Jack’s Blog

File this blog under the category, “local boy makes good.”  After the third round of the U.S. Open at Whistling Straits (WI), former Fresno State golfer, Nick Watney, has a three-stroke lead.  Should he claim his first major, the San Joaquin Valley will receive publicity for something other than being the nation’s number one agricultural region.

Nick is more than just a Bulldog alum; he is, and always has been, a true role model for everyone who’s met, seen or followed him.  Soft-spoken, incredibly talented and a young man whose humility is in inverse proportion to his skill, he has made everyone in the Sacramento area, where he grew up, and the Valley, where he starred, quite proud.  Not only has he grown as a professional, he’s remained grounded - due mainly to his family.  I’ve never had the pleasure of meeting either of his parents, but I am lucky to have been a colleague of his uncle - Fresno State golf coach, Mike Watney.  Even though I’m no longer employed by the university, he and I regularly correspond - although I’m ashamed to admit that as much as I abhor communication through modern technology, it’s more of the email and text variety.

Mike was (and is, as far as I’m concerned) an accomplished golfer in his own right and a sensational coach (in 2007 he was inducted into the Golf Coaches Association of America Hall-of-Fame).  Besides having the Bulldogs in contention for a conference championship on an annual basis (he’s coached at FSU for 30 years), he, in one lesson (which I won in a Xmas staff luncheon and he insisted I take advantage of), watched me take two swings and rid me of my 20-year slice with a simple correction to my grip.  Unfortunately, I never won another lesson.  On that, I kid.  Mike offered additional lessons (at no charge), but my game was a lost cause - unlike those he tutors on the golf team.

Mike not only taught his nephew the finer points of the game, as he does the other golfers he’s mentored (several others of whom are on the Tour), but he is as fine a person as there is in college coaching today - regardless of gender or sport.  This message was conveyed loud and clear to Nick, who had the benefit of Mike’s impeccable character and guidance at family functions as well as Bulldog practice sessions.

Superlatives are overused, but I’ll go out on a limb and make the statement that there never will be any negative publicity concerning Nick Watney.  To date, there’s never been a hint of scandal in his career - which happens to be taking place during the Age of the Internet. Save your money if you’re planning on betting against my prediction.

If you believe that good things ought to happen to good people, join me in pulling for Nick Watney to win his first, but not his last, major.  As for what he ought to do to accomplish that, Abraham Lincoln summed it up best:

“I never had a policy; I have just tried to do my very best each and every day.”

Nearly every time a professional athlete is interviewed, he says how blessed (the new magic word for players) he is to be able to play a game for a living.  Yet, each year, several of these blessed individuals don’t show up to work on time.  Why would that be?

If I were given three guesses, all three of them would be . . . agents.  I’m not demeaning that profession - it does enough of that to itself.  In fact, I happen to know a few sports agents (each of whom is described as belonging in the legitimate category) and understand how difficult a business it is.  For the purposes of this blog, let’s limit our discussion of agents to only those who are legit.  The underhanded ones don’t deserve the space - and are such easy targets for criticism, this post would be reduced to an uninspiring “preaching to the choir” entry.

The day Mark McCormack (the “inventor” of the sports agent) broached the subject of representing his good friend, Arnold Palmer, is one that changed the entire landscape of professional athletics.  The idea of a sports agent makes so much sense, it’s a wonder someone hadn’t thought of it even earlier.  The concept of it is quite sound: 1) allow the athlete to give his (and now, her) total focus to his (her) trade and not to worry about distractions such as contract negotiations, 2) remove the athlete from having to deal with owners, who are multi-millionaires (except for the ones whose description exchanges the “m” with a “b”) and who made most, if not all of their money using the “buy low, sell high” philosophy, 3) create additional revenue streams through endorsements and, in the case of good agents 4) form a team of advisers, financial people, accountants, realtors, etc. to mentor the athletes and make certain their “lives after sport” will be provided for - since the window of earning power, while almost infinitely greater than the average Joe, is so much shorter. 

The major flaw in all of this is the agent’s livelihood is completely dependent on the client, i.e. the agent’s sole means of support is a small percentage (usually no more than 4% of the contract and 10% of the endorsement deals) of what the client makes.  Also, the agent is forced to become a master spin doctor (if not an out-and-out. blatant liar).  It’s hard for me to recall an agent representing a client who screwed up, whether a minor infraction or a blatant violation of the law, holding that client accountable for any misdeed.  After all, that’s their meal ticket!

