as passionate, emotional people with feverent loyalty, cannot really be asked to be sterile robots -- especially not when 'those d-bags over at ESPN are totally hatin' on ______ (your favorite team here), ______ (author of article uploaded onto ESPN.com) is such a d-bag!!!'

Let's just look at one of the most hotly contested regular features: Marc Stein's Weekly NBA Power Rankings. Back in the day when Stein only used to write the occasional opinion piece on the ESPN.com website I did not go crazy. He appeared to favor some teams over others and while I did not agree with all of his opinions, he did bring something to the table as a sports writer. That was then. Today he is like a God, and his weekly pronouncements cause reverence and hysteria amongst all his believers.

[EPIC TANGENT ALERT!!!] Can you imagine if this was actually the case -- if God had His own Power Rankings each week? The posts we'd see on message boards would be insane:

• Christians knock off Jews as God's people this week! Numbah 1 babeey!!11! [Xx_LaMb_Of_GoD_xX]
• Moses is injured, we're not worried [FeartheZohan]
• Whatev, Jesus was nailed to a cross, k thnx bai [CanIhasSalvationplz?]
• Wicca beats Voodoo, Rasta an Shinto on road, and goes down 2 spots? Hata!!! [WynndrWymyn]
• Wiccans underrated! [Magic Circle Sister]
• Wicca hasn't even made the playoffs since the dark ages, ur aal dumb [Stan666]
• Ay, whaut be dis ting ye sayin, bway? Wicca bee lucky dis week, 'seen? [RudeBoy420]
• ZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz [Cth007h00]
• My head asplode [EmilyG]
• Atheism always last each week? WTF? [NoGod1999]
• Hey, why doesn't anyone respond? [NoGod1999]
• Hello? [NoGod1999]
• Anyone? [NoGod1999]
• .....god? [NoGod1999]
• God's rankings sux! Stupid Middle East Coast Bias, boo! [Dr.Zeus]
• Dharmic faiths more fulfilling than Abrahamic? [LittleBuddah5]
• In this life, or the next? [I_am_Ganesh!!!]
• +1 [Quetzoquatl4MVP]
• +1 [Quetzoquatl4MVP]
• Stopid servers, sry for dbl post [Quetzoquatl4MVP]
• +1 [Quetzoquatl4MVP]
• lolz, u mean trippple post [ODiN>>>L0Ki]
• heh heh heh [Quetzoquatl4MVP]
• whatever, it's all rigged [Xenuluvr88]
• Shuttup elroy [72Virgins4me]
• Fine, believe what you believe, let me believe what I do [Xenuluvr88]
• Hey you *&%$#@! [TeeCruise] -- post pending deletion
• post deleted by administrator
• That's it! I am going to sue you in England! [TeeCruise] -- post pending deletion

[/EPIC TANGENT ALERT]

Such is the outcry every week when Stein submits his Power Rankings -- and it's slightly less funny to read what people write. And while Stein isn't God, the waves made by his weekly Power Rankings cause ripples all over the Internet. Sports Illustrated (a corporate RIVAL of ESPN) has a forum on their servers, yet on that server people who talk sports have message board throwdowns about Stein's rankings. SI has their own power poll, by the way, but the fans of SI are talking about ESPN's rankings . . . on SI's message board. Even The Onion, probably the most consistently funny (and honest) satirical view of our modern society, mentioned Stein's Power Rankings a while back. Would we care if Stein's rankings did not come from the self-styled "World Wide Leader", and thus, were bereft of this absolute authoritarian weight? Most likely no, because you don't see people go Apeshit "monkey poop mode" over the weekly rankings over at BallDon'tLie, or RealGM . . . well, they do, but not to the same level.

Ultimately, it is the fact that they style themselves as the WWL that draws us to them. Some agree, some disagree . . . and random people dedicate time to discussing them (good things and bad things), validating those people who feel like no press is bad press. I'm a sports fan. I hate ESPN. I really do love to hate them, and I feel justified in doing so as a fanatic of a small market sports team . . . but does it even matter to the execs over at ESPN? If they surfed their way over here they'd see "ESPN", "ESPN.com" and the word "love" about a dozen times and give each other raises, never really stopping to read it.

Now if you excuse me, I have to go check out their webpage to see if anything new is up . . . for me to go all Angry Dad over.

THAT'S OPINION!!! NOT NEWS!!!

The Jedi Voodoo Mind Trick Hype Machine

It should come as no surprise that after the Jazz started to get a) some of their injured guys back, and b) allowed some of their banged up guys (who were still playing) to get well again that c) the Jazz would start to win some games. Similarly so, people all over the world would start lauding Utah again. This has been par for the course over the last few seasons. In the 2004-2005 season the Jazz won only 26 games. Why? Not because of any extra-ordinary amount of 'suck', but because of injuries. (AK and Booz were out almost all of the season EACH) The next year -- when healthy -- the Jazz almost made the playoffs. End result: people started to talk about the Jazz. Since that time, the Jazz have increased their wins in each of the successive seasons. Alas, it would be folly to suggest that the Jazz did better when they weren't flying under the radar.

