These aren’t John Hollinger’s dad’s statistics

Okay, I love direct observational research as much as the other guy, but as someone firmly rooted in the sciences (aka. wasting my life in college and beyond), I love quantifiable results. As a result, I find that statistics are vital towards observing, categorizing and understanding the environment that we inhabit (and share with other organisms). Stats are awesome, and I love them (I got 98% in stats in university) . Though, I know that stats can be manipulated and abused – furthermore, statistics do not fully explain the entire situation, nor do sufficient statistics exist that can approach a full knowledge of a hybrid (not just numerical) system.

We can attempt to use statistics to better understand basketball – and as a fan, and non-paid analyst, I’m not alone in this point of view (just check out the Wages of Wins sometime). That said, the statistics that we currently have in basketball are not complete. No current stats exist to fully describe all possible positive actions on the court (e.g. there’s no stat for a defender breaking / slipping a screen and staying on his man, despite the set play run by the offense). Also, some stats that would be useful are just not recorded in the NBA (e.g. in the Adriatic league their stats also include things like how many times a player has their shot blocked, or how many times a player draws a foul – don’t you want to know how many times Dirk gets stuffed, or how many fouls Shaq drew per game during his peak?).

Right now there aren’t enough stats to fully map out good play, and some of the stats that we do have appear to mean more than they actually do! A steal means that a defender has disrupted the offense to the point that a turnover has occurred – many guards and swingmen get steals. The bigman analog has always been blocks, but the most important part of the steal (aka, the change of actual possession of the ball) is lost in a block. Often a blocked shot prevents a made basket, but does not always give possession back to the defending side. In effect, a blocked shot that still gives the ball back to the offense is no better than a defender causing a deflection of a pass where the ball goes out of bounds – and the offensive team retains possession.

Deflections are the most important stat that continues to not be officially counted by the NBA; on one hand it would be difficult to adjudicate (when is it a block? when is it a deflection?), but on the other hand, deflections often lead to other stats. The guy who picks up a ball that’s deflected out of the hand of the ball carrier is rewarded with a steal – but the guy who got the ball out of the ball carrier’s hand (the deflector) doesn’t get credited for causing the play. I think that’s kind of unfair.

In fact the guy who defends well frequently gets jobbed out of a good stat. For years I’ve seen a solid defensive play in the paint by a center (straight up single coverage that results in his man taking a shot – and missing) be recorded as a GREAT defensive board by the power forward (who wasn’t defending anyone, he just happened to get the rebound off of someone else's good defense). I’ve seen this happen on all levels of play. If anything, it prove the limitations of stats, and the limitations of the stats to accurately reward defense.

It’s no secret that defense is way harder to grade by using stats alone. Firstly, there are not enough defensive stats (like the guy who can navigate through a number screens and gets back in time to contest/change a shot gets the same amount of stats as another play who doesn’t even go through the screens and lets his man take an open jumper), and secondly, the stats that do exist do not always mean great defense. A very quick guy like Allen Iverson spent years on the court playing in the passing lanes. This is him gambling on defense to get steals. It’s exciting when a guy does get those break away steals in the game – but it’s not sound, fundamental man defense. Really, this play is sorely discouraged in the case where there isn’t a big shot blocker in the paint to clean up any mess that an unguarded PG getting into the paint can cause.

I know – I’ve seen John Stockton make these same type of ‘Defensive Back’ style steals because he had big Mark Eaton (two time defensive player of the year – once had close to 500 blocks in a season) watching his back. Iverson had the same with Theo Ratliff and Dikembe Mutombo. Chris Paul is another player who benefits from being backed up by shot blocking force of nature Tyson Chandler. If guys like Stockton, Iverson and Paul had Mehmet Okur and Jarron Collins laying down the law in the paint behind them you can be sure that the head coach would have told them to defend their man more, and gamble on defense less.

Over the years I’ve been lucky enough to coach some basketball on the youth developmental level. We tried to go past the lack of collected stats on defense in order to quantify good play on both sides of the ball. An attempt was made to count the number of times the player defending a shooter resulted in that shooter missing. Other times we tried to record good traps on the ball carrier, or how many times the defender harassed the ball handler into turning the ball over. These types of things can be recorded but by far the best defense I’ve ever seen on any level is that where the man being defended does not ever get the ball, entry passes are denied, position is denied, and when he does get the ball – he’s in such a disadvantageous point that he cannot positively help his team when he has the ball. You know what kind of stats that guy gets – for playing the best defense? He gets nothing for it. There is no reward for him that shows up on the boxcore – and this is a failure in terms of statistics being used to categorize and enumerate good play in a game. But if he manages to tip an errantly passed ball that he forces the guy he’s defending into attempting(because he can’t shoot it where he is), the team mate who picks up the ball gets credited for a steal.