As far as players not attending team practices goes, it would be comical, if it wasn’t so insulting, listening to the agents explain why holding out is the right thing to do - especially for a rookie.  Try as I might, I can’t imagine a player, if asked prior to his final year on the “amateur” circuit if he’d play for, say, a guaranteed $15 million, not responding with, “ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!?”

Because it happens every year, it seems like agents have the knack of getting their client(s) to drink the Kool-Aid.  I simply can’t believe that, once again let’s talk about rookies, an untested player, regardless of stats, skill level or hype, doesn’t realize how holding out retards his development and is detrimental to the team (especially in terms of timing), not to mention what it does to team chemistry (especially if he’s making more than the veterans).

Like it or not, agents are here to stay.  There’s a great deal of money to be made (4% of a lot of money is more than enough to live on - quite comfortably), representing marquis clients usually means fame for agents as well and agents will be thought of as a major players, even if they’ve never suited up.  In the words of one of the best agents, Leigh Steinberg:

“Very narrow areas of expertise can be very productive.  Develop your own profile.  Develop your own niche.”

Finally out of that intense Las Vegas heat and back to Fresno - where, just to remind us of the fun we had in Sin City, the thermometer is well over 100.

Younger son, Alex, and the undermanned AAU team of kids from Central Cali (Organized Chaos), represented the Valley well, going undefeated (3-0) in their pool and winning two games in the “Championship” bracket (including a 77-51 trouncing of D-1 Sports of NC, led by Quincy Miller, rated by most as the #2 rising senior prospect in the nation) before dropping a two-point decision to Urban DFW in a contest in which OC led most of the way.

Other than getting a chance for my wife and I to watch our son and agonize over every missed shot and turnover, cheer every basket and assist and “help” the officials (some parents more than others - they know who they are), the trip gave me a chance to catch up with some old coaching friends I haven’t seen in a decade or longer.  NCAA rules preclude coaches from talking to parents of prospects at such an event but, because I have what’s referred to as a “pre-existing relationship” with so many of these guys, I enjoyed speaking, without fear of them getting in trouble, with many of the coaches whose profession I used to call my own.  Heck, I’ve known these guys a whole lot longer than I’ve known my son!

To paint a picture of what last Wed-Mon was like, there were three or four tournaments in Las Vegas involving high school prospects.  The one our kids played in (the adidas Super 64) had 40 pools of 4 teams in each pool.  160 teams!  Following pool play, teams were placed in “championship,” “gold,” “silver” or “bronze” divisions, depending on their record against the other three teams in their respective pool.  Then, single elimination tournaments began.  The other events were similar, although their numbers weren’t quite so high, more like 30-60 teams. 

One day, I received a call from a friend and former colleague who I had actually helped get into the business.  He’s currently an assistant coach at a school in a league that would be referred to as mid-major.  He called while travelling from one of the 20 or so sites.  The pace is hectic, as coaching staffs try to see (and be seen by) as many of their “top-line” prospects as they can, evaluate those players they’ve heard about or received interest from (but have yet to see play) and, especially in the case of low-to-mid-majors, maybe find an as yet unknown player whom they’d have a shot at successfully recruiting.

This coach remarked to me that he was fully aware his job was to get players, players who, in coaching parlance, “could play,” i.e. make their team better, win more games and get his team into the NCAA tournament - or get fired.  For the most part, that’s the prevailing attitude that exists in Division I now.  Why?

I posted a blog on 11/28/07 entitled The Biggest Problem in College Basketball Today.  My number one answer?  Colleges are paying coaches too much money.  Whether you agree or not, the blog is well worth reading and I suggest you check it out, keeping in mind I wrote it nearly three years ago.  The game - and profession - have progressed but, often, with progress comes problems.  Or in the case of today’s college basketball scene, increased pressure.  While what Gonzaga has done, i.e. seeing them in a Top 10 poll is no longer shocking, is remarkable, the presidents and athletics directors of the other seven teams in the WCC (Gonzaga’s conference) adopt a feeling of “If they can do it, why can’t we?” 

