Who else is sick with the Great Hype surrounding Andrew “Bust”num?

If you’ve ever wandered onto an LA Lakers blog, message board, or listened to a nationally broadcasted game by Mike “Fellatio for the Lakers 24/7” Tirico then you’ll know, with complete certainty, that Andrew Bynum is one of the best centers in the league, and will without giving any prior notice, become the next best center in the league and join the pantheon of great bigmen. He will rightfully sit alongside Wilt, Russell and Kareem while using Ewing, Robinson and O’Neal as foot rests. The third footrest will be necessary because of how great and grand his male organ must be – as he has been photographed at the Playboy mansion (who cares) and is curiously linked to Rihanna right now. (who? exactly.)

As impressive as his potential appears, and as great as his off-court life may or may not be (I’d rather hang out at the Acharya mansion any day of the week) – I’m less than impressed with him as a player. I’m even less impressed when I actually look at his accomplishments as a player in the playoffs (aka. when it counts). Furthermore, I’m pretty much sick to death by the hype that he has received from casual fans, homer fans, and the media alike. Now, this isn’t meant to trash the hopes of the future of the Lakers at all – I strive to temper the expectations of him a little bit. For his sake, and ours.

My brother is the most rational Lakers fan I know, he is passionate, but not completely under the spell that countless others are on the internet. He’s more concerned with consistent play, rebounding and solid defense from all of the Lakers and does not have the time to worry about if Bynum is going to be the next Kareem – he’s worried about right now. If I was a Lakers fan I wouldn’t be worried about right now – you guys will trounce Denver on your way to the NBA Finals (where anything can happen). I would, on the other hand, be worried about the past – specifically Bynum’s past.

He’s 21 years old right now and was drafted as a 17 year old. What do we know about him that should really count? How about the fact that he had an injury ruined high school career (leg/knee injury), and in the NBA has had two more leg/knee injuries in his young career. He’s tall, but not nearly as super athletic and fit as freaks like Dwight Howard or Amare Stoudemire are – I don’t expect him to be physically made of the same stuff as those guys are. When you get over 7 feet tall, any injuries to your lower body seriously limit how reliable you can be, regardless of how much work one may put on their upper bodies. (You’re only as strong as your base is – look at Yao Ming, who has just a storied lower body injury history as Bynum, he misses lots of games every year, and is never 100% due to the strain his body puts on his lower body) Amare had two career ending (had this been the 80’s/90’s) knee injuries, but has come back due to a great work ethic. Bynum puts women on his shoulders during rehab. I wouldn’t be making a huge leap by suggesting that Bynum may have a career that features a number of injuries to his lower body, not unlike Yao Ming – as opposed to being virtual injury free like Dwight Howard. But I have no crystal ball, I’m just going on the fact that he’s a big guy with a history of lower body injuries who was injury prone as a teen and only looks to put an increasingly large strain on those same joints as his ages and increases mass.

That’s not very empirical though, it’s just an assumed health arc based on his body type, job, apparent work ethic, how healthy other big guys his size have been and medical history. What is empirical, on the other hand, is to dig deep and look at stats. I love stats. Stats are flawed, as I’ve explained on this blog before, but they still give a pretty good indication of on court production. (After all, that’s what counts, points, rebounds, blocks, assists, steals, turn overs and fouls, right?)

After this last game against the Houston Rockets the total number of playoff games that Bynum has participated in stands at 18. These 18 games have taken him from 2005-2006 till now to amass. In that time he has been brought along slowly – thanks to the fact that he doesn’t need to be useful when he’s so far down the pecking order behind at least 4 other guys. That said, his production does not appear to be indicative of him joining the pantheon of great bigmen any decade soon. I want to look at his stats in the playoffs and see the promise that appears to be there (and only appears in regular season games against bad teams sandwiched between injuries). As a point of reference I looked at Patrick Ewing’s first 19 games (why not 18? wanted to complete that one series to make it an even number of playoff off series for the two) in the playoffs. Ewing was a great center, but never will he be called the best of his generation, and thus, not up for entry into the pantheon of greatest bigmen ever (though the media has already reserved a spot there for Bynum).