Oh yeah, that’s basically it for defense in the NBA, I talked about the fallacy that defensive boards is akin to good defense, I talked about how blocks may stop a shot, but do not give you possession of the ball all that time, and I talked about how steals can be indicative of poor defense, not good defense. (Of course, exceptions to these rules always exist – it is good defense to control a tough defensive rebound that’s contested, or to block a shot to a team mate, or to single handedly strip a guy that  you are defending. But let’s not forget that these instances of good defense are counted just as much as the same stats that are products of situational defense. A ball that rolls do you on defense counts just like a ball that you fought for.)

The long and short of it is that we need more stats – especially on defense. If you’ve read this far down then you are awesome . . . because I’ve tried to make some ‘new’ stats. Some people are good enough for simple points, rebounds, assists, steals and blocks. That’s fine for a casual fantasy basketball league . . . but not good enough if you really watch the game like your life depends on it. I wish there were more stats, and more ways to reward good play – but right now the NBA does not appear to give us things like that (instead the +/- stat is thrown to us, like it means anything). Anyway, I’ve tried to make some new stats and here are five calculations that you can even do at home (studio audience of old ladies says ‘ooooohh’, already put in a receptive mood because of the deal that they got on that juicer they just purchased):

1. Defensive Gambling (DG): This stat is pretty easy – I try to recognize that some of the stats that people get on defense are related to gambling on some level. (Gambling in a passing lane, gambling by leaving your man to get a weak side shot block, gambling by trying to strip a man when the ref is right there, and so forth) We already had blocks and steals . . . but they exist in a world without accumulated risks. The risk here, of course, exists as a foul being called – another stat that we already have. The fun part is balancing the risks vs. the rewards.

The Foul is the base for this equation – as it means that you tried a risky move and you got burned. Not only do you have a penalty against you, but it directly benefits the offensive team. A steal, on the other hand, is a situation where a player takes a risk, is rewarded – and the offensive team is directly disadvantaged. When a team misses a three pointer and the opposing team gets the ball and scores a layup that is a 5 point swing. A steal does not directly mean you gain points, but you directly prevent the chance of points – it’s not a 5 point swing, but it’s a possession swing. I say that this is worth 1.5 fouls, in terms of risk/reward. A block does not guarantee such a similar swing in terms of possession (it does sometimes though), but while a steal only prevents the potential of a shot being taken, a block directly affects shots that are taken. (It’s a shame there’s no stat for shots changed, because a good shot blocker has an aura that surrounds him that changes many shots – for example when players started to scout Kirilenko his blocks went way down . . . but he was changing the same number of net shots as guys changed their shots to avoid getting blocked by him) A block, then, is not as good as a steal, but it’s still good – a block is equal to 1.3 fouls. The full equation for Defensive Gambling is as follows:

Example: In 2003-2004 Andrei Kirilekno was healthy (at this point in his career, he had played in 240 of a total possible 246 games), getting playing time (37.1 mpg), and happy. That season Andrei had 215 blocked shots and 150 steals against 174 fouls. His Defensive Gambling score was astronomical that season. DG = [ ( 215 * 1.3) + (150 * 1.5) ] / 174 DG = [ 279.5 + 225 ] / 174 DG = 3.002893563 So that means that Andrei was gambling at a very fortuitous rate – he’d get away with gambling three times before he would get burned once. If you extrapolate that to how many fouls he averaged per game that season you can see that he was doing something right with all that time on the court. Because the haters probably want to know, Andrei’s career average DG score is 2.25. For a point of reference, Scottie Pippen’s career DG score is 1.41 – and Pip is the prototypical wing defender who made 10 All-Defensive teams in his career. Pippen had way more steals, but he took way too many poor gambles as well. Pippen has 6 seasons where he’s averaged greater than 3 fouls per game. Andrei has none in his career. So put that in your pipe and smoke it!

Clearly looking at things like blocks and steals on their own gives a skewed view of the world – putting it against a risk/reward system is a better frame of reference that we can use to see which players make smart gambles, and which ones do not. Andrei – for all his faults – has a good Defensive Gambling ability if you ask me.

