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.)

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!

"That Memo is so hot right now" - Mugatu

Mehmet Okur, since the start of February, has made 24 of 39 threes. Looks bad, doesn't it? Well, that's 61.538 %. I felt like looking it up because the guys over at Dimemag mentioned how 'great' LeBron is shooting since the All-Star Break from deep (14-30, 46%). Yeah, if LeBron is hot from deep, Memo is an inferno right now -- over a longer stretch of time as well. Memo has upped his three point shooting % to a career high 48.5% for the season with this hot streak . . . that's good enough for 3rd best in the league right now. Also take note that he's not a specialist spot up shooter like guys like Bonner or Murphy, the only guy who has a higher scoring average on that list then Memo is Durant, who is way down to #9, Memo scores inside and out to the tune of over 18 ppg right now. When was the last time a center was in the top 5? Never, right? If you didn't get what that quote is from, it's from the movie Zoolander . . . you can watch part of the running gag here. Hmmm, today seems to be the Will Ferrell Day here at All That Jazz.

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.

Requisite Oscars/NBA cross over post

[EDIT: After several emails and other comments which told me that this post was unreadable, I re-formatted it so that it no longer appears ONLY in widescreen resolutions. Now all the text should appear. Thanks!]

If you are like me, you have a special woman in your life who made you a) watch the Oscars, b) simultaneously tape it to your digital media recording device, and c) do the same for the pre-Oscars red carpet thingy. Hopefully this is a small majority of men out there, for watching a program so self-aggrandizing disgusted me . . . then again, I read the ESPN.com website, so perhaps the two forums aren't too far off in reality. That said, let's take a look at some of the movies nominated (and not nominated), and see if there's some loose threads we can stitch together to make a post about . . .