The WCC is a league of eight church-schools, six in California and the University of Portland, in addition to the Zags, so resources would seem to have been relatively equal throughout the league when Gonzaga began its ascent.  Don’t think the prez’s and AD’s don’t have egos.  When their counterparts from Gonzaga walk into WCC meetings, the “have-nots” begin to wonder, “Why not us?”  Changing the coach often becomes the answer.  So, while my friend’s statement about “get players or else” might have seemed a little dramatic, it’s become reality.

Yet, coaches love their profession.  Some for different reasons than others, but working long hours - and many days on the road - is just part of the job.  Consumed is the word that’s used when the coaching profession is discussed.  As a sort of personal experiment, I asked my friend if he knew who Shirley Sherrod was.  Although hers was the lead story in nearly every paper in the nation, he told me he didn’t.  In fact, when he called, he was in the car with an assistant coach from a high-major program (BCS) and he asked him if he knew about Shirley Sherrod.  Same response. 

I am not including this story to disparage nor criticize my friend and his associate.  It’s mentioned because, when I was an assistant (between 1972-2002), I wouldn’t have known about a front-page story like Shirley Sherrod either.  I don’t mean to infer that every coach on the Division I level is ignorant of the Shirley Sherrod story.  It’s just that, because of the consuming aspect of the job, there’s a feeling that nothing else matters other than what you ought to be doing to make your team better and advance your career (or keep from derailing it).  In addition, you get the (absurd) feeling that while you’re reading about that A-1 story, you could be calling a prospect or seeing another game.

My late, brilliant mentor, John Savage, used to say there were some people at opposite ends of the spectrum.  Most coaches were the latter in his statement:

“Some people are a mile wide and an inch deep, while others are an inch wide and a mile deep.”Â

Before readers start wondering whether I understand the magnitude of Wade’s remarks, let’s take a look at Wade - from several different perspectives. 

First of all, would what he said have caused such a stir if it had come from a random rabid Miami Heat fan (of which many have sprung up recently)?  A fan who, upon being asked by a member of the media if he thought the Heat were going to go undefeated, said, “If we (as any fan refers to his team) lose two or three in a row, you all (meaning the media, as Wade did) are going to make it like the World Trade Center is coming down again.”  Would that statement have caused as much of an incident as when Wade uttered it? 

Examine the speaker in this case.  As cool and stylish as any of today’s athletes, Dwyane Wade was born to a couple who did more than dabble in the drug culture, especially his mom, who spent time in prison.  Google Dwyane Wade’s name and you’ll read about how he was sent to live with his dad and his new wife (who also began having marital problems).  While Dwyane, Sr. played ball with his son (hour after hour) and taught him how to deal with adversity on the court, the son apparently didn’t receive the same guidance in the academic world.

He was a Proposition 48 casualty, meaning he wasn’t eligible to play his freshman year in college.  The story is similar to many such scholastic stars - OK grades, but missed the necessary standardized score (in Wade’s case, the ACT) by one point.  Whether that was the case or not, missing academic eligibility isn’t like narrowly missing the Dean’s List.  With his academic and social background, it’s amazing Dwyane Wade grew into the type of young man he is.  But let’s not make him someone we should turn to for social commentary. 

Wade fell in love early in life and married his high school sweetheart - after she gave birth to their first child.  They stayed together for quite a while, but I remember coaching friends making comments that, with the temptations professional athletes were presented, especially the high profile, rich, good-looking ones, it was only a matter of time before the Wade romance hit the skids.  As has been reported, i.e. publicly dragged through the mud, a nasty divorce and child custody battle is now taking place.

Then there’s the story of how D-Wade walked into a tattoo shop, as seemingly all the great ones do, turned around and left because he knew his father would disapprove.  That’s a rather major statement in this day and age.  Parents guide in different ways.  I recall a professor I had in a child psych class in college lecture us one day that there were three theories on how to raise children.  “Unfortunately, none of them work,” he ended the lesson.

Granted, Dwyane Wade makes big money.  10% of that (before tax) is donated to his church.  It’s easy to say, “If I had that much money, I’d be giving it away too,” but exactly how much are of your own money is designated to charity?  Regardless of your views on Wade, Sports Illustrated saw it fit to name him their Sportsman of the Year for 2006, an award they don’t give away lightly. 

