Jack’s Blog

It doesn’t surprise anybody when I tell them the pull I have with the NCAA and the NBA is equal to the juice I have with the White House.  That doesn’t mean I don’t have a better idea when it comes to the (admitted) problem of the NCAA’s one-and-done student-athlete.  While the following post (which, by the way, I first blogged on 5/3/2010 and altered a little here) certainly could use further tweaking, it’s exponentially superior to whatever has been proposed thus far.  Plus, it’s not illegal nor does it break any NBAPA rule.  Read and let me know what you think.  Better yet, contact the NBA office.  Especially if you have clout.

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’ star.

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.  My claim is that the current situation can be changed for the betterment of . . . everybody.

The why are we whining about it?  Let’s 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 actually is 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, e.g. show them there is relevance for them to attend college!  Why not create a major in the field.  Put off the general education classes temporarily and offer them (and any other student at the university for that matter) courses in 1) money management (including the value of philanthropy for those who really hit the jackpot), 2) how to select advisers (mentors, agents, and, although, it could be a sensitive area, friends), 3) how to deal with the media and use it to their advantage, 4) women’s rights, including “no means no” (this should be mandatory for many students in the wake of today’s front page stories), 5) nutrition, 6) maintaining physical fitness, 7) accepting (embracing) the responsibility of being a role model and acting appropriately (whether they want to or not, athletes are role models) and 8 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, to . . . whatever)?  Many other course possibilities exist if people at the top (maybe create a mastermind group) would put their heads together.  For the kid who doesn’t get drafted or realizes he’s not yet ready, or better yet, realizes a college degree might be a necessity, and at the very least, certainly wouldn’t hurt, the sophomore year can be devoted to catching up on general ed classes.

What this does is give an extremely talented (in the sport of basketball) young man something that he can actually see will help him in his life after basketball.  Although Charles Barkley is a one-of-a-kind, e.g. an out-of-shape kid who eschewed attending classes, he became one of the 50 best players in the NBA and has been inducted into both the intercollegiate and NBA Halls of Fame.  He has managed to make a great life for himself, currently serving as a studio analyst for both the NCAA and NBA as well as a pitchman for several products.  That is, he’s making a lot of money.  However, for every Charles Barkley, there are hundreds, maybe even thousands, of kids who never played a second of pro ball, nor cashed an NBA paycheck.

One night a few years ago, the guys on the set of TNT’s NBA game night studio show were giving Sir Charles a hard time about the (lack of an) Auburn education he got and leaving the school without a degree.  Charles had a pretty good comeback (which may only apply to him):

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

Probably because I was in the “arena” so long (30 years in Division I basketball at nine different institutions, for first time readers - or those who’ve been away for a while and have less than stellar memories), I chuckle (now - I used to fume) when I see “letters-to-the-editor” or hear TV talking heads spew venom when they know, maybe, 10% of what they’re commenting on.  All that said, I saw something in yesterday’s paper, the entirety of which I imagine I know very little.  Armed with so little knowledge, however, I will still go out on a limb and make comment on it.

The story was about Billy Hunter, the executive director of the National Basketball Players’ Association.  Full disclosure: I am on record as being on the David Stern side of the NBA & David Stern vs. NBPA & Billy Hunter battle.  One reason is that I think Stern is as competent at his job than anyone else was/is at theirs.  Inside the world of sports or out of it and for that, I truly admire him.  Hunter always struck me as the pompous, bullying sort for which I can’t bring myself to respect him.

It seems that, as unbelievable as it sounds, there was criticism of his hiring practices.  Somehow his daughter and daughter-in-law were on the payroll of the NBPA. Hey, maybe they killed the interview.  Or aced the written exam.  Falling within a similar realm of incredulity, the NBPA used to work with Prim Capital.  I have to admit I’ve never heard of that organization.  One thing I do know about it, though, is that Hunter’s son, Todd, is employed there.  Bids in sealed envelopes, perhaps?  In any case, Hunter was forced to fire the two ladies and the NBPA no longer can be affiliated with Prim Capital.

Situations like this mess beg for a quote - and in the case of someone like Billy Hunter, it’s not Mark Jackson’s catchphrase, “You’re better than that!”  Rather, we’d have to paraphrase Desi Arnez:

“Billy, you got some ’splaining to do!”