They do. A small market team that no one likes tends to band together better with the 'us against the world' attitude that happens with multiple all-star snubs, and poor projected win numbers. When everyone is flying high with the Jazz bad things happen. (After all, that 2004-2005 season where the Jazz won only 26 games was supposed to be a big win season according to ESPN.com, they had improved themselves the most over the off-season in their power rankings) Perhaps being disregarded early (due to poor playing in December and January each season) helps the team mentally get ready to "show everyone" that they were wrong for counting out the Jazz.

After all, no one was talking Jazz at the All-Star breaks the last few seasons (except for last season maybe), but each time the team is able to have spectacular runs in the final 30 games of the season and have won their division twice in a row. The mental edge that some of our players hone due to being passed over may not be so sharp right now when everyone and their grandmother is counting the Jazz in this time around.

Hollinger, of ESPN.com, once suggested that the Jazz would be the team to watch in 2009. Even after the season of injuries that the Jazz have suffered so far, he contends that the Jazz can still win the division. Mark Stein, also of ESPN.com, moved the Jazz up to 9th best in the league in his power rankings, and in his chat later on this week suggested that he should have moved then up to 7th best.  Chad Ford, again, ESPN.com, chimed in yesterday that when healthy "the Jazz . . . are the Lakers biggest competition in the West." Skeets and Tas over at TheBasketballJones suggest that the Jazz *are* this good, and only injuries got in the way.

As nice as all of this sounds, even the most vocal, yet highly respected, detractors of the Jazz have gotten on the respect wagon of late. AOL's NBA Fanhouse could be my browser homepage, their contributors get the news out from all over the league onto the net almost faster than anyone else. They recently had a roundtable discussion on the Jazz, and anyone who knows their writers knows not to expect glowing reviews. Matt Moore has contested for quite a long time that the Jazz are paper tigers. [fair enough...] He, however, did recant somewhat on his own blog, the amazing Hardwood Paroxysm, with his post "In the interest of fairness". (SLCDunk.com quoted MM yesterday on his LHM tribute) Moore even suggests that reading the comments in the Fanhouse roundtable elicited him to dig a little deeper.

"But I read the comments on our round table today, which featured an amazing combination of actually lucid, intelligent commenters, and I realized that I just didn’t fully give the story."

I'm guessing he wasn't talking about the comment calling everyone a moron, but perhaps maybe this one started things off. That "Doc A" guy sounds really smart. Now only if he had a blog that he could post his thoughts on . . . one that properly formatted itself depending on the browser settings of the viewer . . . grrrr. [For those who didn't get it, I'm "Doc A"] Tom Ziller (you should know who this guy is if you like reading basketball on the internet) goes where no one else has gone before and even suggests that we should, collectively, "Fear the Utah Jazz".

The recent love for the Jazz extends beyond the reaches of ESPN.com's columnists or bloggers . . . Kenny Smith (who has two rings), despite not being able to pronounce Deron Williams' name, goes out and heaps praise on our, small market team. Charley Rosen, Phil Jackson's butt buddy, is an opinionated old coot whose analysis of games is limited to whatever game is on cable TV that month. Dude doesn't even go to games. Essentially, if you look past his mediocre success as an assistant coach in the CBA he has no greater insight into the game than anyone else with a remote control and a laptop. This week he found it within his back heart to say something nice about our players -- one in particular -- the same one that Kenny Smith can't pronounce despite covering him for at least two rounds in each of the last two playoffs. All of this must sound great if you are a Jazz fan, right? On one hand it either shows that the world at large is a) respecting our team, or b) had their head so far up their sigmoid colon that they merely overlooked the Jazz and their lower seed record as evidence that the Jazz were just a bad team. I don't particularly find much comfort in either answer.

The Jazz don't do well with hype. You can look back and see what happened in that eventful 2004-2005 season, or look farther back at what happened in the 1998-1999 playoffs . . . or still farther back to one of those 5 first round exists during the early Stockton & Malone era after looking so good at such a young age by taking the Lakers to 7 games in 1987-1988. Hype can dull the edge, or worse, completely remove the chip off of the shoulders of our hungrier players. By giving the Jazz too much hype, perhaps, our expectations for them will never be attainable? Partly because of our expectations, but alternatively, also due to the hype removing some of the focused insanity that motivates people when they feel disrespected. Utah needs all the focus they can get, just look at their road record vs. under .500 teams . . . they don't play well unless they feel like they have something to prove.

So please, for the sake of the Jazz, don't hype them.