So who is Dwyane Wade?  In this instance, it’s a case of walking a mile in another man’s moccasins.  Shouldn’t he have realized that that comment would set off a frenzy of disbelief that someone could be so insensitive?  Sure - if he had your social awareness, intelligence, upbringing and, yeah, common sense.  Just like you wouldn’t be such a klutz when you play your weekend hoops game at your local gym if you had his basketball skill.

Dwyane Wade’s talent in basketball has given him fame, fortune and some powerful friends (not just LeBron and Bosh).  Yet, as difficult as it may be to understand, it doesn’t mean he fully comprehends the magnitude of an event that took place when he was nineteen.  That’s not an excuse, just what I believe happens when people with a platform are ill-equipped to discuss certain issues.

This reminds me a little - and just a little - of what brought down Jimmy “The Greek” Snyder.  In 1988 I was associate head basketball coach at the University of Toledo when Jimmy made his infamous remarks that got him fired from CBS and happened to be a guest on a Toledo radio station .  When asked for how I summed up the story, I said:

“The guy was a bookmaker and now people are making him out to be a geneticist.”

It’s always interesting (for those of us to do this sort of thing) thinking about who, after all the draft hype, will eventually be the Rookie of the Year.  Sometimes, it’s a certainty, e.g. Lew Alcindor (remember him?), Patrick Ewing, Shaq and LeBron.  Barring injuries, no one really knows because, although the number one pick usually goes to a bad team and, thus, gets mega-minutes, other first rounders are put into positions which showcase their abilities and allow them to have big years.

Naturally, the overwhelming favorite this season will be John Wall.  Based on his first two summer league games, the ROY award’s going to be hard for anyone to take away from him.  But there are other candidates.  One, in particular, is the number two pick, Evan Turner.  Having played in college for a greater period of time must have helped with his maturity, as did playing on the Big Ten stage and having to be a leader for the Buckeyes - which he did magnificently.  Another factor in his favor is he will be coached by Doug Collins who, aside from being a terrific motivator and possessing an extremely keen basketball mind, was the number one pick coming out of Illinois State.  He will be a calming mentor to Turner.

Picks three and four, Derrick Favors of the Nets and Wesley Johnson of the Timberwolves, respectively, each were selected by bad teams desperately in need of immediate help at their positions so opportunity will be no problem and while their teams were lousy last year, each has complementary pieces who should allow the two newcomers to flourish in their extensive roles.

DeMarcus Cousins’ maturity has come under scrutiny - for which he has only himself to blame - but if his mental makeup can catch his physical stature, he also will be given a role in which he’ll get all he needs to prove himself - and will have a great point guard and guy who understands what it takes to win the award.

Gordon Hayward and Cole Aldrich may have hit the jackpot with the teams who drafted them but, while they’ll be happy to be in the situations that present themselves, they won’t be ROY candidates - which is as good as any rookie could hope - to be drafted by a good team which needs them but, more importantly, is just what they need.  As if the guaranteed money wasn’t enough of a bonus.

So, armed with all this knowledge, who will the 2011 NBA Rookie of the Year be?  My pick is . . . the Clippers’ Blake Griffin.  For all the reasons above - opportunity, need, big minutes, will be playing for Vinny Del Negro, under whose guidance Derrick Rose, Joakim Noah and Taj Gibson became NBA fixtures (defined - by me - as guys who will have minimum 10-year careers) and, add to that list, a hunger to make up two years in one.  

Those in the Clippers’ organization claim Griffin’s work ethic is unsurpassed.  And he has several others traits that ought to insure NBA longevity and stardom, e.g. skill set, strength, quickness, intelligence and high character.  After missing his first year in the league due to injury (the reason he’s eligible for the ROY award), Griffin is finally healthy.  This is a guy who was MVP of last year’s summer league.

If ever Napoleon Hill’s quote applied to anyone, it applies to Blake Griffin:

“Effort only fully releases its reward after a person refuses to quit.”

Kendrick Perkins should have read my blog yesterday.  For those you who haven’t - and thank you to the many who contacted me by posting a comment, emailing me with kind words or calling my cell phone (I’m starting to figure out this “power of the Internet” thing everybody’s always talking about), the blog was about NBA players complaining - about every call - and even some of the non-calls too.

