Archive for the ‘graduation (HS and college)’ Category

Recruiting at the Highest Level

Wednesday, July 1st, 2015

The clock struck midnight and July 1 was upon us, meaning the beginning of NBA free agency. With it came the wining and dining of guys who have no trouble wining and dining themselves. Instead of colleges wooing 18-year olds, NBA franchises are begging getting together with older guys (some in their 20s), but who are now more proven performers. Many of these are the same guys who, after graduating from high school (and holding all the cards at that time as well), had to decide on where to ply their trade – and continue their education (unfortunately, but realistically, in that order). Although there was a time period in between (called the NBA draft) in which they were being told who they’d be employed by), they have regained control of their respective situations.

The NBA free agency process is similar to college recruiting, only on a much more expensive level. People who have only read or heard about both would be shocked at how much work goes into trying to sign a recruit or a free agent. Because there are rules on each, e.g. a college official visit can be no longer than 48 hours and NBA teams have salary limitations they can offer, the presentations must be as personalized and creative as possible. As an example, let’s look at the Los Angeles Clippers’ DeAndre Jordan.

The main three competitors for Jordan’s services are the Clippers, Lakers and Mavericks. In my estimation, the Lakers have next-to-no shot because everything the Lakers can offer, the Clippers can at least match – unless he was a huge Lakers fan as a kid or is steeped in NBA tradition. For the purpose of this blog, let’s assume neither (or that he yearns to play with Kobe for a year, two max).

So, it’s down to a two-horse race. Here’s a list of positives and negatives (in no particular order, mainly because I’m not privy to what Jordan’s priorities are – beyond what has been reported, which is usually quite a distance from the truth). It usually comes down to the comfort level of the player – on, and off, the court. One point in Dallas’ favor is Jordan, a high character guy, is originally from Texas (Houston) and, undoubtedly, still has family in the state. However, the number of NBA players who live in Texas is dwarfed by the number who have homes in LA – independent of whichever NBA team is their employer. “Family” is something that doesn’t change, e.g. the Clippers can’t give him “better” relatives. Ditto when it comes to weather. Neither franchise can make a dent in the other’s strength – nor should they try.

Money, which is a determining factor in the lives of so many humans, is not really a factor because the Clippers can offer 5 years and $110 million, while the Mavs can put a 4 year deal for $80 million on the table. However, Texas has no state tax while California residents pay an ungodly sum to the state – and, without getting too technical, it’s reported some of this season’s free agents want shorter deals because after a new collective bargaining agreement is signed, there will be – as if what they’re paying players now is chicken feed – unprecedented spending.

From a basketball perspective, it’s been reported that Jordan doesn’t want to be fourth or fifth option on offense (his current offensive role with the Clips). Dallas will undoubtedly paint a rosy picture of Jordan offensively, sharing center stage with Dirk Nowitzki (no player’s ego is so out of control that he thinks his offensive role will surpass that of the face of the Mavericks franchise). Since there are no stats to hold them to, Dallas can claim pretty much anything and, certainly, will point out the fact that when Blake Griffin was out with an injury, Jordan’s points per game jumped from 11.5 to nearly 15. There are many holes in that argument but most have to deal with DJ actually believing (which, apparently he does not) that his major role – with whomever he plays – is to rebound and block shots. Why is it that people who excel in an area of life seldom are satisfied with being the best at what they do? Oh, and rest assured, there will be no mention of “Hack-a-DJ” by either team.

Side story: One of the college teams I worked with had a guy whose role with our squad was identical to DJ’s – and, naturally, he wanted a bigger offensive role. One day he approached me and said that we had “plays” for each of our other four starters and questioned why there wasn’t a play or two for him. My message was, “We shoot 43% as a team. That means 57% of the plays are designed for you.” He laughed, not happy with the response, but understanding it.

The yin and yang of this story is the Clippers’ roster has a better chance of winning it all but the Mavs actually won one – and the guy who was the Finals MVP is still there. Doc Rivers couldn’t have promoted a player any more than he did DJ last year but there are rumors of a personality clash between Jordan and Chris Paul. Then again, who would you rather have as your point guard? Nowitzki is a bona fide All-Star; Blake Griffin is today’s superstar. But then you get into that third banana thing again.

Whoever wins the wooing of DeAndre Jordan will come down to which franchise will tug most at his heart strings/appeal to his ego. Also, will his decision be made by his head or his heart (or his agent, but that’s another story altogether)? Both owners are filthy rich (Steve Ballmer has a more money than Mark Cuban but once someone’s net worth exceeds $1,000,000,000, you figure, unless the fortune is inherited – not the case for either man – the person’s intelligence is not to be questioned).

It might just come down the strength of Los Angeles, e.g. Hollywood (that Dallas can’t come close to) versus the imagination of Mark Cuban. Listening to Jordan speak, and seeing his personality in action, he seems like he’d be a natural for TV or movies. And, unless there’s something we don’t know, it seems that those kind of roles would be very attractive to him. Endorsement opportunities abound in LA, but Cuban knows enough people “in the business world” to make comparable offers happen.

Rumor has it the Clips are putting together a kind of This Is Your Life, DeAndre Jordan presentation for their meeting with their center. What X factor will Cuban counter with? If I knew that answer, I guarantee you I wouldn’t be blogging at 2:30 am. Creativity and shrewd thinking are characteristics of Mark Cuban. He lives by the quote I read long ago:

“Did you ever go to a movie and laugh? Ever go to one and cry? You think it’s because of what they put in the seats?”

 

Fresno State’s Tyler Johnson Has Impressive Rookie Season

Monday, June 1st, 2015

Heading to Stanford to check in with my pain management doctor, then on to LA to visit friends. This blog will return Friday, June 5.