2. Pure Hustle (PH): Pure hustle builds off of the Defensive Gambling equation, but adds more chances for risks and more chances for rewards. Here we see Blocks, Steals and Offensive Rebounds go against Turnovers and Persona Fouls. The common factor for hustle is a turn over. It’s the most benign result of hustle. Too much hustle can result in a foul – which hurts you and your team. This is why a foul is worth more. On the good side of things, hustle can result in good defense, or a second effort (or third, or fourth) on offense. We all remember Tayshawn Prince robbing Reggie Miller with a game winning block. We should all remember Bird stealing the inbounds from Isiah. And we all know that second chance shots can not only allow you to score from an advantageous position – but also result in scores themselves. This is why I think when it comes to hustle, Offensive Rebounds are worth the most, with Blocks and Steals being on equal footing with fouls.

Example: When people think of hustle they are apt to think of garbage guys who don’t have much skill. That type of scrappy play can result in solid contributions for a team, but I think hustle is more than just effort. Hustle is assisted by skill and psychology. It is a risk/reward equation after all – if you go all out all the time you’re just going to pick up fouls. You have to know when to go all out, and when to hold back. Many people hated him, but no one could deny the Pure Hustle of Dennis Rodman. Rodman has 4329 career Offensive Rebounds, 611 career Steals and 531 career Blocks. They aren’t the best numbers around, but when you input them with his 1481 career turnovers and 2843 career fouls he manages a Pure Hustle rating of 1.80. This may not look like much, but for a frame of reference, Paul Millsap (what most current Jazz fans think Pure Hustle is all about) has managed a career Pure Hustle value of 1.24. So if Paul Millsap is giving 110% out there, Dennis Rodman is giving 155% out there.

 3. Shooting Worth (SW): This is an easy one, because it already exists on many website by it’s other name “Points per Shot” (PPS). It’s just how many total points you get (including free throws) divided by the number of shots (FGA) you take. Sure, there’s some points that may be unrepresented by FGA (like technical fouls, or being in the bonus), but the fact that the player is involved in those free throws is a benefit that they get for being good shooters. The idea is that if you take a shot it’s worth two points, right? Well, that doesn’t always work out in the PROs, and the league average (or mean for all player data) is 1.22. [Yes, I looked at every shot in the L last year on ESPN.com] So, in effect, you have a positive Shooting Worth if you are better than average, and have a SW greater than 1.22 – of course, you can still be good at your job if you have a lower value; you’d just be below league average. That’s the crux of this statistic – it seems to display individuals who take good shots, and this stat can be used to better differentiate between guys who score a high ppg who take good shots, or the guys who shoot a lot in order to get good stats.

Example: Allen Iverson has been a phenomenal scorer in his career. He’s averaged over 30 ppg on four separate occasions, and even with his no-show last year his career average is still 27.1 ppg. That’s a really great average, but how does that really stack up against a guy who averages something similar, but shoots much better than 42.5 fg%? Well, when you input Iverson's 23983 total career points over his 19,590 total shots you see that his actual Shooting Worth is 1.22 – which is exactly average. He’s not a “better” scorer than some of his contemporaries, he’s just a volume scorer. Karl Malone only has a career scoring average that’s in the 25 points per game range – but unlike Ivey, Karl was much better than average when it came to the quality of his shots; Karl’s Shooting Worth was 1.41 (better than lots of other known scorers like Kobe, Jerry West and Glen Rice, to name a few). From this we can conclude that a shot by Allen Iverson was, in effect, worth less than a shot by Karl – Karl was taking better shots.

 4. Shot Frequency (SF): Some websites try to find out often a player shoots and they represent it by the number of shots / value of time (usually minutes). I don’t know what 0.282 shots looks like, so that representation means little to me. I would rather look at the same data in another way, namely, how many minutes of burn does a player need before he jacks up a shot. Some guys start shooting the ball as soon as they are on the court, while others spend a lot of time on the court – but don’t shoot the ball. In effect, this stat (Shot Frequency) will be able to identify if a certain player is gun shy to a fault (some would say that John Stockton was) or a pure, unashamed jacker of shots (too many to name). In this case, the lower the number means a higher frequency of shots . . . because the number represented is the time needed on the floor between shots. To find this out we divide the total minutes played by the number of Field Goals attempted (FGA).