Amir Johnson was selected 56th in the 2005 draft - fifth from the last pick - by the Detroit Pistons.  He played at Westchester HS in Los Angeles, arguably the best high school basketball program in California (unarguably, one of the top five), both in wins and production of NBA players.  He was originally signed by Louisville.  Based on his recent actions, it’s questionable if he would have qualified academically.

Prior to the 2006 draft, the NBA instituted a rule that requires American players to be at least one year removed from the graduation of their high school class to be eligible so barring still another rule change (who knows, maybe Adam Silver wants to put his footprint on the league once he takes over for David Stern), Johnson will be the last-ever high school player drafted.  Then-Pistons head coach Larry Brown thought that, eventually, Johnson could be an impact player.  After Monday night, he’s got a way to go - just to prove he’s mentally fit to play at all.

Johnson’s been traded twice, both coming in 2009.  Detroit traded him to Milwaukee who, two months later (before ever issuing him a uniform), traded him to Toronto.  He played in all 82 games (starting 5), shooting 62.3% from the floor and 63.8% from the line, averaging 6.2 points, 4.8 rebounds and .8 blocks in less than 18 minutes a game.  As (too) often occurs in the NBA, he then signed a 5 year, $34 million contract with the Raptors on the first day of free agency (an oxymoron if there ever was one).

While he makes big boy money, he displayed the temperament of a child Monday night in Portland where the Raptors were beaten 94-72.  After a made Portland free throw, referee David Jones retrieved the ball.  While he was holding it, Johnson reached over and grabbed the ball.  While it was a classic “jump ball,” anytime it’s between a referee and a player, the unwritten rule is “ref ball.”  Unwritten because it’s never happened!  An altercation between ref and player ensued.  Jones didn’t appreciate Johnson’s effort and let go to “T” him up.  Amir must have reached into his vocab book for a choice one because Jones turned and gave him the heave-ho sign.

Johnson absolutely freaked!  Teammates had to restrain him from Jones who was wisely heading in the opposite direction.  Johnson then did exactly what a spoiled child would have done in this situation.  He threw his mouthpiece at the authority official.  To prove he’s got game, the mouthpiece hit Jones squarely in the back.  The NBA suspended him one game without pay.  I wonder if anyone has put into perspective to him how much that tirade cost him - in terms of what that money actually means - especially when his career ends.  Even if it’s 15 years from now (when he’s 40). And people who act like he did last night never last until they’re forty.

Amir Johnson has made in excess of $45 million since he’s been in the league.  Early in his career, he spent a couple stints in the D-league.  Although he played well there, that’s not exactly the blueprint for a superstar’s career.  His actions in Portland can only be explained by the quote:

“The difference between genius and stupidity is genius has its limits.”

Headed up to the Bay Area this weekend as Cal State Monterey Bay opens league play.  Younger son Alex is currently the team’s scoring leader at 17 ppg.  He gets his first collegiate start tonight.  The blog will resume on Tuesday.

The San Antonio Spurs were on a six-game road trip, having won the first five games when Spurs’ head coach Gregg Popovich decided to rest his Big Three - Tim Duncan, Manu Ginobili and Tony Parker (plus Danny Green).  He sent them home to rest because they had a big game coming up tomorrow (Sat) with Memphis and he wanted them at their best.

“Pop” is the longest tenured NBA head coach with the same team and is one of only five coaches who have won at least four championships.  No one doubts his ability to put a quality team on the court and give them every possible chance of winning.  Be it strategy, motivation, in-game and halftime adjustments or late game situations, he understands his job as well or better than anyone.

And therein lies the point of contention between his actions - which he sees as doing his job in the best possible way, i.e. win games and have a rested team free of injuries (if anyone can figure that out) come playoff time.  Even his title of President of Spurs Basketball connotes that his ultimate job each and every year he’s in charge is to win it all.  So what’s the problem?