18 players who did not get drafted last year played in at least one game during the 2014-15 NBA season. Talk about fulfilling a dream. I’m sure every one of those guys had, at the very least, hoped to have been drafted. Only 60 guys get picked. If you’re not one of them, what’s your next step?

Although I don’t know for certain, I’d guess each one must have had an agent. That is when the agent makes his money, however little it is. Find the client a job overseas (obviously, as lucrative as possible – and there are some high paying jobs across the seas), try to get him signed as a free agent, get him a spot on some team’s summer league squad, try to place him in the D-League.  Keep his dream alive.

A lot of it depends on the client. How badly does he want to play? Is he willing to relocate – maybe to somewhere they don’t speak English? What’s his ultimate goal – the NBA, to make as much money as he can, or is he the adventurous type who wants to see as much of the world while he’s young (on somebody else’s dime)?

Googling “Fresno State players in the NBA” the results show that the school has placed, to date, 21 players in the NBA, although a Fresno State release claims as many as 30 (for the record, Tark had 10 of the 21, not including one kid who transferred from FSU and eventually made it to the league). The Bulldogs’ latest entry is Tyler Johnson, a youngster who wasn’t very highly recruited and whose freshman year saw him average just over four points for a 14-17 club. He improved every year and during his senior campaign he averaged nearly 16ppg and scored at least 20 points in a game on 13 different occasions throughout his career.

Johnson was one of those 18 who went undrafted but earned a spot on the Miami Heat’s summer league squad. Signed by the Heat in early August, only to be released in late October, he hooked on with a Development League team in Sioux Falls, SD. His play must have caught the eye of someone in the Heat organization because, in mid-January, he got what every D-League player dream of: a ten-day contract.

10-day contracts can lead to something – or they can simply tease a player. Some guys see action, others never even get to play during the 10 days. Most, then, get released – usually heartbroken. Johnson’s 10-day stats? One game, two minutes, two points (FTs). The release part happened to Tyler Johnson, but not the heartbroken. He returned to his D-League outfit, more determined to make it than ever. He had seen actual NBA basketball up close and knew he could hang. A couple weeks later, he signed another 10-day, and did well enough to merit another. Only the rule from the NBA’s collective bargaining agreement is, “After the second 10-day contract, the team can only retain the player by signing him for the remainder of the season.” Johnson had done enough to merit another contract, this one for the remainder of the 2014-15 season. His salary was prorated for the remainder of the season but, still, he had made the NBA!

Although that’s not the way Tyler looked at it. He had not yet made anything (even though the contract he signed was for two years – for over a million per year. He was determined, more than ever, to earn every last dollar. By NBA standards, a million dollars a year isn’t earth-shaking. Not even a minor tremor. To put it in perspective, though, guess what the valedictorian of Fresno State’s graduating class makes? While my research, or nosiness, doesn’t extend that far, suffice to say #1’s salary is less than Johnson’s. Besides, Tyler had additional plans.

What might have play into his hands was that the Heat, a proud franchise with multiple championships in the recent past, were struggling just to make the playoffs. The buzz that used to fill the arena was not nearly what it had been when The Big Three were going to the NBA Finals on a yearly basis or when D-Wade and Shaq put up a banner. Some guys just “play it out” at that time, while others might be banged up from a long season and at far less than 100%. Why go all-out, man, you’re a millionaire?

No matter for Tyler. Bring it on. This was his dream – right there in the palm of his hands and he was going to, just as he did in every game he’d ever played, “leave it all on the floor.” Hustle plays, coming up with 50-50 balls, anything to show he belonged, he did it. The month of March was good to him as he first scored a career high 26 points, on 10-of-13 shooting, in a win over Phoenix and, five days later, he played 44 minutes, scoring 24 points, with six rebounds and six assists in an OT victory against Sacramento.

What many players don’t realize, especially at the end of the season when a lot of guys have already made vacation plans, is it’s not only your front office you’re trying to impress. You’re auditioning for your opponent as well. With today’s technology and staffs full of video people, every game is an audition for every team in the league. The way players are moved around today, Tyler Johnson’s performance for the Heat upped his stock so that somewhere, somebody will want him on their roster.

Heat coach Erik Spoelstra on his evaluation of Johnson’s career to date: “. . . over the course of the years, undrafted players on average, there’s less then five a year that actually make it and have a role . . . (now the question is) can you sustain it.”

All-out hustle is not a new concept. Arguably the greatest baseball player of all-time, Joe DiMaggio, when asked why he always gave maximum effort, replied:

“There might be somebody coming to the game today who’s never seen me play – and I don’t want to disappoint him.”

The Biggest Issue in College Basketball Is Not the Shot Clock

Saturday, April 25th, 2015

While so many members of the media – print, TV & radio talking heads, even people on social media – are clamoring for a shortened shot clock, there are other aspects of the college game that needs to be addressed.

The main problem deals with transfers, e.g. 1) from one four-year school to another, whether the reason is due to homesickness, change of coach, lack of playing time, whatever, 2) the “double” transfer, i.e. started at one school, transferred to another, then left institution #2 (maybe played there, maybe not) to transfer once again or 3) the newest version of “good intention, bad result” – the kid who graduates from his original college and is allowed to go to another, and be immediately eligible, allegedly so he can pursue a master’s degree at his new location.

I’m not sure whoever thought of this “innovative idea” should be congratulated (although I’m 100% certain he fully believes he deserves accolades). My reasoning behind my skepticism is that in the “Information Age,” we get inundated with statistics, yet we have seen no numbers regarding 1) how many kids are actually receiving advanced degrees and, what’s worse, 2) how much legitimate academic work is being done by the guys who are taking advantage of this rule. My suspicion is that the moves are heavily weighted toward athletics decisions as opposed to academic ones.