Example: Let’s continue talking about Iverson here. Most of his life he’s been the first option on offense … a guy that the rest of the team made way for. As a result, he spent a lot of his career shooting the ball. How often does he shoot? Well, he’s played in 36719 minutes and taken 19690 total field goal attempts in that time. If you input the data it reveals that Allen Iverson, for his career, will shot the ball once every 1.865 minutes he’s on the floor. To be honest, this is the highest frequency I’ve seen in all my months ‘beta testing’ these statistics. 1.865 minutes is every 1:52 of actual game time. So that means if he plays 35 minutes in a game he’ll shoot the ball nearly 19 times. For a point of reference another Hall of Fame type “point guard” is John Stockton, who shot the ball once every 3.497 minutes (once ever 3:30 of game time). If given the same amount of time (35 minutes), Stockton would shoot the ball 10 times. (Really, 10 times, 10.008 is pretty darn accurate!) That’s almost half as many shots as Iverson . . . and effectively, half as frequent.

This statistic helps us understand which guys really shoot the ball the most, and most likely, are the primary offensive options for any given team. (Though, some anomalies exist, like Matt Harpring who shoots the ball very frequently for a guy with his skills – he shot the ball more often than some guys who started over him during his career)

Gestalt Offense (GO): This is the biggie. I’ve fretted over this for days and days and finally am prepared to release it upon an unwitting population. It’s not perfect, and it seems to only work best with larger sample sizes (a seasons’ worth of data, or a road trip, may look fine – any singular game can break it). It really favors guards and only really works best for players who played in a modern-ish era (one where turnovers, offensive rebounds and other similar statistics were actually recorded). The basis for this was to isolate how much pressure certain players could place on the defense. What a player does on offense (when it comes to stats) can be either one of five things: he can assist on a score, he can get to the foul line, he can take a shot, he can be called for a turn over, or he can grab and offensive rebound. There are no stats for setting solid screens, or anything like the ‘hockey assist’ right now with how the stats are kept. So the statistic is already limited, but I try to do the best with the data that I have. Essentially the GO Rating is the summation of a player’s modified assists, free throw opportunities, offensive rebounding ability, penchant for scoring against their turnovers, all over the number of games a player has played:

Of course, it’s a lot more complicated than that . . .

The first, and most straight forward, part of the equation is assists. This equation not only values assists higher than their normal value ( 2.23 > 1, after all), but it also serves to give a bonus to good passers, and penalize poor passers. (Good or poor depending on if they have a high Assist to Turnover Ratio) The first standard value here is 2.23. Where did this value come from? Well, it’s the true value of an assist when you balance it for the ratio of assisted 2PTFG vs. 3PTFG. (According to the stats on ESPN.com, where all the major stats came from, aside from archived player stats from Basketball-Reference.com) The second standard number is 1.48, this is the mean Assist to Turnover ratio for teams in the NBA. (Room for improvement exists here if I could actually find the mean Assist to Turnover ratio for the players) As it stands how good you are at passing (vs. turning it over) affects how many total points you get from this category. After all, Tim Hardaway may be able to get you 37 assists on a road trip, but those 37 assists would be better than 37 assists from Alonzo Mourning because Zo would pick up quite a few more turnovers along the way.

Free throws are simple enough to understand now that we’ve gone through assists. Here we don’t look at how many free throws an individual has made, as the point of the GO rating was to see the type of pressure that an offensive player puts on the defense. Instead the focus is to see how many free throw attempts the player gets. Of course the catch is that value for FGA is modified by how good a shooter you are compared to the league average (which is 77%). A guy like José Manuel Calderón may only go to the line half the time as someone like Shaq – but Shaq is below average and Jose above average to the point that the difference in points from this category are not as large as we would think. Again, like in assists, it’s a bonus to good shooters and penalty to those who are not so hot from the line. In effect, you want your best free throw shooters at the line, their FTA are then worth more than that of guys who do not go to the line with as much confidence as they do.

Rebounding is easy. I figured that in the grand scheme of things, an Offensive Rebound is worth 1.16 points. I based this on how a Turnover is 1.3 points (see below), how an assist is 2.23 points and how points are worth, well, points. This is a modifier. The second modifier is similar to previous categories. Before we looked at if the player was better than average at Assist to turnover ratio, and then how they fared in FT% against the mean. Here we see that 26.73% of the total rebounds in the NBA were offensive rebounds. If you are a better than average offensive rebounder then you get a bonus here, if you are worse, then you get a negative modifier (as seen as a number less than 1.0, but not a negative number, per se). This part of the equation really seems to get broken if used on Charles Barkley (who, if you look at just one game, would get some crazy number of points in this section because he had 11 offensive rebounds and 5 defensive ones). Thankfully this section self-neuters itself if you have zero offensive rebounds.