David Stern is commissioner of the NBA and, as such, has no affiliation with any particular club.  His job is to build the NBA brand.  That’s why there are regular season games in Europe.  That’s why there’s so much individualization (even though, technically, it’s a team game), i.e. endorsements and commercials being encouraged.  It’s a league of stars - so put your stars front and center.  That’s why the NBA picks up the tab for the WNBA - even though that’s a losing venture year after year after year.  Stern realizes the WNBA losses are (relatively) insignificant compared to having the image of (financially) promoting women’s basketball.  Since women make up half of the population, why not cater to them too?  (Or at least don’t upset them).

That’s exactly the point.  David Stern is a servant to the public.  He needs giant corporations to buy luxury boxes and huge blocks of tickets.  He needs television and its _illions (fill in the first letter or two) of dollars - which they can give because the demand to see games is so high because of its superstars.  He needs the family of however many to take in a game.  He needs fans purchasing NBA souvenirs, memorabilia and gear (which mainly happens to be that of the superstars).

The argument I’ve heard why Pop was wrong is because of the young kid who whose dad saved up so they could go to one game - to see the boy’s idol.  Sounds nice and that’s true - in fairy tales.  What about the guy who’s head of a multi-_illion dollar company, who’s trying to seal a deal with another guy who owns a multi-_illion dollar company, and knows the guy has a man crush on whomever (Duncan, Ginobili, Parker) and says, “C’mon, let’s go to the Heat-Spurs game.  I’ve got a couple court-side seats.  We’ll check out these guys up close.”  That is what Stern dreads.  All of it is what Stern dreads.

It’s “Stern needs to keep the game as pure as the driven snow” vs. “Popovich needs to figure out the best way to win it all.”  Harken back to the days of yore when guys flew commercially - or went by train - and for a lot less dough.  The NBA Players Association has a strong union.  Players are making enough money that 90% of them ought to be able to retire comfortably if they had a morsel of decent financial advice.  They must stay at luxury hotels.  There have been stories about guys bitching because they had to stay at a Marriott - of all godforsaken places - when they first went to Oklahoma City.  Per diem is $125 even though some meals are catered. e.g. on the (private) plane.  It is written in the collective bargaining agreement that, during the season, players must have so many days off.  This is, obviously, an injury-prevention measure and a wise one.

What Pop did was not against the rules.  At the very least, though, he should have had communication with Stern prior to making the move.  Nearly ten years ago, I heard an educator, Dr. Bertice Berry, say something that I think applies here - because in the end, it’s the consumer who’s paying for the way for the NBA:

“There’s a big difference between what you have a right to do and what is right to do.”

Taking charges was once hailed as a talent - something only the toughest players would do, the guys who would give up their body against a massive beast driving to the hoop.  A charge would be called and teammates would rush to help their brave man to his feet, while the color commentator would gush with compliments.  “Taking a charge is as important as hitting a big shot, more so because of the momentum swing it gives a team.”

Seldom, however, did it seem the superstar made this defensive move.  There were reasons for it.  As much as players like to hear their names and get patted on the back, the risk vs. reward for the charge was often too high, e.g. it could wind up as an injury, possibly even a career-ending one.  It was said the guys who were taking charges were doing so because they didn’t have any (other) skill.  Or it was a way for a washed-up veteran to hang on to a roster spot.  Some guys who performed this defensive maneuver wound up with cult hero status.  Dennis Rodman was the president of the club.  On the flip side, Kobe Bryant called it “a chump move.”

The essence of the move was to try to get the referee to buy not only that there was contact, but that it was excessive.  Even if the offensive player barely touched the defender.  As things tend to work in the NBA, if this move worked for one side, why not the other?  Soon fans were watching games in which a dribbler coming off a screen where the screener’s defender stepped out and the ball handler made like he was mugged.  Or a guy taking to the hole and flails when a defender nudged him.

Like anything else, at first, it was kind of slick; then it became annoying; finally the act got tired.  The once proud move became known as “flopping.”  Whether done at the offensive or defensive end of the floor.  Everybody started to complain about it and by everybody, we mean coaches (always the first to complain - something about gaining/losing an advantage), players, referees, fans, even play-by-play men and color commentators.  The bitchin’ got all the way to the commissioner’s office and one thing David Stern doesn’t care for is negative publicity.  Truth be told, he nor his advisers didn’t care for flopping either.