As I’ve mentioned oh-so-many-times in this blogosphere, I toiled for three decades in college hoops, the final 18 as the assistant chairman of the Recruiting Committee for the coaches’ association (in addition to my duties at whichever school was paying me at the time). One year all coaches were mandated by the NCAA to cut the number of recruiting calls to prospects to one per week per prospect. The thinking behind this change came about when student-athletes were polled about what they disliked most about recruiting and pressure came in first by about the distance Secretariat won the 1973 Belmont Stakes.

Because the NCAA so severely limited face-to-face contact between coaches and prospects, phone calls were the next best method of establishing a relationship with, and selling the school to, prospects. At one of our Recruiting Committee meetings a question was raised, “What happens if you make your once-a-week call and it goes to voice mail?” The general consensus was if the call didn’t last more than one minute (which could be verified by phone bills), that it wouldn’t count as the call for that week.

At a coaches’ clinic I attended shortly thereafter, one of the topics dealt with the new recruiting rules. When the one/week phone call was brought up, one coach proudly shared what his staff did. Prospects were allowed to call schools as often as they wanted, the feeling being that since the prospect initiated the call, the pressure would be self-inflicted. The coach who spoke prided himself on not breaking the rules.

He explained that he (and the other coaches on their staff) would call and as soon as the prospect answered, they’d say, “Hey, it’s ____ from the U of ____. We can only call you once a week so here’s our toll free 800 phone number” (remember which century this was). “Call me back as soon as I hang up.” Th prospect is caught between a rock and a hard place. Few kids have the nerve to tell schools they’re not interested. Or maybe he is interested but has to leave and really can’t call back. Now he’s been placed in a pressure situation of greater magnitude. It was a somewhat devious move by the coach but only a minor violation. Other coaches in attendance could be seen nodding heads as they took notes.

The new torrent of transfers is the modern version of the phone call rule, i.e. the intent of the rule is good but the ways it’s being used is based on deception. These “master’s candidates” have become more like mercenaries and, like the one-and-dones, although so many coaches do not want to recruit them, they feel as though they must if, for no other reason than if of they don’t, they’ll wind up playing against them, maybe losing to them and, gulp, losing their job. Coaches are allowing their competitive gene overrule their moral gene.

Given the choice, my conservative estimate would be that 85% of the coaches would rather be able to coach guys for four (or even five) years. Part of that group would include junior college transfers whom they could work with for at least a couple years. Develop their skills. The relaxed transfer rules have turned too many college basketball players into nothing more than free agents. Adding in the one-and-done player, and coaches are behaving in ways that in past decades would be unrecognizable.

The stat I heard that hit me like a sucker punch I never saw coming was: every point scored by the national champion Duke Blue Devils in the second half of the final game against Wisconsin was scored by freshmen, only one (the four) of whom is returning to Durham next season. 18-year olds using one of the greatest academic institutions as a mere stepping stone to a professional basketball career.

One has to wonder in college basketball:

“Is the tail wagging the dog?”

Wednesday, April 8th, 2015

Headed for another wedding. A couple of my college roommates’ sons wound up getting married within three weeks of each other. This one’s in Ft. Lauderdale and, instead of a week at Myrtle Beach, like we did after the March wedding in Charleston, we’re spoiling ourselves with a cruise to the Caribbean. Why not? What’s retirement for anyway?

I’m sure I’ll have plenty to blog about by the next post on Tuesday, April 21. 

The NBA draft is made up of two rounds. i.e. a total of 60 picks. If a player is selected in the first round, his contract is guaranteed. In other words, he gets his money – independent of how well (or poorly) he plays, if he gets injured, even if the team cuts him. A second rounder receives meal money during camp and a spot on the franchise’s summer league club. It’s incumbent upon him to make the (up to) 15 player roster if he wants a steady check.

Last year nearly 44 underclassmen declared early for the 2014 NBA draft, 29 got drafted, 18 of those in the first round – with 17 out of the first 23 picks being underclassmen. In 2013 the numbers of early entrants was 48, 28 of whom heard their names called. Two-thirds of the first round were underclassmen. How about 2012? The numbers are eerily similar. 49 put their names into the draft before exhausting their collegiate eligibility. Of those, 29 were drafted – 24 in the first-round (16 of the first 17). Every one of the 29 who were selected went in the top 45 picks.

Those numbers almost seem that it’s worthwhile to leave school early – or at least consider it. Maybe so, but only they can tell. 55 of them over the past three years gave up college eligibility to . . . do what? Maybe their academic situation dictated they “put their name in the draft” to, you know, save face.  On occasion I’ve heard, “Aw, it was time, I couldn’t have accomplished any more in college.” (Translation: “I didn’t feel like studying harder and spending extra time with the tutors the program had set up for me, knowing I was a ‘special admit’ and needed extra assistance just to stay eligible in the first place). Believe it or not, for some kids, they have a better chance at playing professionally than they do of earning a college degree. Whether this type of academic risk should have been admitted in the first place is for another blog.

It could have been that they got bad advice from someone or maybe, as is the case among athletes, their egos exceeded their ability. Or, possibly, they were dismissed due to a legal issue (or issues) or they failed one too many “tests” – the kind administered by the training staff that’s impossible to study for.

In all likelihood, they’re playing overseas or in the NBA Development league, clinging to that shot they get called up for a 10-day contract in the “league.” And why not? If you can make a living playing a game, what better way to enjoy life? It’s not like someone can take a job in the business world and, when they turn 40 say, “You know, I think I’ll start that professional basketball (or whatever sport) career now.”

Hey, it’s a good job if you can land one. After all:

“It’s called, PLAY ball, not WORK ball.”