Man, where do I begin with this one? Well, we went over Shot Frequency already. We divide 33.6 (representing 33.6 minutes of action for an elite player) by the player’s own Shot Frequency. This tells us how many shots he will put up if given Starter type of minutes. The next step is adding 1 to the Effective Field Goal Percentage (eFG%). This is so that we get a positive value with the percentage when multiplied. Why use eFG% instead of just regular FG%? Well, eFG% adds into account three point shots, and the higher degree of difficulty of shooting from that distance. (For more info on eFG% click here) This step tries to even things out a bit. The third part is how the player’s Shot Worth (also described earlier) rates compared to the league average for Shot Worth (or PPS). If you are Malone-like, you get a nice bonus here, if you are Iverson-like, you don’t get a bonus, and if you are really poor, then you get a penalty. The last part is the total points scored by the individual, divided by 10. Ten was one of the first numbers I used that seemed to make things work out when I was fiddling around. I don’t know if this last section of the Shooting section is legit or not yet, I remember when I tried this out without the last part that individuals would be getting very little from this part of the equation. At some stage you have to factor in how many points a guys scores, even if you are looking are how well they shoot.

Uhhhh, so this is very easy to understand. I’m not going to mention anything more than that this value is subtracted from the rest of the section values in the numerator. Don’t forget to divide everything by the total number of games, ya here!

Man, I’m super duper tired, so I’m just going to go ahead and post this. Give me feedback, tell me I’m crazy and set me straight. I think we need mores stats, and unfortunately, the lack of defensive categories means I can’t make a Defensive GO rating type of stat. I’m open to changing my formulas and re-working things. If you want I can e-mail you the spread sheet that contains the Macro that calculates these new stats. (I got really sick and tired of calculating the GO Rating by hand with pen and paper.)

I will probably make another post on the Go Rating in the future, filled with examples of players, and how they rated. So far I’ve seen that eFG%, Total Points, Assist to turnover ratio and a few other factors really seem to hinder bigmen, while giving guards and other wing players a boost. For the record, Magic Johnson’s GO Rating is 102.241, and he is the gold standard . . . some guys score higher than he does, while others politely fall into place. (Jordan is at 120, Karl Malone at 83, and so forth.)

Don't ask about Donatas

On Sunday I mentioned Donatas Motiejunas in passing, then lo' and behold ESPN.com's draft Guru Chad Ford lists him as one of the players whose draft stock is on the rise. He said:

"Donatas Motiejunas, F, Lithuania
Every year NBA GMs fly around the world looking for the next Dirk Nowitzki. There have been lots of pretenders -- from Nikoloz Tskitishvilli to Vladimir Radmanovic to Andrea Bargnani (who actually looks pretty good this season) to Danilo Gallinari -- but the next Nowitzki has proven to be pretty elusive. This year's Dirk wannabe is Motiejunas -- a 7-foot, 215-pound forward who, you guessed it, runs the floor, has a pretty jumper and can play multiple positions.

Motiejunas has many of the same red flags as those other guys. Scouts say he is soft, needs to add a lot of strength and is playing against watered down competition in Lithuania. However, he's averaging more than 20 points and shooting around 50 percent from 3-point territory -- that's not bad for an 18-year-old in any league in Europe. While it's highly likely he stays in Europe for another season, a couple of international scouts are telling me there are rumblings he might leave.

Said one NBA executive who watched Motiejunas this year: "He's the closest kid I've seen to Dirk coming out of Europe. Honestly. I know what you're thinking. But this kid could be really good."

Somewhere, Bill Simmons is licking his chops for the third round of our annual draft debate." (Ford, ESPN.com, 2008)

I still don't want the Jazz to get interested in this guy, and thankfully, he does not appear to be in draft range of where we'll be picking. Yet . . . this was a pretty cool co-incidence that I blog about a guy, and a few days later, ESPN mentions that guy.