Bynum’s first 18 Playoff games, and how they stack up:

Ewing creams Bynum statistically. And Ewing played in a time where big guys weren’t bailed out with foul shots, and played against much better competition. Bynum played against the Phoenix Suns, twice anchored in the paint by Frenchman Boris Diaw; the injury depleted Utah Jazz that was forced to start Jarron Collins; and the Houston Rockets, who during the course of the series, lost Yao Ming to injury a little more than 2 games in – and had to turn to a rotation of Chuck Hayes, Carl Landry and Luis Scola to battle LA’s 7 footers. Bynum gets killed – just look at the stats.

Alas, he is immune to any criticism for a great rebuttal exists: Ewing had much more experience from being a guy who actually went to college, won a National Title; and also played in the NBA for a few seasons before making the playoffs. All this is true, but nothing prevented Bynum from going to college himself – if he was really interested in experience. That said, I also took a chance to look at another young bigman, and saw how he faced the NBA pressure. David Robinson did manage to make the playoffs as a rookie (he led his team there, unlike Bynum who did his best to stay out of Kobe’s way). David Robinson is far from my favorite player in the world – but he also creams Bynum’s numbers when you take out experience and look just at Bynum’s FIRST FOUR SEASONS against David’s ROOKIE season.

Let’s not forget that David had to go to war against Joe Barry Carroll and the plethora of tough guys in the paint that Portland sported back when David was a rookie. Bynum, with 4 years of experience in the NBA, has yet to face anything like that in the NBA playoffs – and his numbers are completely pathetic.

Ewing: 22.1 ppg, 10.9 rpg, 2.37 bpg

Robinson: 24.4 ppg, 12.00 rpg, 4.00 bpg

Bynum: 4.83 ppg, 3.78 rpg, 0.67 bpg

Obviously the data is heavily skewed against poor, young Bynum. His first few playoff sorties were short and he was inexperienced. Obviously the stats are going to go against him when you include some of his early games. The Bynum of today is a beast though! Look at Bynum’s numbers from just his 4th season in the playoffs against other greats and you’ll see! You’ll all see!

Okay, let’s do that then.

Bynum’s Playoff stats from his 4th season, and how those stats stack up:

Bynum’s numbers improve very slightly, he ups his ppg from 4.83 to 5.58, his free throw percentage from 62.96% to 76.47% and he swats almost 0.2 more blocks per game. Still not impressed. He’s a far cry from, let’s just randomly say, Hakeem Olajuwon. In the Dream’s 4th NBA season he happened to tear the NBA playoff’s a new one with his scoring -- 37.5 ppg (57.14 fg%, 88.37 ft%); rebounding – 16.75 rpg; and all around game – 2.75 bpg, 1.75 apg, 2.25 spg.

Not only did Hakeem obliterate Bynum’s pitiful offensive output by a magnitude nearing 7x, but absolutely owned him all over the boxscore. He also did it against much tougher competition as well.

Heck, Bynum is so far from being impressive that Greg Ostertag’s fourth year playoff stats could (and do) give Bynum’s fourth year playoff stats a run for their money. It’s horrible to say, but really Lakers fans (and media, or is that redundant?) – take a look and weep.

Bynum is a much better offensive player than Ostertag (is this even saying anything?), but Ostertag owns Bynum when it comes to rebounds and blocks. Greg even managed to out-assist Bynum and made less mistakes (as seen in less turn overs and fouls per game).

What’s worse, the fact that Bynum just got his lunch handed to him by Ostertag; or the fact that Ostertag was doing this against super duper vets and talented players like Vlade, Arvydas, Dale Davis and Rasheed (when Ostertag was a 4th year player) – and looking better than media adored Bynum going up against Chuck Hayes and the guy who was behind Ostertag on the depth chart?

Furthermore, Bynum’s had 5 scoreless games in the playoffs, out of 18. And he’s scored less than 5 points 11 times out of 18. Ouch.

Take a look at Hakeem’s 37.5 ppg average again. Ouch.