How to Spend (Nearly) a Fortnight with Relatives

Wednesday, February 18th, 2015

As the lead to my last blog stated, my two sisters-in-law, both from Nashville (where all three of the Anderson girls were born and raised) visited us. They decided to fly into San Jose because 1) Southwest Airlines doesn’t fly into Fresno and 2) they were flying on Thursday and that’s the closest airport to Monterey, where younger son, Alex, was playing Friday and Saturday.

Since I’ve flown hundreds of times and had to coordinate schedules, I took matters into my hands and set our itinerary. Unfortunately, while we were making the two-and-a-half (or so) hour drive from Fresno to San Jose, Jane received a text from her older sister, Peggy. She and sister Susan (the “baby” of the three) had landed in Phoenix. Great flight. However, it seemed as though there was a minor problem, something about needing to fix a part. Obviously, a part that helped the plane fly. Safely.

The delay was going to be an hour. Or so. As it turned out, it was more like “or so.” Once Jane and I got to San Jose, we found a nice hotel with clean rest rooms and a comfortable lobby in which we could read, relax and plug in our cell phones. For the next four hours!

Peggy sent a text that the airlines had given up on fixing the part and were trying to locate another one, allegedly, a new and unbroken one. Another hour passed and a decision was made that it would be easier to find a new plane than it would a new part. Change of planes meant change of gate but, finally, Peggy and Susan, and the new plane, landed.

We left the hotel and pulled into short term parking. When we entered baggage claim, there they were (one thing about the San Jose airport is that it is infinitely easier to locate passengers than its San Francisco counterpart is). There were hugs around, then a little anxiety waiting for the bags (changing planes occasionally causes bags to wind up elsewhere). Since we were leaving for Monterey as soon as those bags were in the car (no snide remarks, please, I get along swimmingly with my only two sisters-in-law), it was a major relief to see the luggage appear.

Off we went for Monterey and what turned out to be a later dinner than we’d planned. In fact, since Jane likes to get to the games early, i.e. about halftime of the women’s game (which precedes every conference tilt), we generally don’t eat dinner until 10:00pm. This is no problem for me as my body clock runs on East Asian time but, for a couple of ladies who live on Central time (and whose bodies aren’t used to eating at midnight), there was quite an adjustment. No complaints by anyone, however, we were just glad to check into the hotel in Monterey which was to be our headquarters for three nights.

Alex’s guys split a pair of games (losing in overtime), yet that was secondary to his aunts’ delight in seeing him play, checking out the campus, seeing his apartment, meeting his girlfriend and having dinner with a delightful couple Jane and I often eat with following home games. Naturally, there were brief tours of Carmel, Cannery Row and downtown Monterey before departing for Fresno on Sunday.

There was plenty of room at our house so everybody could do whatever it was that pleased them, meaning the ladies got to talk (a lot), shop (a little) and eat (well) – the last part with me. Meanwhile I got to sleep in (my favorite retirement luxury), watch TV, ride the exercise bike and practice my yoga (Jane and Susan even made it to a couple of classes at COIL Yoga, one each taught by Katie and Diane, two of the greatest yoginis this side of India).

Friday we were ready to leave the ‘No (for good as far as they were concerned – for this trip anyway), as Cal State Monterey Bay’s next two games were in Los Angeles. On Friday night a couple of my best friends from our college days (which, since that part of my life began in 1966, means we’ve known each other nearly 50 years) came over to support the son they never had (they have two brilliant daughters, each with a couple sons of their own). Words alone can’t express how wonderful it is getting together with friends you’ve known your entire adult life. Our guys won in OT and Alex crept closer to 1,000 points for his career.

Saturday night, older son, Andy, and a couple of his UC-Irvine fraternity brothers (soon-to-be-lawyers) made an appearance. Andy sells software and IT (whatever all that is – loyal readers know that technology is not in my wheelhouse) for the health care industry for a company named Kareo (headquarters in Irvine) and, in his words, is crushing it. Since he’s in sales, there are days he tempers his remarks but, so far, he’s riding the sales roller coaster and definitely surviving, if not thriving.

At the end of the half, one of those “this can only happen in a movie” events took place. Alex, who had six points at that juncture, had the ball in his hands, working for the last shot of the half. My cell phone rang and I noticed the call was from my cousin who lives in New Jersey. Since it was nearing midnight Eastern time, I pretty much guessed what the call was about.

“My dad died a little while ago,” I heard him say – just as Alex floated a short jumper over one of Cal State LA’s big guys. It hit nothing but the bottom of the net as the horn went off. Heading into the game, Alex was seven points away from 1,000 so that bucket put him over. I mentioned this to my cousin and he said, “Assist HHCPA.” My uncle, Herman Harris, was a CPA and from my high school days on, I always referred to him as “HHCPA.” We reminisced a little about his life (he was 88) and, before ending our conversation, I said to him, “You know, Bill, one of these days you were going to be making this call.”

He was in complete agreement and remarked, “While it is a sad day, he had a long, happy and successful life.” HHCPA was one of the brightest (NYU graduate), most selfless, giving, caring people I have ever met. Anyone who ever dealt with him felt exactly the same way.

Alex’s buzzer beater had cut LA’s lead to one and, although the Otters fell further behind, clutch plays on both ends gave them a victory. Aunts Peggy and Sue witnessed three out of four wins. The team hoped their new good luck charms would stay. None of us knew how close to the truth that statement wound up.

Sunday was reserved for Andy Boy. We moved headquarters to Orange County (Andy lives a half block from the ocean in Newport Beach). He gave the women a tour of UCI’s campus, complete with tidbits that were mostly humorous (now that he’s graduated); we dined at a terrific fish place on the water (fish tacos around, plus adult beverages for everyone but the driver); he showed them his apartment (assuring them they didn’t need to have a tetanus shot before entering) and we went by both his previous and current places of employment.