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: Mehmet Okur

Memo is a man-mountain of offensive firepower. (not unlike the Janissary warriors of his Turkish heritage) He's a fantastic spot up shooter for a guy 6'11, and has legit range all over the court and is pretty clutch. He can play pick and pop, pick and roll, or even take his man off the dribble after a cute little pump fake. (Something he worked on all last season with Tyrone Corbin) Most people don't know that he's pretty good in the paint as well, heck, Memo routinely schools Amare Stoudemire when he posts up. After the All-Star break last season Memo averaged 17 and 10, and while a lot of NBA fans think that he's just a soft Euro because he has three point range may have failed to notice his absolutely insane rebounding numbers down the stretch. [15 games of 13 or more boards, 6 games of 16 or more, a season high 19 against the Lakers in the playoffs]

All photos by Melissa Majchrzak for NBAE/Getty Images

Okur was almost Dirk-like from February onwards, as he averaged a double double. Moreover, in games where Memo played in 35 minutes or more [he averages 33 mpg in the regular season] from February onwards he averaged 18.7 ppg and 11.2 rpg. If you further select only games where he plays a Dirk-like 38 mpg then his numbers balloon to 19.3 ppg and 12.1 rpg. You're a pretty good team if your 3rd option is giving you 19.3 and 12.1 when he plays big minutes. "Oh," you say, "these are only for the regular season." Well, In the playoffs he averaged 15.4 ppg and 11.8 rpg. [Up from 14.5 and 7.7 in the regular season] In the games where he only played 38 minutes or above (again, Dirk like numbers) he ends up getting 16.5 ppg, 13.1 rpg -- and 2 apg and 0.78 bpg to boot. If you ramp his stats up to just the games he played over 40 mpg those go to 2.8 apg and 1 bpg respectively if you were wondering. This may even prompt us to ask ourselves if we really do have a center problem when ours averages a double double and pulls down over 13 rebounds per game in the playoffs (in games where he gets star player minutes)?

I'm sorry, for whatever reason people (outside of Utah, Detroit and Turkey) have failed to recognize that Mehmet Okur is a serious bad-ass. Tyson Chandler has that rep, and he averaged 8 ppg and 10.3 rpg in the playoffs. If you forgot already, Okur averaged 15.4 and 11.8. Tyson blocks more shots [a whole 2/3rds of a block more when Memo plays big minutes -- but then Tyson's 8 ppg looks really bad against Memo's 17.2 ppg], but Memo actually makes his free throws and hits threes. If Okur gets better stats than Tyson, why is Tyson a bad-ass, and Memo is soft? There are many reasons, but this isn't the time to discuss racial provincialism in NBA fans. What is it time for is time to talk about what three things we should look for this season from Memo:

1. We need him to start off 'Hot': This is especially true when we've got two rotation guys currently down (Deron Williams, Matt Harpring). Memo is a capable player, his stats from February on through the playoffs show this. He was an All-Star two seasons ago, and the Jazz are going to need him to start off 'Hot' this season, instead of allow him to sleep-walk for half the season, and then turn it on in a Shaq-like development. Thankfully he has come into camp in the best shape of his life and he's been getting praised for his added mobility by coaches and the media alike. This is potentially a contract year for him as well, and if he could be nominated for the All-Star game it would greatly improve his asking price. Memo is an All-Star level talent when he's on the floor for star minutes (35+ mpg) and is averaging 19 and 12.
2. Needs to get to the line more: Did you know that one of our top scoring options and top free throw shooters (by percentage) only gets to the line 3.2 times a game, based on last year's statistics? That was remarkably low for him, as in his previous seasons he was going to the line 4.7, 5.5 and 4.8 times per game. The Jazz offense should put Memo in more situations where he draws fouls (maybe on those pump-fake drives of his, or dare I say it, more post up work). I think Memo needs to shoot between 5 and 6 free throws a game. Andrei went to the line 3.6 times per game and he never even has the ball in his hands on offense, what gives? Even Tyson Chandler went to the line more, at a whopping 3.7 FTA/game, not that he did much good there (59.3 ft%), but that's besides the point. Only Kyle Korver shot better from the line than Memo last season, we need to get our best FT shooters to the line more for easy points.
3. Three point accuracy: It kind of begins and ends with Memo's three point shooting. Being a three point ace makes him a three point threat. Being a three point threat allows him to pump fake people closing out on him, which allows him to put the ball on the floor and drive. Driving allows him to get fouled more, and thus, go to the line more for freebies. Memo needs to shoot a high percentage from deep again this year, especially with Deron possibly being out for a few games we're a little week on outside shooting for the time being. Dirk was like this as well, but he just ended up shooting less and less threes every year and now people remember that he's a three point maker, but he doesn't actually make three pointers. Last season Dirk made 79 threes (up from 72 the season before), but only at the rate of 35.9 3pt%. Last season the Jazz had a few people who shot a higher percentage than Dirk did: Deron @ 39.5%, C.J. @ 39.0%,  Memo and Kyle both @ 38.8%, AK-47 @ 37.9%. I think that Memo's driving ability should make him take (potentially) less threes, but with the over-all result of making him take (shoot and make) a higher percentage of threes. I want to see him shoot above 40% from deep this season while still making more than 100 of them (last season he hit 114 threes, the season before he made 129) . I think that he can.