In this case, while Perkins does need to maintain better control over his emotions (after all, the game is about more than just him), the subsequent technical foul called by veteran official Eddie F. Rush was flat-out wrong.  While Perkins displayed disagreement, he was walking away from the action - and Rush.  There was absolutely no reason, other than Rush’s ego, for him to make that call.  And because it’s Perkins’ seventh technical of the post-season (who said Rasheed Wallace doesn’t have influence over the Celtics?), he, by rule, merits an automatic one game suspension.

The way the series has made a turnaround, the likes of which haven’t been seen since . . . yesterday, when the Phoenix Suns tied their series with the Lakers, the Celtics look like Friday’s game in Boston, although they still lead 3-2, is a must game.  Consider that they lost Game Four and then got hammered last night.  That means should they go down in Game Six, the deciding game will be in Orlando.  Don’t think that after winning three in a row and heading home the Magic won’t be a prohibitive favorite.  In a game of Friday’s magnitude, Boston had better have everyone on its roster.  Which definitely includes their starting center.

Doc Rivers (have you ever seen a calmer guy in such a stressful situation?) mentioned that, had Rush known the call would have automatically disqualified Perkins from Game Six, he probably wouldn’t have made it.  Slick move.  Why antagonize a league that holds in their hands the decision as to whether Doc’s club has to go into a pressure-packed game short-handed?  Plus, if he complains, he 1) gives his guys a reason to justify losing (it was the referee’s fault) and 2) gets hit with a fine which, in the current state of affairs, just adds insult to injury (to his bank account).

What Eddie Rush did reminds me of a story the late Jim Valvano used to tell.  In an NC State game in which V was coaching, he complained to an official about a call.  The ref hit him with a technical foul.  When Jim asked the guy why what he said deserved a tech, the zebra turned to him and said, “Jim, you showed me up.”

Valvano said to the guy (and this line should be retold at every officials’ meeting):

“Showed you up?  Who the hell do you think came to watch YOU!” Â

So many people are up in arms regarding the NBA rule that forces a high school player to attend college for at least a year before heading to the big league.  Of course, there are alternatives, but many are pretty radical, e.g. playing overseas ala Brandon Jennings.  While it (ultimately) worked out for Jennings (keep in mind he had a terrible experience over there), others have tried and haven’t been as successful as the Bucks’ rookie.

If memory serves me correctly (and at this age, that being true is a toss up), David Stern said the rule is in place due to some “legalese,” i.e. he’s not too thrilled about it either, but it’s the best of all evils.  With that in mind, it means that the “road most traveled” will be to enter college for at least (and for some, at most) one year.

If that’s the case, why whine about it?  Deal with it.  How?  Make college more relevant to these guys.  If they are as talented as they think they are (and as influential outsiders are telling them they are), then the school’s goal should be to help them - just like colleges are helping all other students.  As I initially blogged on 5/6/07 (and have reprinted that post at least once), the reason kids go to college is not for an education, but to improve their station in life.  

The one-and-dones are going to college because they have to - and once the sand runs out of that year-long hour glass, color them gone - for the big money.  If that’s the reality - and for the great ones, it is - why not give them a curriculum to prepare them for the life they’re about to enter?  That’s exactly what the basketball coach is doing in practice.  How about offering them (and any other student at the university) courses such as money management (including philanthropy for those who hit the jackpot), selecting advisers (mentors, agents, and, although, it could be a sensitive area, friends), dealing with the media, women’s rights (this should be mandatory for many students in the wake of today’s front page stories), nutrition, maintaining physical fitness, accepting the responsibility of being a role model and acting appropriately (whether they want to or not, athletes are role models) and, since NBA players don’t have normal 8-hour work days, nor do they play year-round, a course in how to productively use “down-time” (from doing crosswords and sudokus to keep the mind active, to reading up on a topic of interest, to tennis and golf)?  Many other course possibilities exist if people at the top would put their heads together.

What this does is give an extremely talented young man something that he can actually see will help him in his life after college.  One night a few years ago, the guys on the set of TNT’s NBA game night studio show were giving Charles Barkley a hard time about the (lack of an) Auburn education he got, leaving school without a degree.  Charles had a pretty good comeback:

“I don’t have a degree - but a lot of people who work for me do.”  �

In the latest Sports Illustrated, there is a absolutely sensational article regarding the “Core Four” - four New York Yankees who entered the majors in 1995 and have played together and been largely responsible for the enormous success the Bronx Bombers have had since that time.