Then it was back to the hotel and our suites (not rooms, thank you very much), to rest up for dinner. Peggy, who didn’t invent the computer but could have if she’d been asked to do so, had been staying on top of all situations of interest. One, in particular, happened to be the weather back home in Nashville. Snow – a lot of it – had been predicted but now they were talking about ice and sleet. Resourceful as they were, the girls had a Monday flight out of John Wayne airport in Orange County. Had was the operative word, as they were informed that, not only were they not going to be able to catch their flight the next day, they couldn’t get out of OC – and back to Nashville – until Wednesday!

Jane and I had to get back to Fresno (a five-hour drive with no traffic – which never occurs, unless, as I did in my USC days, we’d leave at 1 or 2 am) so we said our goodbyes. I reminded them that being “stuck” in a place where it was 78 degrees and sunny, as opposed to sleet, ice and wind chill hovering around zero wasn’t all that much of an inconvenience and that they would surely survive nicely.

We got home – stopped in the San Fernando Valley to see some friends from our SC days and finally made it back by about 9:00pm. As the (modified) saying goes:

“All’s well that . . . ends.”

And by now, it finally should have for Peggy and Susan.

Why College Players Get Dismissed

Friday, January 30th, 2015

Off to watch the Otters play in SoCal. This blog will return on Tuesday, Feb. 3.

The college basketball world was shocked with the news that Duke’s junior wingman, Rasheed Sulaimon, was dismissed from the squad this past Thursday.

“Rasheed has been unable to consistently live up to the standards required to be a member of our program,” coach Mike Krzyzewski said in a release. “It is a privilege to represent Duke University and with that privilege comes the responsibility to conduct oneself in a certain manner. After Rasheed repeatedly struggled to meet the necessary obligations, it became apparent that it was time to dismiss him from the program.”

Duke is currently sitting at 4-3 in the ACC after losing to Notre Dame. They play at Virginia tomorrow. The game will be vastly different from the Duke-UVA games of yesteryear for several reasons. One is that the Cavs are undefeated. Another is that without Sulaimon, the Blue Devils are left with only eight scholarship players – and sans one of their few capable wing defenders. Nearly as astonishing as Virginia being undefeated is that, should the Blue Devils lose, it would more or less knock them out of the conference championship race – this early in the conference season.

No big deal, you might say, the NCAA tourney is what Coach K focuses on. Unless he’s been fooling everybody all these years – and I believe Mike Krzyzewski is as straight up a coach as exists in Division I, i.e. spews less coachspeak than nearly all D-I head men – he has always claimed a prestigious goal – and honor – is winning the ACC title. Therefore,if anybody thinks the dismissal of Sulaimon was a knee jerk reaction for some indiscretion, well, they’re simply wrong.

So, what’s in store for the, now, ex-Dukie? Naturally, he could declare for the NBA this year but if he decided on that route, he’d better wow pro scouts at the draft combine (assuming he gets invited). Also, it’s certainly possible he could attempt to turn pro right away, whether in the D-League or overseas.

Another option would be to transfer to another university. Although Sulaimon is in good academic standing, it has yet to be revealed as to whether he has the capability to graduate this year, meaning he’d have the option to transfer to another Division I school and be immediately eligible. If not, he would have to sit out next season, with only one to play. This poses a couple questions, namely, would he be willing to wait two years to become an NBA player (even though it might be beneficial to him to do so)? The second one is, how many schools out there would be willing to tie up two years of a scholarship for a one year player?

Something else needs to be taken into consideration as well. With Rasheed Sulaimon being the first and only player dismissed from a team coached by Mike Krzyzewski, how many teams would gamble on a player with that kind of albatross? With 351 Division I teams, Las Vegas might put the over/under on the number of such teams at 325. I’d still take the over.

One team that, in all likelihood, would not be pursuing Sulaimon is the University of Washington who recently dismissed a bright prospect in center Robert Upshaw. The 7-footer had troubles of his own. After transferring high schools, as well as changing AAU teams between his junior and senior years, Upshaw committed to Kansas State, only to de-commit when then K-State coach, Frank Martin, left Manhattan to assume the head coaching position at South Carolina. He, then, signed with Fresno State but after a lackluster frosh season (marred by injuries and suspensions), he transferred to UW, where he found trouble in his redshirt season (he wasn’t allowed to attend practices or games during the second semester).

This season began with such promise for the big man. Up until his being asked to leave, he was the nation’s leading shot blocker. Blessed with the wingspan of a pterodactyl and extraordinary timing, he was a major deterrent for any of the Huskies’ opponents who attempted to score in the lane. While Upshaw was a very personable young man, with social skills beyond his 21 years of age, rumor has it he struggled to pass tests. Since he is an intelligent youngster, the “tests” were possibly of a non-academic nature.

While Sulaimon had no such issues at Duke, he too often displayed one of Coach K’s pet peeves: bad body language. I recall during the 1992-92 season when I was on the staff at USC, we beat UCLA at Pauley Pavillion for the second consecutive year. The day after the game, our head coach got a call from Coach K. “He told me he knew we were going to win after the second media time out,” George Raveling told us.

“When I asked him why,” Rav continued, “Mike said he could see the difference in the body language of the players. He said our guys exuded so much confidence, while their guys looked like they didn’t want to be there.”

Obviously, Sulaimon’s dismissal had more to do with than just bad body language, but as C.L. Brown of ESPN.com wrote (and it was true of Robert Upshaw – and truth be told – nearly every player who’s ever been released):

“His issues didn’t outweigh his talent.”

 

Will There Always Be a Place for Gossip in this Country?

Wednesday, December 31st, 2014

Here’s a quote from yesterday’s paper regarding the Jim Harbaugh hiring: “… two people within the university with knowledge of the negotiations told the (Detroit) Free Press on Monday evening. They spoke on the condition of anonymity because Michigan officials weren’t authorized to speak publicly about the coaching search.” If these people were “within the university” it probably means they are college educated. Maybe not UM grads but they got a degree from an accredited college somewhere.