Of course, there HAS to be a rebuttal for this . . . no way can Bynum been so far behind Hakeem at the same stage of NBA experience, and yet so close to NBA laughingstock Greg Ostertag . . . right?  . . . .right? Don’t worry Lakers fans, of course there is . . . forget about NBA experience, that’s a flawed concept. Let’s not forget that Hakeem and Greg both played college ball (like Ewing and Robinson did) . . . Bynum didn’t play college. Look at how young he is! He’s only 21! Surely when you take that into account it makes up for 32 ppg (in the case of Hakeem), or nearly a block and a half (in the case of Ostertag)!!!

Okay, let’s take at a look at that. Try me.

Bynum’s Playoff stats as a 21 year old, and how those stats stack up against another 21 year old:

Bynum is a very brittle 21 year old who doesn’t have to do anything, and his team makes it to the NBA Finals. I’m not lying, the Lakers did that last season. That said, Bynum is a force of nature, and the future of the center position in the NBA. His 21 year old production is unrivaled. Right? Wrong. Take a look at this guy, and what he did in the playoffs at the tender age of 21 (his 2nd season in the L, not his 4th like Bynum). I just have one hyphenated word to describe this: Shaq-Attaq.

A lot of the same Lakers fans who champion Bynum marginalize how great Shaq was. I can clearly see why Kobe went out of his way to suggest that Bynum needed to be traded – because Kobe knew how good Shaq was. The difference between the two is quite telling when you look at these two centers at the age of 21, Bynum in his 4th season and Shaq in his 2nd.

The difference between the two was almost 15 points, 10 rebounds and over 2 blocks and almost 2 assists . . . in favor of the 2nd year player.

That’s a huge difference.

The difference between being called one of the best bigmen of all time, and being called a bust.

Bynum was a lotto pick man, and aside from his inspired dirty play in injuring two guys this season, and being afraid of Fesenko in the paint, he’s done nothing to earn the high praise that’s heaped on him. And he’s done nothing to make me feel like giving him any props.

His current playoff run isn’t over yet, and he’s got one, most likely two more playoff series to make his 2008-2009 playoffs slightly more memorable than his complete no-show in the 2007-2008 playoffs.

I’m taking it easy on Bynum here by comparing him to guys that he may yet one-day reach . . . even if it doesn’t seem like it. I could really try to down him if I wanted by comparing him to his contemporaries who are out-playing him right now. For example take Dwight Howard -- in his first 14 playoff games: 17.86 ppg (57.23 fg%, 51.72 ft%), 15.5 rpg, 2.71 bpg, 1.14 apg, 0.714 spg . . . those numbers are way better than Bynum’s. Also better are Dwight’s numbers as a 21 year old and Dwight’s numbers in his 4th NBA season.

If I really wanted to be a dick I’d mention that Dwight also has 3 less leg injuries. I’m not a dick though, so I’m not going to mention that.

 

 

What did we learn?

What did we learn? Well, for starters we learned that Andrew Bynum’s playoff performances leave much to be desired. His first 18 games in the playoffs pales in comparison to Ewing’s numbers over the same situations – and Ewing played against much better defensive clubs like Michael’s Bulls and the Bad Boy Pistons. We learned that David Robinson’s rookie season playoff numbers invalidates the argument that Bynum’s rookie numbers shouldn’t count. We also learned that Hakeem’s numbers as a fourth year player completely eclipse Bynum’s as a 4th year player. I didn’t even have to look up 2nd tier NBA centers like Rik Smits at all after I found out that at the same level of NBA experience that Greg Ostertag’s playoff performance was a wash with that of Bynum’s. Lastly, we learned that Bynum can’t even hide behind his age as an excuse for how poor his performances have been – as Shaq as a 21 year old eats Bynum up. Ultimately, we learned that it’s a bit too premature to call Bynum anything other than a bust at this stage. He’s much closer to Ostertag, albeit one who rebounds and blocks less, and fouls and turns the ball over more, than he is to being one of the greatest bigmen of all time – let alone in his own generation.

After all, Dwight’s numbers at each break down (first x number of games, 4th NBA season, and at age 21) are vastly superior to Bynum’s. Oh yeah, also Bynum has a history of injury problems to the same parts of his body and young guys who sustain so many injuries in short succession tend to have injury plagued careers. Yeah, I wasn’t supposed to mention that again . . . I guess I am a dick after all.

Bynum doesn’t deserve his hype until he does something. Something other than sucking when it counts, that is.