	The big winner of the night was "Slumdog Millionaire", despite actually casting the talented Anil Kapoor in the role of a villain, the movie was pretty solid. It was not the best movie of all time, and it's not going to make anyone forget about previous movies that dominated the awards ceremonies, but it was a small film from the middle of no where that came on strong . . . and as people continued to notice it . . . it became such a huge hit that it ended up winning 8 Oscars -- you know 3 less than Ben Hur (my fav. movie of all time). Perhaps if the field was stronger this year, and there was more competition for Slumdog then the movie would not have been regarded as such a success. Sound like anyone we have on our team? It should, we have our own Slumdog Millionaire on our team in Paul Millsap -- born into a difficult situation in Louisiana growing up under harsh economic situations, yet learning the value of hard work, he has fought his way into the NBA and earned a minimum salary contract. This year he is a (restricted) free agent, and looks to break out and win his big payday.
	A few Jazz fans would easily take the easy route and make initial connections to Carlos Boozer with the movie "Doubt". I don't want to go there, especially not when his coach goes to bat for him and suggests that Carlos has done everything he has been asked to do. Instead, I'm going with "The Dark Night", while the movie was enjoyed, it did not really gain any critical claim (save for being nominated for 8 Oscars). The Dark Knight, essentially, is a movie that delves into the issues of perception and reality. Bruce Wayne is a good guy who is caring and hard working who hides that with the appearances of being an extremely wealthy 'douche bag' who lives a good life and is vapid, but somewhere between the real Bruce and the fake Bruce is a man who fights for good. Yet even in doing that his crime fighting persona is equally loved and vilified by the very people that he is fighting for. The only people who really get Batman, really understand him and the sacrifices he has made are those closest to him -- his team. How is this not Carlos Boozer? We all think he's a bad guy -- isn't this almost exactly how all people on Gotham's police force and underbelly alike (save for Gordon) see him? He is like a Dark Knight in that he is not without blemishes, he can take the criticism, yet still press on to do good.
	When looking on IMDB.com I see a lot of movies that are highly ranked partly due to their own virtues, but mostly popular due to how recent they are. The 'industry' really appears to be a 'what have you done for me lately' kind of business -- and this is similar to the NBA in some respects. Thankfully some performances do get recognized, even though they are by older actors, or happen to occur in movies that do not have high profile stars the kids of today are familiar with. It's pretty much the same mentality that makes Doc Rivers a two time coach of the year -- yet he couldn't coach his way out of a paper bag, he's been fired like 2 times hasn't he? Clint Eastwood is a throwback, and his character (in Gran Torino) of a grizzled old man assessing his life in the wake of his wife's death, and trying to still forge a place in the world for someone like him really seems a lot like Jerry Sloan. Sloan has won a lot of games and was an All-Star a few times as a player himself; Eastwood was one of the best leading men in the film industry and gone on to be a great director. If it is possible, I find that both are talked about quite a bit, yet, both are still under appreciated today.
	Okay, this one is a stretch, but . . . did anyone actually see the highly acclaimed movie "The Reader"? 15 year old boy thrown into 'the game' in Europe during crazy times, passionate love affair with older woman who has a crazy past? Dude likes to read? Sounds like Andrei Kirilenko, who turned pro at the age of 15 (well, I think it was 16, but that's still 2 years earlier than CJ did); and married an older woman. (Masha is a few years older) The time between Andrei being a professional till them meeting later in life masks some weird shit Masha did. No, she was not employed by a genocide organization, but she did study abroad and became a pop music producer. (Not exactly the straight and narrow) Let's just saw that she knew much more of the world before Andrei knew her.
	I don't really want to go into it, but "The Wrestler" and Matt Harpring -- both are tough, gritty and flawed individuals trying to do the best they can with what they have -- while fighting their toughest rival yet: father time. Both spend more time grappling than any of the fancy moves you see today, and I guess that Harpring's wife (who is a successful doctor pulling in over $175k per year) is kinda like former Oscar winner Marisa Tomei on some level on the spousal success meter.
	I did not watch this movie either, but the plot seems kind of interesting . . . there's this guy, and when he's born he's all old and stuff. And then he ages backwards . . . somehow there's a tie into a love interest (and the special time in their lives when they are both the same age) and something about New Orleans. I guess the point, or gimmick is that instead of getting older, something natural, he gets younger. What else defies the natural laws of reality? How about a guy who was pretty solid in his rookie season, only to get worse every following season in the NBA? Thus, I give you, "The curious case of Jarron Collins". (click on "the curious case of" to go to the imdb.com website for the movie, or click on Jarron's name to read his actually curious case)
	If you thought the Wrestler=Harpring thing was a stretch you're not going to like liking Kosta Koufos with "New Boy" . . . a story about being the new kid in school. Apparently there are some race issues in this movie, or undertones, and they probably don't exist in Kosta's life unless Memo gives him a hard time about Cyprus or something.
	Okay, this is another movie I have not seen, but . . . the concept of "Step Brothers" seems interesting: two guys end up having to live together (as their single parents get married) and they have to learn to live with it. They have a history of competition, but -- I'm guessing -- learn to work it all out together. I'm thinking 2005 Draft Pick C.J. Miles and 2006 Draft Pick Ronnie Brewer for these roles. They were initially thrust into having to live together (as starters), have a history of competition (they had to fight for playing time over the last few seasons) and -- we're hoping -- learn to work it all out together. Both hardly see much time in the 4th quarter of games, and have had their ups and downs this season, but right now both are playing quite well. Also their film history does suggest that they could carry a comedy film. (necessary link)
	Out of all of these, the least research was put into linking "The Visitor" with Morris Almond and Kyrylo Fesenko. In the movie a college professor learns that he has some illegal immigrant squatters living in his apartment -- instead of calling the cops we get a drama about cultural exchange and growth. Instead of making it a college professor, how about a college grad . . . and instead of squatters, a large Ukrainian guy (with work visa troubles) who doesn't have a drivers licence and calls you all the time when he needs to go somewhere? This has buddy comedy written all over it, something like Rush Hour meets What about Bob?, but without all the fighting, and probably about twice as much slap stick comedy.
	Okay, that's a flat out lie . . . the least research was actually trying to link "Burn after reading" with Memo, Korver, Brevin and Ronnie Price. Korver is the pretty dumb one (Brad Pitt). Knight is the intense dumb one (John Malkovich). Memo is the funny, bearded dumb one (George Clooney). Ronnie Price just wants to get paid (Frances McDormand). I got nothing.
	Lastly, I'm not a huge fan of remakes, though at times I can freely admit that a modern take on a great movie/character/script is well worth the admission. For example, I think that 12 Angry Men is a great movie; one that would be good in the right hands if remade. Similarly, John Stockton was amazing, and a modern take on him would desperately help our team escape from the Milt Palacio's and Keith McLeod's of previous years. That said, some times expectations are hard to meet on these remakes. "Quantum of Solace", on its' own, is an okay movie -- but as an closeted remake of the older Bond movie "Licence to Kill" it pales in comparison. The new Bond is better than the old Bond in some ways, similarly, Deron Williams is better than John in some ways -- but really, I think historical revisionism is going a bit far when some Jazz fans feel that Deron is better . . . Deron Williams' hasn't even made an All-Star team or been first in the league in APG in a season yet. But back to the movie . . . Quantum of Solace is, essentially, a revenge movie. A strong character who often has to do it on his own to get things done finally gets some help around the end of the film, puts it all together, and does what he is supposed to do, in order to attain that very small quantum of solace. Deron has over the past few seasons been an All-Star, though his 'team' hasn't won enough games by the All-Star break the past two seasons to warrant his inclusion in the All-Star game. This season has been no different. James Bond is in similar situations where he's not highly regarded, has to do it alone, and though hard work and perseverance gets the job done. The few quanta of solace for Deron this season (again, no All-Star nod) will have to be making the All-NBA team (again); getting just as far, if not farther than CP3 in the playoffs (again); and beating his ass in head to head competition (again).