Therefore, it’s not like they didn’t understand what “not being authorized to speak” meant because they knew enough to inform the writer they’d only speak if they were allowed to remain anonymous. So the question is, why? Are they rewarded in some way – cash, gifts, favors or just chits to be stored and used at a later date?

Earlier this season, I saw another example of how awfully easy (and fun?) it is to cast aspersions from relative anonymity when I read an article in which an anonymous NBA assistant said Kobe Bryant is more or less washed up, comparing him to a Washington Wizards-era Michael Jordan. Why not just keep that bit of juicy gossip to himself, at least until he was ready to come out publicly and say it? Probably because he’d rather tell his closest friends that the quote was his, getting attaboys from his buddies, while strongly denying it if anyone else attributed the line to him.

When a head coach is fired, usually there are – or had been, if the termination had been brewing – players coming to his defense. The coach-player bond is often as powerful, in some cases, more so, than that of a father and son. The final time the (by then) former coach and his players get to meet is usually an emotional one. Things said at that meeting are meant for the people in that room – and only the people in that room.

Although I have no first hand knowledge of what went on when Bo Pelini met with his former squad of Nebraska Cornhuskers, one of two things had to have happened. Either a disgruntled player (or wannabe player) surreptitiously taped Pelini’s comments or, because the meeting was held at a local high school in Lincoln, someone was tipped off and the room was bugged. Is there any other method the newspaper could have received an audiotape, as was reported?

Well, his detractors (and Pelini had a ton, many created by his brash style) would undoubtedly say, “He shouldn’t have used those words, period. It’s the reason he got fired in the first place.” To that I have two comments. One is simple and ought to be easy to relate to for those middle age and beyond of us: Old habits die hard. The other comment: Is each and every critic so pure of word and action that none of them would mind if any private conversation they had with friends were made public? Even the ones when two people might be slandering discussing a third party each of them know (and consider a friend)? How would anyone like it if that third person was privy to those comments?

I have said to my friends on numerous occasions, while we were having a private conversation, “Aren’t you glad this isn’t being taped? We would be open to some serious repercussions.” With all the snooping people there are, including as it turned out, our own government, is the Thought Police truly a myth?

After a recent game between Cleveland and Miami, LeBron James was shown talking to his close friend, Dwyane Wade, with his jersey over his mouth. Did you think James, who knows the ways of the paparazzi as well as anyone alive, was fearful of spreading germs to his former teammate?

Googling quotes on gossip I saw several profound ones but chose this one to share:

“People are probably not happy with their own lives if they’re so busy discussing yours.”

Why Is It Older People Think They Can Help Others?

Sunday, October 5th, 2014

This isn’t exactly breaking news but Google is a pretty awesome invention. Or discovery. Or creation. Whatever, it’s way above my intelligence level. If ever there was something that can give you answers – quickly – it’s Google. For someone with a relatively decent level of intelligence, when it comes to technology, I’m, let’s just describe it as, well below the curve. Suffice to say, whoever (or whatever) invented Google is quite a bit above that curve. Yet, on occasion, answers can be found elsewhere.

Because I’ve lived through six-and-a-half decades, in nine different states all across the country and have had jobs of influence over the youth of America, passing on information is something that comes naturally to me. More than having the job of teacher or coach, I have always considered myself a student of life and an observer of people.

Maybe due to an early lack of confidence – which some people who know me would scoff at – I was always worried about being good enough. For those who don’t believe that, here’s an example. When I was a senior in high school, I never considered myself exceptionally bright, e.g. my overall GPA was around 2.7 or 2.8 which gave me a class ranking in the upper 25%. Not bad, but not exceptional by any means. I was smarter and a better athlete than some of the guys I hung around with – in math and a couple selected sports. But they were better than I was in other subjects or sports. 

During my sophomore year, I doubled up taking geometry and algebra 2 so I could take calculus my senior year. There were 12 of us in the class (another kid in our graduating class was so smart he’d taken calculus his junior year so he was taking his math class at Rutgers, located a couple miles across the Raritan River). At that time many colleges were requiring single subject SATs as well as the regular morning tests everyone took to gain college admission. Naturally, the kids in our calculus class (and the brainiac at Rutgers) took the single subject Level 1 math test.

When the scores came in, I got a 756 (out of 800). The only people I knew who’d taken that test were the 13 of us. When I got to class and everybody reported their scores, I found out that mine – outstanding by anyone else’s measurement (but which I had no idea) – was the 11th highest, meaning it was the next to the lowest in the entire group. Eight of the others got perfect 800s. Two of them received a perfect 800 on the Level 2 test. That test was on material we hadn’t even covered in class!

There are other stories which contributed to my inferiority complex in areas academic, athletic and social so I was always looking for ways to improve. So it wasn’t at all strange that when I returned to my alma mater, Highland Park (NJ) HS, as a math teacher, football and basketball coach (after I graduated from college in 1970) that I read one of the most influential books of my life, Psychocybernetics by Dr. Maxwell Maltz. It wasn’t until I read Dr. Stephen Covey’s The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People that a book had as much influence over me as that one I read in 1970.

For a guy who didn’t particularly enjoy reading in high school and college, once I graduated, I began to read quite a bit (probably because it wasn’t required). When I went to Washington State in 1973 and began working for George Raveling (one of the most voracious readers of all time), I was positively influenced to become a lifelong learner. George would always be giving me books – print and audio. In addition, I’d always enjoyed simply studying people. All of those traits have broadened my life.

