Here’s how you KNOW that the NBA Draft has passed you by as a fan. I used to be at least VAGUELY familiar with the names, games, and history of the various HS prospects selected in the 1st round. Now? No clue. Where did that guy come from? Who is he? Why is he so good that college hoop is just not needed?

Not to be a blatant race-baiter like Steven A. Smith or Dan LeBetard, but let me ask this question. If Andrew Bogut were black, would there have been ANY discussion at all, about him being the #1/#1 pick? As LeBetard would say: “I’m just asking.”

I use Michael Olowakandi as a comparison. Bogut had virtually identical numbers coming out of college, but he did it in a stronger conference. Candy man had just picked up the game in England, whereas Bogut enjoyed Olympic level coaching for years living in Australia. While Candyman was an admitted project (but remember, you “can’t coach size”) everyone agrees that Bogut will be essentially plug and play. Good to go out of the box.

And yet, and YET, here’s the phrase I heard so often by various people, that it sounded like they were reading it off a cue card. “Bogut is the better player now, but Marvin Williams has the potential to be a better player in a few years.”

To which I always asked people: “Oh yeah? Based on what? What are you saying about Bogut? That while good, he just won’t get much better? Why would you assume that? How do we know how good Williams will be at the small forward position, which he did not play at Carolina? What are we basing this on? One year for a guy coming off the bench on a loaded team?

I understand the culture of doubt that surrounds white NBA centers. Too many years of drafting guys like Luc Longley, Bryant Reeves, Chris Mihm, Frederick Weiss, et al. – just because they are tall (and remember you “can’t coach size”) have battered down expectations. But the “big black stiff” also exists, even if that term is never used.

Bottom line is this. I ain’t mad about it, but I do find it rather amusing. I believe Marvin Williams will turn out to be a fine NBA player, maybe “star” or even “super star” someday. I also think the chances of Bogut averaging LESS than 15 and 8 after two full seasons (barring injury) is very small. The guy can play, he’s got the heart for it (ahem…. Kwame), and has more skills than just about any other big man out there.

Given the fact that 1’s are infinitely more difficult to come by than 3’s in terms of NBA talent, this pick was a no-brainer. Bogut looks like the white version of Elton Brand. Another #1/#1, that nobody really bit their nails worrying about.

The NBA Finals are tied at 2-2, yet you gotta wonder if the ratings might GO DOWN from here on out, unless something changes. Here’s the bizarre and ugly statistical reality: Games have been won by 15, 21, 17, and 31.

More bizarre: the Spurs have been 18 points better (on average) at home than the Pistons, while the Pistons have been 24 points (on average) at their home than the Spurs. That’s what we call a WHOPPING 42 POINT SWING based on home court advantage!!!

What gives? Is the home crowd, home cookin’, home sleepin’, hometown PA announcer “advantage” worth THAT much? Or could it be the refereeing?

Statistics don’t even back that up - surprisingly, I might add.
Spurs have been called for 17, 19, 21, and 21 fouls. Pretty steady. Pistons have been called for 19, 25, 18, and 22. Not much difference. Free throws taken also track pretty equally. Spurs have shot 15, 34, 20, and 24. Pistons 14, 16, 17, 23.

I looked at Bruce Bowen’s foul numbers, hoping to find a homecourt/road discrepancy. Nope. Bowen has had 4, 3, 4 and 4.

Who knows, maybe the “subtle hand of David Stern’s refereeing angels” have been at work for big calls at strategically crucial moments in the game to help the home team, not with overt favoritism throughout. I can’t say for sure, since I can’t possibly stay up late enough to watch the whole game. Imagine if this trend continues, and we have a 7 game series, that has NO games closer than 10 points? Impossible? Don’t bet against it.

The only thing that I did notice was this: nobody has fouled out in this series. Not even a scrub. Zero. You would think, with bruising, defensive, low scoring games, that at least ONE guy a game would DQ. Right? Maybe this is the core of the NBA’s scoring problem. If players actually played in regular fear of fouling out, the lanes on offense would open up dramatically. Hmmmm.

Thought of the moment on the NBA’s ratings crisis (oops, it’s no crisis, because David Stern insists that viewership in Argentina is bonzo!) that just hit me. The NBA Finals ratings are down from a Jordan-led 15.8 in 1998, to a low of around 6.5/7.0 now. That’s roughly a 60% decline in viewers in 7 years. Now here’s what kills me….