One of the four, Mariano Rivera (the other three are Derek Jeter, Jorge Posada and Andy Pettitte), made some poignant comments in the piece after the quartet was asked which one of them young players should ask for financial advice.  Posada replied, “Mo.”

Rivera’s statements should serve as advice that should be heeded by every young professional athlete.  Before quoting Rivera’s sound counsel, allow me to introduce a prime example of someone who ought to be listening -and listening intently. 

Jerome James just concluded his NBA career - sitting in street clothes on the Chicago Bulls’ bench.  He was obtained by the Bulls in a trade between them and the New York Knicks, mainly because of his enormous contract.  NBA trades now are as much, if not more, about money than acquiring talent.  To oversimplify current trades, the money of the players switching teams has to somewhat balance.  When the Bulls unloaded Larry Hughes, he of the 5-year, $70 million contract, James had to be thrown into the deal, even though he had sustained a career-ending Achilles tendon injury and would not play a second in a Bulls uni.  This change of address couldn’t have been too surprising to James since in each of the past two years, he’d played in only two games during each one.  One reason he needn’t fret was the contract he’d been offered by Isiah Thomas - someone many guys in, and now out, of the league ought to keep on their Xmas card list.

James contract, which he was offered after showing brief flashes of ability in eleven games of the 2005 NBA Playoffs (to quote Jim Mora, “Playoffs???” - not an entire season, but playoffs!!!), was for 5 years and $30 million.  His salary for this season, in which he even never suited up, was $6,600,000.  “What economic downturn?” Jerome must have been thinking.

But now his career is over.  And now is the proper time to invoke the wise words of Mariano Rivera regarding the longevity of a professional athlete’s career: “I understand we do this in a period of time.  We cannot do this forever.  So whatever you make, you’ve got to take care of it.”

A brief break during this bit of wisdom to reflect on a recent story I heard about James’ modes of transportation.  One is a Maserati and the other is a Rolls Royce.  Admittedly, this is second hand information, i.e. I have not actually seen either of these two vehicles but, as is said by real journalists, it does come from a “very reliable source.”

Back to Rivera’s sage guidance: “I’m going to do whatever it takes to save the money that I have made, because I know that I’m not going to be working after that, or making the kind of money that we are making now.”

I don’t claim to have any idea how much money Jerome James has stashed away but I’d venture to say that a 34-year-old with both a Maserati and a Rolls, coupled with a contract that just ran out, might want to think about the old proverb that says:

“Money talks, but all it ever says is goodbye.”     Â

Last night, after searching the Internet for information regarding which collegiate players have declared for the NBA draft, I found the number was 54.  When I checked the night before, the number was 50.  Then I noticed a related story that Arkansas soph point guard Courtney Forston had declared, yet his name was not on the list, so that pushed the number to 55.  Additionally, neither Kyle Singler’s and Patrick Patterson’s names were on the list and most people feel Singler will declare if, for no other reason, than to see how he stacks up to the other potential draft picks and listen to where the NBA people think he’ll be drafted.  In Singler’s case, he has the perfect mentor in Mike Krzyzewski.  This isn’t John Calipari’s first rodeo either, so Patterson has someone with knowledge to lean on, too.  

If an NCAA athlete hires an agent, he immediately forfeits any remaining eligibility.  If he doesn’t, he has until May 8 to withdraw his name to retain his eligibility (unless he’s pulled this trick once before - as in the case of Patterson last year - in which case, once the player declares for the second time, he’s considered a pro).  Players have until midnight on April 25 to file.

One website listed whether the player had, had not or probably would hire an agent.  The number of those who had hired an agent was 19 (probably 20 with Patterson), the “had not’s” numbered 25 (actually 26 since Forston has not) and in the probably category, there were 10.  Considering there are only 60 draft picks (two rounds, 30 NBA teams) - and there will certainly be some seniors and foreign players drafted, it seems as though some guys are being subjected to really bad advice.

First of all, players declaring for the draft fall into different categories.  The guys who don’t hire an agent (especially juniors, since they’re only allowed one mulligan) are, like most feel about Singler, testing the waters.  Similar to football, if a guy shows well at the pro-sponsored workouts, NBA decision-makers tend to discard the previous year(s) of his career and raise the guy’s stock.