Yeah. Going to bed at 2 am on a Sunday night isn't that fun . . .

Walking Wounded

Let's be honest, this was supposed to be our season. Not our season to 100% win the championship, but a year where things were supposed to come together better than they had the previous seasons -- guys would be at the end of their contracts, and this would be a make or break season for the team as it is currently composed. Instead everything pretty much went absolutely nuts -- in a bad way.

It could have been worse, you know -- it's not like we traded a player only for him to fail his medical examination (right Hornets?); or we haven't played our highest earning player a single second this year (right Knicks fans?). That said, it hasn't really been that great either.

I haven't been that glued to the Jazz this season partly because of how bad it got. I haven't felt this distanced since the 2004-2005 season (where AK missed 41 games and Carlos missed 31). The Jazz are sitting at 3rd place in their division and 8th in the conference right now. Why? If I had to point my finger on something I'd have to go with "Injuries for $500, Alex". After playing 55 games this season the Jazz have (only?) 23 losses.

Position	Name	Role	Accolades	# of games missed	Status
PG	Deron Williams	Team leader	All-NBA 2nd team last year, Top 5 PG in the L, Gold Medal winner	14	Injured in pre-season, played hurt all season long, finally feeling healed over the last two weeks
SG	Ronnie Brewer	Primary wing defender	Top 5 FG% SG in the L	1
SF	C.J. Miles	Utility player on offense	Never really had playing time before in his life	5
PF	Carlos Boozer	Top Scorer, Top Rebounder	Multiple time All-Star, Gold Medal winner	43	...and counting...
C	Mehmet Okur	Best outside threat, clutch shooter	Former All-Star, captain of his National Team	9	Had to fly to Turkey in the middle of a road trip because his father was on his death bed
6th Man	Andrei Kirilenko	Best defender, Glue guy	Former All-Star, MVP of Eurobasket 2007, European player of the year 2008	15	Just had ankle surgery, came back early, could have been out longer
	Brevin Knight	Team veteran off bench, oldest player	one of the best career Assist:Turn over ratios	8
	Paul Millsap	Became starter early in the season because of Boozer's injury, previously just an energy player off the bench	Had 19 straight double doubles this season	6	Got injured when the Jazz were reeling from other injuries to forwards/centers, has been playing hurt over the last 6 weeks
	Matt Harpring	Toughest hustle player	Player other NBA players hate to be defended by	14	Near fatal foot infection after surgery in the off-season
	Kyle Korver	Bench sharp-shooter	Highly regarded three point threat	4	Has played entire season with wrist injury to shooting hand
	Jarron Collins	Backup center	Probably had a good SAT score	38	Off-season golf cart accident that injured him and his twin brother, still a bad player, but still our backup center
				157 games total