Public opinion got so bad the league did what it seems to do best.  It decided to legislate against it.  Call it the “anti-flopping” rule.  What happens when rules are broken by NBA players and coaches?  Warnings, fines and suspensions, those are what.  While it seems like a means of cutting down, if not eliminating the problem, it becomes another way for players to lose money.  First-time offenders get a warning, second-time is a $5K fine, naturally increasing to possible suspension on number six.

So what happens when there’s a disagreement between players and the league?  Don’t tell me another strike.  No, that’s just the last resort and those involved in the last one claim it will be just that - the last one.  Prior to any action (I imagine including the kind that takes place on the floor), the players’ union needs to get involved.  It is currently claiming that implementing the rule would be tantamount to an unfair labor practice.  Particularly when it involves an unclear rule.  The players’ union allege the whole problem is an overreaction by the commish’s office.  Which means they’re upset they weren’t contacted first before their league made the rule.  Someone needs to explain to these millionaires (and, contrary to the football players who say only a few of them are that highly paid, basketballers really are all millionaires) how being an employee works.  OK, only 95% of them.

Imagine if the players had involvement on this decision?  I wonder who the player reps would be?  Shane Battier?  Anderson Varejeo?  Manu Ginobli?  Derek Fisher?  Paul Pierce?  Maybe Kobe could argue for both sides.  It should be stated for the record:

“Be careful what you wish for; you may just get it.”

On May 3, 2010 I blogged about the one-and-done situation in college basketball.  I’ve received many compliments about my idea.  However, none of the people had any “juice.”  Read on and let me know if you think there’s any merit to my madness.  Especially if you have “juice.”

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’ star.

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 for life after college - just like they do for 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, i.e. posses), 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 keeping 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.  Plus, it makes college interesting for guys.  And that might never have occurred to them before attending classes in which they saw value.  Maybe they won’t actually graduate (according to published graduation rates, several other non-athletes fail to do so as well) but the experience will be a positive, as opposed to a fraud (which, in many cases, is currently the situation).

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.”  �

Even more than the NFL lockout, its basketball counterpart is about “billionaires against millionaires.”  Therein lies a major part of the problem.  There is so much money made - and spent - in professional basketball that the guys who own the teams have finally realized how much of that dough is wasted.

I remember when the Chicago Bulls paid Michael Jordan $30 million - for one year.  People were appalled.  How could anybody be worth that kind of money?  Yet, he was worth it - and then some.  Actually, and then a lot.  People bought tickets to see Jordan.  In Chicago and on the road.  They also bought his jersey.  Once at the game, they parked their cars, bought programs, concessions and souvenirs.  He was a bargain - because there aren’t many MJs.

Where the money is foolishly thrown around is on the guys who fill out the roster.  Check out a list of NBA player salaries.  The minimum salary for a rookie, i.e. the absolute lowest salary an NBA baller can make is $442,114.  A player’s salary will increase based on how many years he’s been in the league, which is as it should be.  NBA clubs are composed of 15 players (teams are allowed to dress 12 players and have three others on the team).  Some choose not to carry the max allowed but it’s rare to see any NBA squad with less than 13.

Since most teams play 8-9 players during a game, that means there’s a whole lot of . . . a combination of projects, mistakes, past their prime, dead wood, injured players, etc. rounding the squad.  Some of these guys are vital to the team’s success.  The term “good locker room guy” is heard on various teams (usually the winning ones).  But the number of overpaid players is staggering.

NBA players are the best athletes in the world, but let’s not kid ourselves - the guys filling out rosters aren’t any better than many who are not in the league but would love to be.  In other words, just as the superstars are at a premium, the supply of the 10-15 roster fillers greatly outweighs the demand.  And if the “non-rotation” players were offered a minimum of $100,000 (a salary many in this country would gladly work for), salaries could be trimmed considerably.  I can almost hear the gasps as I type that line.  If those guys are so offended, they can take their talents elsewhere, say, overseas.  Or into the workforce.  Just don’t expect to land a six-figure job quite so easily - with terrific benefits, $113 per diem and a cushy room at the Ritz-Carlton or Four Seasons.  Some of those guys need to be introduced to how the majority of the world lives.