If you liked the stat breakdown, and would like a full version at full resolution, click on the image below. I dunno, maybe you are just into making Bynum look silly . . . or want a stat heavy window’s desktop wallpaper . . . or both? Go nuts!

Contract years, Developing Talent & Front Office Subterfuge

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

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

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

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

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

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

It's not always this simple, though.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Utah Jazz Pre-Season 2008-2009: X Factor

The major X-Factor this season is not going to be guard play . . . or post defense . . . or bench production. All three of those things have normalized themselves, our guards are who they are, our post defense needs improvement and our bench is very productive. The whole issue of next off-season will not hang over the heads of this team all season long either -- as they will focus on the games at hand. If this does become a large factor it will actually serve as a positive motivation for the team to get it done this season, instead of just rely on the fact that they are all so young. (Eldest player on the team is Brevin Knight at 32) The X-factor for this season is, bluntly, Andrei Kirilenko. I've written about him a lot ever since I started this blog (61 times as of this writing), and that is no doubt correlated to how complicated his situation is with our team.

I don't need to rehash everything here, we all know that he makes more money than he could ever justify on the court. We also know that he's pretty talented, and when given the minutes, he can do some amazing things -- things no one else on our team can do. Right now he's going to come off the bench for us (which may be good -- or bad).

The main reason why he's the X factor is because of escalation. Back in the 80s you were a contending team if you had two really good players (for example, the Jazz didn't start to win until they had Stockton and Malone). Then somewhere in the 90s you needed a third guy to be a good team -- and all these crops of "the big three" started to be talked about. Some teams still did well with two really good players (like Shaq and Kobe), while other teams needed that third guy to get them over the top. The last, best example of this would be the 2007-2008 Boston Celtics with Paul Pierce, Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen. Escalation now has changed things, and to be a good team you're going to need four good guys.

For example, a team like Orlando (three good guys in Dwight, Hedo and Rashard) can only advance so far in the playoffs because their three guys aren't the best three guys around. They would need a 4th guy to be as good. Moreover, the LA Lakers now sport line ups with Kobe Bryant, Pau Gasol, Andrew Bynum and Lamar Odom. The Detroit Pistons have been playing forever with Chauncey, Rip, Tay and 'Sheed. Houston has reloaded and are now Tracy, Yao, Ron and Battier/Rafer (they equal one good player).

Brewer is a nice player, but right now he's not at the same level as most of the guys I've listed -- he's not at an All-Star level. Andrei, on the other hand, has all the credentials to be a player at that level. He is a go-to-guy for his national team, he compliments the other three guys (Deron, Carlos and Memo) well, and he's BEEN just as good as an All-Star at times during his career (Like last season's victory over the Lakers when Memo and Booz were out and he had a triple double and nearly a 5x5 in the same game).

Four is the new three; just as three was the new two. We need that 4th guy to step up. And as a result, Andrei Kirilenko is our X-Factor this season. We need less 12 point, 4 assist games from him and more 16 point, 6 rebound, 5 assists games from him if the Jazz are going to be one of the top 5 teams at the end of the season -- instead of just at the beginning.

Things to look for this season: Andrei Kirilenko

It's seems like it's Andrei Kirilenko day here at:All That Jazz . . . or at least it does if you read this rant (basically Part 1 of what to look for from Andrei this season).
	Blocking Yao Ming	Using hair Gel	Looking to dime

Speaking of which . . . what are the three things should we look for from AK-47 this season:

1. Role Play: Being the 4th or 5th option on offense with the starters and standing around watching other guys play with the ball didn't really work for Andrei. His stats suggest that he "can" be the same guy, but it's hard when he's playing only 24 mpg, and in the time he's playing he doesn't get to see the ball except on shots that he blocks. Being more involved with the ball as one of the major cogs on offense for the bench is going to help quite a bit. I saw this one move from this preseason that had me absolutely drooling. Millsap posted up on his man and got the ball from Knight. Andrei's man went over to help and Millsap picked up his dribble. Andrei cut from the perimeter towards the basket and Millsap found him. Andrei sucked in all the defenders as he had a clear path to the basket -- and instead of shooting it he kicked it out to the right corner where Korver was all alone. Naturally, Korver buried the three point shot. Last season our bench had two plays: the Harpring curl (sometimes used for Korver instead), and the turn over. Having Andrei play with the bench is going to make our bench so much more dynamic. If the starters can tread water on defense for long enough when Andrei sits then our team can be quite good -- especially with a 6th man who can basically play starter minutes, defend and give you 14.5/6/5/2/2 in that time.
2. Be a glue guy off the bench: Andrei explained that when he gets to watch the game develop he can take note of things that are happening right on the floor, and stuff that isn't going so right as well. When he comes in he can try to help fill the gap of whatever was missing. (Most likely it's going to be defense, but hey, call me a cynic) Coming off the bench is going to be really good for him as the 2nd quarter usually starts off as a time for Harpring to have the green light to shoot. Andrei's points were down the last few seasons because he just plan stopped shooting the ball. The last five seasons have gone from 11.9 fga as an All-Star to 10.2 fga, 10.6 fga, then 6 fga and last season 7.6 fga. I don't think Andrei needs to be shooting over 10 times a game, but when he shot around 9 times a game he ends up scoring 14 points or so. Supplanting Harpring at this juncture may allow him to shoot if a bit more. However, my concept of glue guy doesn't mean shooting the ball all the time -- it's just that being on the floor with less talented offensive players may mean that coach calls his number a bit more often.  Knowing Andrei, if Sloan drew up a play for him to shoot, he'd probably find a way to pass off the shot to someone else anyway. Still -- Andrei's versatility may work to everyone's advantage as a glue guy, instead of a guy who is more talented than Battier being forced into playing a Battier like role with the starters.
3. Expect the unexpected: This could mean a variety of things . . . I fully expect Andrei to throw some really crazy passes this season. Having him handle the ball more with the 2nd unit and pass to guys who he doesn't get to play with a lot is going to result in some really spectacular early season turn overs. This could also mean that Andrei -- him, and not the fans -- should expect the unexpected. Harpring is gingerly participating in shooting drills now, and as I mentioned previously, the main reason why AK is going to the bench is to replace the heady play of veteran shooter Matt Harpring. What happens when Harpring comes back? Jerry Sloan already talked about how Harpring doesn't need to participate in pre-season because he knows his role and what 'we' are trying to do here. What if the starting frontcourt gets clobbered on defense without AK watching their back? The whole AK as a super 6th man concept may end before the honeymoon period of having him anchor the 2nd unit does! We may see Andrei back in the starting line-up before we know it.

Personally I don't really care, after developing a massive migraine looking at over 250 games I can say that he just needs to play 35+ mpg to be awesome. The last two seasons he played 29 and 30 mpg. He also wasn't awesome. Three seasons ago he played 37 mpg, and got 15/8/4/3 and 1.5 steals per game. Five seasons ago he played 37 mpg and was an All-Star. Doesn't take a genius, or a 70 million year old coach, to figure it out.

NBA Stars Back in the Day . . .

I got this from over here, and props to them for finding it. It's kind of entertaining to see some of the 'personality' of these stars stay consistent from way back then: for example Alonzo Mourning looks like he wants to fight, Kobe is smug because he's popular, and Magic is a smiling fool. I do agree with the author of that post that I am stealing this from (ethanator1088) that Larry Bird looks like he was born during the depression according to this picture. Anyway . . . enjoy the video.

Here's the full list of kids pics:
Allen Iverson Kevin Garnett Emanuel Ginobili Baron Davis Emeka Okafor Shaquille O'Neal Pau Gasol Dennis Rodman Devin Harris Shawn Kemp (looks like LeBron's dad . . . I'm just saying) Yao Ming Tony Parker Kobe Bryant Larry Johnson Vince Carter Tim Duncan Charles Barkley Mike Bibby Alonzo Mourning
Andrei Kirilenko Dwyane Wade John Stockton Kenyon Martin Magic Johnson Anfernee Hardaway Scottie Pippen Sebastian Telfair (with cousin Stephon) Reggie Miller	Dirk Nowitzki Larry Bird Karl Malone Pete Maravich Grant Hill Dominique Wilkins Steve Francis Jason Williams Paul Pierce Patrick Ewing (looking to be sponsored) Michael Jordan

Fun stuff . . . the song is kind of down-tempo though, so if you like Sarah McLachlan then you'll like this. (and really, who doesn't own a few of her albums already . . .)