That's a lot of games missed by key guys. If you divide 157 games evenly between your starters, and their back ups, you get an average of 16 games missed by each of your top 10 guys on your depth chart. That's not bad, especially not if those are spaced out. That's quite manageable. Unfortunately, the Jazz have had multiple injuries at the same time . . . sometimes to the same position on the court. Heck, there have been games where both Deron Williams and Brevin Knight have been out. If you haven't been following along, Jerry Sloan's offense is only as good as the point guard running it. During this stretch the Jazz had Ronnie Price (former 2 guard), C.J. Miles (a former 2 guard now playing the 3) and Andrei Kirilenko (former 4 playing the 3) running the show. How solid would the Lakers have been at the 2 (the triangle's most important position) if Kobe and Sasha were both out? Probably not that great, I reckon.

D-Will had to be carried off on Oct 18, 2008 thanks to some amazing Bowen like defense by Derrick Rose (Photographed by Joe Murphy for NBAE/Getty Images)	Boozer hurt his knee on Nov 19, 2008 against the Bucks, a non-contact injury which made little sense. (Photographed by Melissa Majchrzak for NBAE/Getty Images)	AK was down but not out after his ankle surgery -- he came back to play pretty quickly for such a fragile looking guy. (Photographed by Lisa Blumenfeld for NBAE/Getty Images)	Nasty post-op foot infection, not actually Matt Harpring's foot though . . .	Memo and his dad Abdullah in the Istanbul Int'l airport, in happier times back in 2005.

Lots of teams face injuries during the season, it's just part of the game. Very few teams face a multitude of injuries/absences to the same position at the same time though. The zenith of it was a game against Philadelphia where Memo had to leave to fly to see his dad in Turkey, Jarron Collins was injured, Kyrylo Fesenko had to leave the country because of a work visa problem, and the Jazz had to start a 19 year old Kosta Koufos -- and Kosta had to defend guys like Elton Brand and Sam Dalembert all night long. The Jazz actually won that game. How crazy is that? All hail expanded rosters and 4th string (actually he should be 2nd) centers! [Sadly, this was one of the first games of the season -- and the most RECENT game recap on All That Jazz]

The injury situation has been absurd this season for the Utah Jazz . . . heck, yesterday our injured team owner even passed away. Never has a team been so cursed with injuries it seems. Well, there is good news -- so don't jump off any bridges yet. Right now the Jazz are the least injured they have been all season -- with only one key guy (Boozer) who is out. And rumor has it that he will be ready to play next week. The Jazz have managed to position themselves in the playoff hunt, and they are only 5 games behind in their division. Utah plays Denver twice yet this season, so if the Jazz win those two games then they only need to make up 3 more -- which is easily done if we come back hungry and healthy in this 2nd half of the season. It's a good time to be a Jazz fan, because as dark as things look now, things are only going to get better. After all, in the last few games the Jazz have (while still not at full strength) knocked off the LA Lakers and Boston Celtics.

Oh, if the Jazz do win the division Jerry Sloan should get COY . . . all the other playoff teams would have died by now with 157 injuries (spread unequally among the rotation guys). So here's to a healthy next 27 (+playoffs) games!

Go Jazz Go!