The salary scale is screwed up because of the owners.  These men are mega-successful and obviously incredibly bright - in whatever field they made their money.  But many of them act like little kids with their favorite toy.  They want their toy to be the best and, consequently, make decisions with their teams they’d never make in their businesses.  They agreed to the last CBA and its inflated salary scale.

This isn’t a player-hater blog.  Players should get as much as they can - as long as they earn it.  For quite some time, there’s been massive waste by the owners.  David Stern is the best commissioner in all of sports.  His current charge is a simple one:

“Save the owners from themselves.”

No one has ever doubted Ron Artest is a complicated human being.  His well-documented past is made up of highs (a championship ring which he later auctioned off to raise money for mental health awareness & a citizenship award which followed many internal battles) and lows (being a major part of the worst NBA melee ever & now, being suspended for a dangerous cheap shot).  In an interview yesterday, all he would say was that everyone needed to move on because they had an important game to win, albeit without his services.

What Artest’s intentional foul stands for is the playoff mentality that has permeated the NBA culture.  How many times does a guy get mauled driving to the basket and the commentator’s response is, “That’s just a hard playoff foul.”  What, exactly, is a “playoff foul?”

Are we to believe what everyone’s always said about NBA games - that the players don’t really put out during the regular season, that to watch a NBA game, it’s only necessary to check out the last two minutes?  Of course, intensity rises during a run to a championship.  It’s only natural that players throw it into another gear when they can actually see the trophy - and not just the $113/day meal per diem and another television game.  It used to be that guys went harder because of the playoffs shares but with what players make now, that money just goes to defray the costs of a posse.

Are playoff games being refereed differently?  Is a “playoff foul” something that would be a flagrant foul during the regular season?  Or does it revert to the question regarding the fans getting shortchanged during the regular season by paying maximum price but not seeing maximum effort?

In the twisted mind of Ron Artest who, prior to clotheslining Berea, received a foul for shoving Shawn Marion out of bounds fighting for a loose ball, was it okay to act like he did . . . because it was a playoff game?  He apparently made a great deal of progress as can be witnessed by David Stern’s quote to Dan Patrick regarding his receiving the NBA’s citizenship reward:

“I’ve been watching him grow and become an adviser to others and recognize his own vulnerabilities.”

Did he revert or do we give him a pass because it’s the playoffs?

The NBA and the player’s association desperately wants to get their new collective bargaining agreement ironed out, all i’s dotted and t’s crossed, before it expires after next season.  They face a couple of major issues: 1) the league doesn’t want to pay the players as much money as they’ve been making and 2) the players, as employees in any other business, want more dough.

The players want a bigger cut of the pie while the owners claim the pie’s not as big as it was when the current CBA was signed.  David Stern made the statement that the NBA will lose upward of $400 million this season.  Billy Hunter, the executive director of the Player’s Association, responded with one word, “Baloney” even though he probably would have preferred a two-word description, having the same meaning.  It’s been reported that of the 30 NBA franchises, that possibly as many as 22 will lose money this year.

Whether lose money means “being in the red” (player’s definition) or “not making as much as we’d hoped” (owner’s definition) is unknown.  As we’ve seen in other mega-businesses in this country, creative bookkeeping distorts the actual truth - which is its main objective.  For anyone outside the NBA, it’s difficult to fairly assess the situation. 

The NBA is the ultimate organization in its field, i.e. professional basketball.  The NFL, Major League Baseball and the NHL are similar in that they are also the highest level of competence in their respective sports, but none of those really compare to each other.  There are fewer members in the NBA (450 active players, max) than the other sports, but there are several former players whose salaries on still “on the books” for whatever team had them under contract.  This is the equivalent of what accountants enter into a balance sheet as bad debt expense and allowance for uncollectible accounts, meaning, essentially, money that is written off, wasted.

Additional wasted money to me, admittedly, an outsider, was the league’s decision this past year, in economic times as these - and with the owners pleading poverty - to raise the per diem given to players and staff when they’re on the road and at training camp from, I believe, $104 to $113.  This money is for daily meals - for players who make an average of $5,854,000 a year!  Did they really feel the need for that extra $9/day?  Using the figures of a travel party of 25 and assuming that half of the league (15 teams) is on the road each day for roughly 200 days (a conservative estimate), the additional cost for this past season alone would be in the neighborhood of 2/3 million dollars.  Maybe not a huge number (to you), but it certainly isn’t helping to solve the budget crunch to add line items like these.