Utah Jazz on National TV -- what to look for!

I guess this is improvement on some level, you know what I'm talking about . . . I've been a hardcore Jazz fan for 20 years or so now, and I've never seen them on National TV so much in one regular season. How many times are the Jazz going to be seen nationally? 11 times! That is really a lot, as I'm used to the 3-6 games a season that I may get a chance to see (mostly on TNT double headers). Anyway, let's take a look at what to we're bound to see:

November 12th, 2008		December 5th, 2008
	Utah @ Washington on ESPN -- This is the first game on National TV for the Jazz and they face off against a team of excellent outside shooters, led by Gilbert Arenas. He and Deron will feature prominently in this game.		Utah vs. Toronto on ESPN -- I don't know the last time that the Raptors won in Utah, but they are not to be slept on. This game has two deep teams, starting with All-Star Power Forwards Chris Bosh and Carlos Boozer.
Photograph by Pablo Martinez Monsivais for AP Photo		Photograph by Unknown for NBAE/Getty Images
December 11th, 2008		February 5th, 2009
	Utah vs. Portland on TNT -- Roy, Aldridge, Oden, that Spanish kid and more . . . why don't we just give them the NBA Title already? (Oh wait, didn't the media already give that to the Rockets or Lakers? I keep getting confused with all the conflicting hype.)		Utah vs. Dallas on TNT -- For some silly reason I think the Mavs will be better (and more desperate) this season. This should be a good match where the good guys should hopefully win. This could be projected as a potential 1st round match up, hence TNT picking this game
Photograph by Unknown for NBAE/Getty Images		Photograph by Melissa Majchrzak for NBAE/Getty Images
February 19th, 2009		March 6th, 2009
	Utah vs. Boston on TNT -- Hopefully the Jazz can avenge their loss to the C's in Utah with a win against the NBA Champs on their home floor. Boston didn't get better this off-season, while we did. Hopefully Ray Allen is shooting blanks.		Utah vs. Denver on ESPN -- Denver really got worse over the off-season, no Camby means that Boozer will probably have a big game, which would be nice seeing how it has become an increasingly rare thing lately.
Photograph by Melissa Majchrzak for NBAE/Getty Images, remixed by Basketballjohn.com		Photograph by Unknown for AP Photo
March 24th, 2009		March 28th, 2009
	Utah vs. Houston on TNT -- I fully expect something insane to happen between Ron Artest and Matt Harpring. I also half expect one of the other two stars on Houston to be injured for this game. Yet, I can easily see Houston winning this game.		Utah @ Phoenix on ESPN -- Memo vs. Shaq, Nash vs. Deron and two power forwards who don't play any defense . . . the perfect TV Game if there ever was one. The team that makes it first to 110 will probably win the game.
Photograph by Harry How for NBAE/Getty Images		Photograph by Unknown for NBAE/Getty Images
April 2nd, 2009		April 8th, 2009
	Utah @ Denver on TNT -- Remember this guy? Hopefully he doesn't go for 40 again as the Jazz face off for the 2nd time on National TV against Northwest Division Rivals Denver.		Utah @ Dallas on ESPN -- The Jazz need to start beating home teams on the road (besides Detroit and Boston). Dallas would be a good place to display this on TV for all the see. Look for Kidd to get the business from Deron.
Photograph by Unknown for NBAE/Getty Images		Photograph by Unknown for NBAE/Getty Images
April 14, 2009
	Utah @ LA Lakers on TNT -- As it's a televised game against the Lakers on the road I fully expect the Jazz to lose. No doubt this game will have playoff implications, most likely are we in the 3 vs. 6 bracket, or the 4 vs. 5 bracket.
Photograph by Unknown for NBAE/Getty Images

Ideally, I would like the Jazz to play games on national TV against crappy teams, so that I can watch the Jazz win. Each of these contests (save maybe for Denver in SLC) should be very close. I'm happy to see Utah getting some TV time though, so I shouldn't complain.

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

+

=

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

New Delhi: Linton Johnson plays with his haar on.

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

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