Guys who do hire an agent usually come in three varieties - 1) a sure-fire first rounder who wants sound counsel regarding his future; 2) a dreamer with less-than-average intelligence (who’s listening to all the sweet nothings - and usually that’s exactly what they’re worth - that some wannabe is whispering in his ear), and 3) a guy who thought (or was told) “this was my (your - our?) year” and stopped going to class.  In this third case, declaring and hiring an agent shows the public (in his mind) that he’s a pro.  When he, as often happens, goes undrafted, blame will be lain at the feet of someone or many people (but not him).  Mostly, this guy was going to be dismissed from school for academic reasons and declaring for the draft is simply a means of saving face.

There is another guy who fits in the third group and that’s the one who does not hire an agent, yet has no intention of returning to school.  This is a slick way of making it look like you’re exploring all options when, in reality, you’re not returning for one major reason: you can’t.  It, then, comes as no surprise when, in spite of poor showings, this student-athlete decides, after all, to go pro. 

While recruiting has become a slimy business, the time when players finish their careers might be worse.  That’s mainly because now, we’re talking serious money.  The lack of conscience of some of the characters influencing these teenagers (or young men in their early 20’s) is akin to a Larry Stowe, the snake oil salesman who was exposed last night on 60 Minutes.  To prey on innocent - or in some cases, not-so innocent - kids has got to bother anyone with any sense of decency.

I found a perfect quote to wrap up this blog, but I can’t find who said it:

“The key is to get to know people and trust them to be who they are.  Instead, we trust people to be who we want them to be - and when they’re not, we cry.”Â

One of the biggest headaches the NCAA has had since its inception (and the number borders on infinity), summer basketball ranks at the top.  It’s now become a big-time business, from some legal shoe sponsorships to some illegal payouts.  If the average college fanatic (and only college sports can produce a brand of fanaticism that can be qualified as average) knew what really has gone on (and is still going - strong), the deafening sound heard around the country (world) would be that of jaws hitting the floor.

Yet, there also have always been many truly sincere people out there trying to do what’s right for the kids they coach.  One of them from the past, circa 1970-90, give or take a few years on either side, was a bald, portly (at that time) brilliant high school history teacher from Buffalo named Irv Saracki.  Irv was a mentor to Bob Lanier as well hundreds (maybe thousands) of other kids from upstate New York.  All the college coaches knew Irv and the one thing we knew about him was that, if you wanted to recruit any of the young guys who played for him, you’d better be a straight shooter.  He had no preference where the kids wound up but his BS meter was always on and was very accurate.

I got to know Irv when I got to the University of Tennessee in 1980.  One of the players UT had signed the spring prior to my arrival was Tyrone Beaman from Jamestown, NY (near Buffalo).  Irv would make the trip to Knoxville once a year, during our Volunteer Classic so he could catch four games.  He loved college basketball and he’d intently watch every game in the tourney, including the two that didn’t involve us.  He’d make the trip with his son, Ernie, and Tyrone’s high school coach, Joe Piscopo (no, not that one) and Joe’s son, Eric.

Irv and I hit it off because we shared a passion for basketball, but also because we each enjoyed the company of genuine people.  I’ve never tried to put on airs and Irv couldn’t! His coaching friends ran the gamut from Jud Heathcote to Rob Evans to John Calipari.

From the time our son, Andy, was born in 1989, Irv would send him a card with a $20 check in it every Xmas and Easter.  When Alex was born four and a half years later, there were two such checks in the envelope.  A couple years ago (around the middle of July), my cell phone rang and I saw the call was from the 716 area code.  It was Irv.  He had heard that Alex, 14 at the time, was a pretty good player and wondered if he was playing in Las Vegas.  During the last two weeks in July, every serious young basketball player is playing in at least one of the many tournaments in Vegas.

I told him he was and Irv said he wanted to watch him play.  He got a cheap plane ticket (for a high school teacher, bargain flights are the only means of travel - if you’re out of driving range, meaning about 600 miles) and we met up again - after probably 20 years - in Sin City.  He watched Alex play every game of the two tourneys his teams had entered.

Irv Saracki dropped dead yesterday.  He’d been battling heart problems for several years, which had worsened the past couple months.  Ernie, who’s now teaching English in, of all places, Vietnam, called me last night and told me his dad collapsed and his heart just gave out.

Probably from overuse.

Albert Einstein said:

“Strive not to be a success, but rather to be of value.”

Irv Saracki was both.  RIP, buddy.