Travel expenses - customized, private jets and hotels like The Four Seasons and The Ritz-Carlton - aren’t even considered in such an environment.  Excess is the operative word in professional basketball at its highest level. 

I recall when Michael Jordan was paid $30 million/year all those people justifying his salary by saying he made that much many times over in increased attendance, concessions and apparel sales for the Bulls, a fact that can’t be refuted by anyone in their right mind.  However, if that’s the measuring stick for salary justification, how much should the 12th man make?  For that matter, how much did anyone other than Jordan (or Pippen, or even, Rodman and maybe a couple more Bulls) deserve?  Who came to watch the rest of the team?  Or bought their jerseys?  And they were World Champs!

How about contracts based not on statistics, but on winning and attendance - two factors that usually equate to revenue for the owners?  That criteria might produce better effort from the guys who perform for the paying customers - including the ones who just fork over money for basic cable.

It’s easy to speak out of ignorance (as evidenced by this blog) but some drastic changes need to be made or a dreaded lockout might be the answer - a lose-lose situation for all involved.  The ancient Roman poet, Horace (who spoke these words without ever knowing the sport of basketball would ever exist), captured the essence of the battle between players and owners:

“The covetous man is ever in want.”

This year is Larry King’s 25th anniversary with CNN.  There can’t be anyone with more connections than Larry King.  He gets nearly everyone he wants on his show.  His guest last Friday night was this (or any other) year’s most sought after NBA free agent, LeBron James.

LeBron, looking extremely relaxed, fit and comfortable (as well as completely recovered from the Cavaliers’ season-ending defeat in the second round of the NBA playoffs), answered the questions Larry (I’ll go to a first-name basis since they’re both referred to as “The King”) posed.  Naturally, a good many of those dealt with his impending decision regarding where he’ll be playing next, and likely, several more years to come.

When Larry brought a small sheet with notes and queried LeBron if he planned on getting together with the other free agents, this being the greatest assembly of talented free agents ever (Wade, Bosh, Stoudemaire, Johnson, Nowitzki, Lee, others) and plotting where each would play, LeBron joked about that being like a “Free Agent Committee.”  Larry agreed, stating that since they all were free agents, the league couldn’t prevent them from doing that - a suggestion I’m sure which was well-received by David Stern.  LeBron, who emphatically agreed with Larry’s crowning him the ringleader of such a group, seemed to think that, while it might not be “to that extent,” it would be intriguing.  I’m not certain LeBron used the word “intriguing,” yet for a guy who never went to college, he was remarkably poised, although he did occasionally butcher the English language as well as repeated the word, “absolutely” a seemingly infinite number of times.

“You go play here and I go here, . . . ” Larry hypothesized, to which LeBron answered something to the extent that it would be interesting for those guys to get together and do what they could to improve the league, another welcome idea for Stern and the league office to ponder.  Just for kicks, let’s say that these “power-brokers” in fact did decide to plot each other’s course - naturally, with the sole intention of making the league stronger. 

LeBron even mentioned that if it were baseball, they all could go to the same team.  (Hey, why not send Bud Selig to the asylum to give David Stern some company)?  Since they couldn’t, LeBron did propose that some guys could pair up while others would go to locations to be determined by this new cartel.  Since there are 30 NBA teams and, at last count, there aren’t nearly that many free agents who could improve all of the franchises, how, exactly, would this news be welcomed in one of the have-not cities?  Sounds like the makings of a sequel for George Orwell.

As far as where LeBron might wind up, does anybody else find it strange that the Cavs fired their coach and Danny Ferry, their GM, just resigned?  Could those moves mean that, in addition to being able to offer LeBron more money than anyone else, Cleveland might just let him have “considerable” say to who the new coach and general manager would be?  The Cleveland Cavaliers have taken after actress Gena Rowlands who once said:

“I can never have a poker face.  Anybody looking at me can tell exactly what I’m thinking.”        