Things to look for this season: Kosta Koufos

Really, what do you even hope for, as a Rookie playing in Jerry Sloan's system? I can only really name a few guys off the top of my head who actually got significant playing time as a Rookie here . . . Paul Millsap (18.0 mpg) did it when he was a rookie back in 2006-2007, Deron Williams (28.8 mpg) did so as well the season before, and before that some guy named Shandon Anderson (16.4 mpg) got burn on an NBA West Finals team. Usually, though, a rookie either doesn't have the opportunity to play, or the BBALL IQ to deserve playing. I have a chance of being wrong here, but I'm going to go out on a limb and strongly suggest that Koufos isn't going to play in more than 30 games for the Utah Jazz this season, and he's not going to average 10 mpg in those games. [For a point of reference, Fesenko played in only 9 NBA games last season, @ a rate of 7.8 mpg per]

Photograph by Melissa Majchrzak for NBAE/Getty Images

So right off the bat the Ohio State product is getting put in a bad situation for him. I guess part of that just happens to be the fact that he was drafted lower than he expected, and thus, is going to a better team. I'm pretty sure that he could be a rookie producer for some other teams that are rebuilding, and don't have any good bigmen (you know, like Oklahoma) -- but he's not on such a team. He's on a team where the guys ahead of him on the depth chart are all vastly better than him at this point in time. And also there's another 7'1 prospect already on the team.

Mehmet Okur	Carlos Boozer	Andrei Kirilenko	Paul Millsap	Jarron Collins
Starting 5	Starting 4	Starting 3	Backup 4	Backup 5
Photograph by Melissa Majchrzak for NBAE/Getty Images	Photograph by unknown for NBAE/Getty Images	Photograph by Melissa Majchrzak for NBAE/Getty Images	Photograph by Melissa Majchrzak for NBAE/Getty Images	Photograph by unknown for NBAE/Getty Images
Okur was an All-Star back in 2006-2007 and after the All-Star break last season he averaged 17 and 10. Okur was a power forward who was converted into a center when Boozer came back from injury a few seasons back.	Booz was an All-Star in 2006-2007 and 2007-2008 and just 'won' a Gold Medal. He's one of the few 20-10 guys out there today. Boozer plays around 35 mpg, and can play either 4 or 5 depending on the team the Jazz are playing.	AK-47 is the starting 3, but at this stage you better believe that Jerry is more ready to give him big minutes at the 4 than Kosta, after all, he too was an All-Star back when he played inside the paint.	Mansap is a beast, and potentially could be good enough to mitigate any potential losses from having Boozer walk. He's short, but strong and tenacious on defense. His offensive game is highly under-rated.	Jarron Collins is a black belt jedi when it comes to flopping. He's so good at getting other people in bad situations that HE was the guy driving the golf cart when his brother got injured this off-season. He's not a very good basketball player, but he has Jerry's trust -- something Kosta does not yet have.

While Konstantine Demetrios Koufos may one day be a legit power forward of center in the league, this season he's going to be getting a lot of quality time with the Utah Flash. Well, what three things should we look out for this season from Kosta?