Quick story (for real). Once, when I was Director of Basketball Operations at Fresno State, we were returning to the mainland on a red-eye after our conference game with the University of Hawaii. I happened to be sitting near the front of the plane. At that time, i.e. prior to the pain pump that’s now implanted in my abdomen, I just couldn’t sleep (sitting up) on planes. So I would read. Around 4:00 am one of our players came up and tapped me on my shoulder. When I looked up, he said, “Jack, turn around.” When I did, I saw that the only light in the entire plane that was on the one above my seat. I knew I was a good deal smarter when I got off that plane than I was prior to boarding it.

Since I was in a role of teaching young guys how to play and, I can’t stress this enough, also how to succeed in life, dispensing knowledge became an obsession. Those who know me well will tell people I’ve never had an aversion to speaking. One person, two people, 1500 people at the Fresno Convention Center (although I got paid for that one) – doesn’t matter. If you’re around me, you’re going to hear something that will make you think or smile. I can’t help it. I enjoy sharing information, stories and powerful quotes.

People I’ve taught, coached, mentored and assisted in one way or another have asked me why it is I seem so comfortable sharing my philosophies, a few of which seem a little off the wall. Believe me, I’m in no way so presumptuous to think I have all the answers. One day, however, I found the answer. It was on a card I saw at a local Hallmark store. It said:

“Just because I give you advice doesn’t mean I know more than you. It just means I’ve done more stupid shit.”

A Classic Example of a “Hog that Got Slaughtered”

Saturday, August 16th, 2014

The following is a blog from May of 2008. After reading it (re-reading for the most loyal of readers), you might just be able to see why coaches weren’t so enthused with their governing organization. The fact the NCAA would lose so much of its clout is something that, 40 years ago, would have been deemed unfathomable. Those of us in the business always thought college athletics (especially football and men’s basketball) were extremely popular but I can’t think of anyone who predicted how much money would be generated. The NCAA must not have believed the old adage: “Pigs get fat; hogs get slaughtered.” 

The National Collegiate Athletics Association (NCAA) is an absolute necessity. There must be a governing body for intercollegiate athletics. That being said, it can be viewed, not as a necessary evil, but as necessary and evil. My interaction with this colossal organization dates back to 1972 when I took the job of graduate assistant basketball coach at the University of Vermont. Back then, many folks closely associated with the NCAA saw it as pure evil.

There are so many personal stories, even for someone so far on the outside, that my comments will probably be spread over at least a couple blogs. “Back in the day,” as the current terminology goes, the NCAA was, if not the most arrogant organization in the country, certainly one that was annually in the finals for the award. They’d win every case against them (caused by many of their unfair and archaic rules) with the same absurd logic, “The NCAA is a voluntary organization. You choose to become a member and may leave it at any time,” as if there was a major university in the country that was about to hold a press conference and say, “We have an announcement to make; as of today, our institution is applying for membership in the National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA).”

It was a monopoly in the truest of sense of the word. Through the years, and with a change in leadership, i.e. when “The Great and Powerful” Walter Byers finally retired, it became, if not “a kinder and gentler NCAA” that some people (mainly those at the NCAA) would like the giant to be thought of, but as a group that makes rules and rulings with more compassion and, in some cases, on an individual basis.

However, the worst idea (aka public relations gimmick) someone thought up is that of “graduation rates and APR” (Academic Progress Rate). This is intended to come off as, “Although we have bright, caring and talented student-athletes in nearly all our sports, certain sports, (namely, those that produce all of our revenue), have not emphasized the ’student’ half of the term we use for their participants. This is very disturbing to us (although not nearly as disturbing as if CBS had not signed off on the $6 billion – with a ‘b‘ – contract for the rights to men’s basketball) and we plan to take immediate steps to … get our fans to think we really care that such a small percentage of the individuals representing these sports actually leave school with a degree (which everyone would like to think is the reason these young, unbelievably gifted, physical specimens enroll in college for in the first place).”

The major problem is the paradigm itself. Certainly, a college degree is the ultimate goal of a college student (unless another opportunity to improve the student’s station in life becomes a possibility, e.g. leaving school early (maybe even after only one year) because he can earns millions doing what he always dreamed of doing or someone like Bill Gates who dropped out of college but still managed to carve out a good living for himself and his loved ones – even if his loved ones number in the billions – with a “b”). The cross-section of colleges throughout the nation have very different, and sometimes diametrically opposed missions. A one-size-fits-all policy is simply unjust.

Examples are Stanford, Duke and the Ivies whose mission is to educate the “classes,” as opposed to, among others, state universities whose mission is to educate the “masses.” The former do their weeding out process on the front end whereas a school like one of my former coaching stops, the University of Toledo, has the admirable policy (or did when I was there from 1987-91) of admitting any child, as long as that student had graduated from an accredited high school in the state of Ohio. There is a need and a place for both types of institutions of higher learning, as well as all those in between. To say their APR’s should be calculated the same way is to say wrestling shouldn’t have different weight divisions for its competitors. Too bad if you weigh 106, your next opponent weighs 350, and if you lose, you’re out (probably cold).

Many people feel athletes should graduate at a higher rate. After all, they contend, they’re on scholarship (the ones mainly being discussed in this blog anyway) and have no monetary problems. Plus, they get all that academic assistance, including the advantage of preferential registration, individual and group tutors, access to computer labs, etc. while the “average” students may have to work part-time jobs to make ends meet and eat and study when they can squeeze it in. This is all true, but consider that the athlete is also “working” for that scholarship and the amount and intensity of the time and work they exert in most cases far exceeds any part-time job in the community. Then, there’s additional pressure (which, granted, the athletes can turn in their favor) that student-athletes are forced to handle, such as being placed in gut-wrenching situations, dealing with the media and having to adjust to inconvenient travel schedules.

Title IX is based on the female population at the school. It would be absurd, for example, to require West Point to spend equal amounts of dollars on its male and female athletes. Instead, the law states the number of scholarship athletes has to be within five percent of the student body (it may have changed to three percent, I’ve admittedly been away from the college scene for several years). So, if a school has a student-body enrollment of 55% women, it has to have a minimum of fifty percent of its athletes be female.

That is how graduation rates should be calculated for all universities. The particular sport should be within (use an arbitrary number, say) five percent of the graduation rate of that university. To reward Stanford for graduating 85% of its athletes in a sport when the overall graduation rate on the Farm might be 95% (numbers are arbitrary and not based on research, just used to make a point) is simply, if not morally, wrong – just as its wrong to penalize a school that graduates 67% of its athletes when the school’s overall graduation rates for its student body is 55%. In a fair and just society, the rewards and penalties would be reversed.

But do you really think that, with the presidents who make up the NCAA’s governing board, that something as reasonable as that will ever happen?

The biggest problem with the NCAA was arrogance, mainly derived from power. As Lord Acton said:

 

“Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

Young Basketball Players Have Even More People Corrupting Their Thoughts

Tuesday, January 14th, 2014

Apologize for forgetting to alert readers this blog was shut down between Saturday-Monday as I was watching in our younger son’s games. This will continue to be the case throughout the season, although I will attempt to remind readers before each Friday’s blog.

In today’s world of college basketball, too many kids are disillusioned about what the future will bring, i.e. the NBA life, complete with its wealth – and all that can go with wealth, entirely too much of it unsavory. These youngsters believe (too) much of what they hear. Make no mistake about it, there’s always been a nasty side to college hoops, be it recruiting, point shaving or, as is the topic of this blog, early entry into the NBA draft.

Initially, the NBA established a rule that “a player could not make himself available” for the draft until four years after his high school graduation. Spencer Haywood, who had been out of high school but three years, challenged that rule in 1971, sued the NBA – and won. Subsequently, Moses Malone (1974) and Darryl Dawkins and Bill Willoughby (both in 1975) left high school to go directly into the NBA. No one else attempted that until Kevin Garnett (1995). While many other great players followed suit (Garnett’s kind, not Haywood’s), the NBA had justifiably grave concerns regarding this action as far too many young players were failing not only to make an impact in the league, but merely a roster spot.

The current eligibility rules that started in the 2006 draft are (granted, an oversimplification) that a player must play a year of college ball before being eligible to enter the draft. Now, however, in addition to all the absurd talk kids hear from people in their corner (or so they think), there’s become more and more of a problem with what they can read. And the concern is not just with just anybody’s opinions on the Internet.

In the 1/13/14 issue of Sports Illustrated, writer Chris Mannix has a story on the NBA prospects of UCLA freshman Zach LaVine. He doesn’t mention what a great NBA player he could be after he finishes four years at UCLA – like Lew Alcindor (shortly thereafter Kareem Abdul-Jabbar) or Bill Walton. Mannix is more current, understanding that LaVine won’t be in Westwood beyond this season. His commentary is how young Zach is a “freakishly athletic two guard who could play his way into the lottery next June.” The fact that LaVine is currently the Bruins’ sixth man doesn’t escape Mannix. He parenthetically writes that he’s averaging 12.2 ppg off the bench. A little much, no?

This post isn’t meant to excoriate Chris Mannix, at least not Mannix alone. An NBA scout (possibly two) and a general manager are also quoted (naturally, anonymously, because of NBA rules – or because they don’t want their employees’ ignorance to be known to all). Mannix includes the following line: “Most NBA executives agree: If LaVine declares for the draft, he will be a first round pick.” Most? Either Mannix is playing it a little fast and loose with his adjectives (which I can’t believe his editor would allow) or we’ve finally uncovered the up-to-now hidden reason so many of the NBA players are waaaaaaay overpaid. I know many (not most) NBA scouts – past an present – and the overwhelming majority would never make such comments as are in the story (pages 30-31) – unless they were trying to play a mind game with a rival. A guy who doesn’t even start for his team - and not a top 20 club but one that’s not even projected to finish first or second in its own conference – is a lottery pick?

Are you serious? What, exactly, do you think one Mr. Zach LaVine is thinking after reading that review – that he better hit the books because he wants to make sure he’ll be eligible next year?

Ask any NBA coach, head or assistant, how many one-and-doners know how to play (although the anonymous scout quoted in the article makes mention that LaVine “needs to learn how to play.” This caveat was not made until he’d mentioned the kid’s superlatives and claimed that he’d be picked between 15-20). Nowhere in the article was there a mention by anyone of what a grind an NBA season is or the physical and mental toughness it takes to play in the league. Forget all that. Just ask NBA coaches the basic question of how many of those young guys have any understanding of how to guard on an NBA level. I guarantee you I can tell you that exact number.

It’s zero! Yet writers, scouts, GMs and execs are saying an NCAA team’s sixth man will to be picked somewhere in the draft’s first 14 selections. No wonder coaches get fired. UCLA’s coach Steve Alford must have cringed when he read that – or was told about it because, for that exact reason, many head coaches actually don’t read such stories. This is UCLA. Their influential people ran out Ben Howland (whose record was pretty darn good – except when compared to you-know-who). They’ll read that article and, with the Bruins having suffered altogether too many losses already (that being anything but none), there will be a cry for Alford to be fired. “How can that idiot not be smart enough to start a lottery pick?” will be the exclamation.

Basketball historians, superfans or old coaches like many of us can remember UCLA losing in the semifinals in 1975 to NC State but coming back the following year – John Wooden’s last – to win it all. On that occasion, one Bruin fan approached the legendary coach and said:

“Great win, Coach, this makes up for letting us down last year.”

The more things change, the more they stay the same. Only now “most” people feel that way.