1. Work hard and learn quickly: Everyone raves about his work ethic. This is really a good thing, because he's on a team where you either work hard, or you don't play. What I've seen of him so far (basically just the RMR), he is talented, and if taught, he can be a solid NBA player for many seasons. He's a very good shooter (especially from the free throw line), but Deron said it best -- what the Jazz need from him is rebounds and defense. Those two things are aspects of his game that are not quite NBA ready -- but hey, if he works hard and learns quickly they will develop quite well. Let's not forget that he's a 19 year old Rookie though, so don't expect him to be the next Moses Malone or anything, but it's not like Jarron is going to last much longer here on the Jazz.
2. Be a better offensive player as a rookie than Fes was: This shouldn't be hard, especially when you compare the fact that Kosta is a 1st round pick who played NCAA ball and was a potential lotto pick, and Fes was some raw hulk playing in obscurity in a minor European league who was drafted in the 2nd round. Kosta has drawn comparisons to Mehmet Okur -- and as far as sweet shooting big men go, it's hard to find a better role model. That said, Fes was not horrible on offense as he did manage to shoot above 50 fg% and scored over 10 ppg for the Flash. You kind of expect Koufos to shoot the ball more (something he seems to have developed a taste for, as he shoots the ball nearly as much as Boozer does), and thus, he has an inside track on scoring more and being a quantitatively better offensive player. Fes was a beast in his departments, averaging 10.8 rpg and 2.7 bpg over 36 mpg in the D-league, and  12.9 rpg and 1.5 bpg over 36 mpg in the NBA. Kosta will, likewise, be a beast in his departments -- mainly ppg, ft% and rebounds.
3. Split time with Fesenko all season long: It only seems plausible that Kosta will be down in the D-league when Fes is sitting on the bench (or behind it) in Salt Lake City, and they'll switch over periods of the season. The deal is that a guy on the D-league affiliate can only be called by three times during the season, and the 3rd time they have to STAY with the NBA team for the rest of the season. So I guess the Jazz brass will keep an eye on this, and the guy who does the best will be called up a 3rd time, and maybe make it on the playoff roster. If I was the coach I'd seriously think about the development of all these young guys . . . but I'm not the coach, so don't expect much from Kosta or Kyrylo this season.

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 . . .

David Thorpe [ESPN] on the Rookie class of 2008-2009

ESPN's David Thorpe (you may know him from his work with IMG) evaluates a lot of talent. He ranks the Top 50 Rookies of each class and continues to update and revise this list over the course of the season. That said, two members of the Utah Jazz make it up this first, initial, list.

All the way down (or up, depending on how you view him, and his 20% fg shooting 'display' during the RMR) is our own Kosta Koufos. Our big fat Greek draft pick (who isn't actually fat, and he was born and raised in Ohio) is a 19 year old 7'0 center with a sweet stroke who has significant upside. Thorpe explains that he is

"Coordinated, but slow, with a good frame. Looks like he likes to face up and shoot, but his shot looks flat now. Does an excellent job absorbing contact on shots inside; keeps his shoulders square on finishes. His capacity for work is very high, so rapid improvement is a far expectation."

Over all, this is a very positive review for a guy who is a few seasons away (at worst) from contributing to our team.

Additionally, at #40 is our own international man of mystery, Tadija Dragicevic -- an apparently 22 year old Small Forward (6'9, 222 lbs.) who likes to shoot the ball. He's going to stay in the Adriatic League as far as I know, for a very long time, and I seriously doubt that Kevin O'Connor will treat him as anything more than just an asset in the near future. Thorpe's take suggests that Tadija is "a strong and offensive-minded forward who is likely staying in Europe." Can't argue with that, as all I know about him is that his defense is non-existent and that we're stashing him over there. That said, the Serbian has been called a 'Scoring Machine' by draftexpress.com . . . really, check it out here.

Some temp gets to use a different dry erase marker color every so often . . . this is one of those moments.	Tadijilla-Drilla throws it down

Andrei's agent denies stupid Internet rumor

It is no secret that I think that rumormongering is pretty weak -- and discredits blogging and bloggers everywhere. Seriously, we're better than Peter Vescey, right? So I was aghast when I saw ballhype hyping up such a silly and insane rumor. In order for this deal to go down (AK to CSKA) a few giant leaps would have had to be made (like getting out of an NBA-Player's Association deal, or getting bought out for $50 million dollars, and so on) -- the largest being a leap in logic. Andrei wants to finish his contract here, he can always retired from the NBA later and play ball in Europe. Many European players have done so previously, like Sabonis or Marciulionis for example, retiring from the NBA, only to play another 5 or so seasons back in their home continent. Anyway . . . from the horses mouth really,

"There's no question that they would love to have him," agent Marc Fleisher said of CSKA. "But to my knowledge, they haven't made any efforts this summer -- at least through me -- to get him, so I don't take it (the rumor) very seriously." (Mark Fleisher, via the Deseret News, 2008)

Marc Fleisher works as an agent with EnterSport, and represents Andrei Kirilenko, Tony Parker, Mehmet Okur, Jerome James, Sean Marks, Willie Solomon and Nathan Jawai.