Does the NBA have ANY idea WHO those viewers were, WHERE they have gone, and WHY they don’t watch the product anymore? Have you EVER heard Stern mention what he thinks happened, how he plans to win them back, or internal studies on what fans do and do/not want?

No, neither have I.

Oh sure, I’ve heard all the dime-store theories. Games too low scoring. Lack of star power. Increasing primma-donna attitudes by players, late start times, incessant hip-hop cultural cross-promotion, high schoolers not ready to play, insane salaries.
Yada, yada, yada.

Again, I ask the question ANY business would ask that had LOST 60% of their customers in 7 years. Who where they, where did they go, and how do we get the back?

Basic questions, despite the fact that all of Buenos Airies is just GLUED to their sets this summer.

ESPN.com’s Page 2 Gen-X writer Bill Simmons remains one of the funniest, up to date, biting, intelligent, culturally relevant, and downright enjoyable reads anywhere on the internet.

His blog called “More Cowbell” (from the hilarious SNL spoof on Blue Oyster Cult) is like the cowbell in “Don’t Fear the Reaper.” It cuts through, in staccato rhythm, always on the downbeats with GREAT points, and great humor. Here are a few exerpts from his recent “notebook” on Game 3 of the Finals.

10:10 – Yet another mystery solved: Stu Scott reports that Hamilton wears the Schnozzaroo Mask because his nose has been broken three times. According to Stu, if it gets broken one more time, there won't be any cartilage left. Looks like we have a new leading contender to buy the Neverland Ranch. By the way, in the past three minutes, we've heard English, French and Stu Scott.

10:54 – Well, something clicked. After Hamilton scores consecutive baskets to put Detroit up by five, Gregg Popovich calls timeout and gets the inevitable "That's an excellent timeout!" compliment from Hubie. I think Hubie needs to release a coffee-table book called, "My 100 Favorite Timeouts of All Time." Wouldn't you pay $29.95 for that thing?

11:15 – With Beno Udrih subbing for Parker, Detroit traps him twice and gets two steals at midcourt. Why didn't they try that tactic sooner? He's the Slovenian Chris Corchiani. And yes, the Pistons just rolled off a 10-0 run before a Horry bucket to end the quarter. It's 70-65, Pistons – they answered the bell. With Ginobili limping around, methinks this series could be going five.

And this is only 3 nuggets from a column with about 20 of them. Great stuff, time and again. Reading a Simmons column on a big game (in any sport) is like sitting on the couch next to him and just talking mess about everything you see and hear. Only without the farting and stuff.

Do you think Ricky Williams now regrets doing that fake “I’m smoking” move on the sidelines of the game where it was cold enough to see your breath? Every time there is a mention of Ricky and his “return” to the Dolphins, ESPN runs this bite. It’s hilarious, in an unintentional sort of way.

Speaking of that “return”, I put it in quotes because until I see it, I won’t fully believe it. Ricky might just last one week in Dolphins camp, before realizing that either he can’t play at his current lighter weight, or that he is horribly out of shape and doesn’t want to go through this (again).

I also saw where one Zach Thomas made rather conciliatory quotes regarding Ricky’s return. Hmmm. Wasn’t Zach Thomas the biggest Dolphin “cannon” in the media unloading on Ricky last summer?

FINAL THOUGHT: I wish I could go back in time to August of 2004, and make a 2-prediction parlay that BOTH Phil Jackson and Ricky Williams would return to their former teams (not another team) for the start of the 2005 seasons. I could have crushed the mythical “Predictions Sportsbook” on this 50-1 (or more) longshot.

Michael Hiestand writes a very provocative column today in USA Today about the NBA’s plummeting ratings.

The two-game average for the Finals is 7% of U.S. TV households, down 32% from the series average for the 2004 Los Angeles Lakers-Detroit Finals. And that 7% average tops the 6.5% average for the 2003 Finals, when the Spurs beat the New Jersey Nets in six.

But that 2003 rating wasn't just an all-time low. It was the only Finals whose average dipped below 10% of TV households since the Michael Jordan era in 1991 in his first Finals, which averaged 15.8%. And that 6.5% pales beside the 18.7% average rating in 1998 for Jordan's final Finals.

What I think is a unique and very seldom voiced thought however, is Hiestand’s floating of the theory that – in essence – maybe the NBA just got lucky.

But the real problem might be less complicated: The NBA might have passed its fortuitous zenith and settled into a less-promising future.

In retrospect, the NBA might have been blessed with a sort of once-in-a-lifetime harmonic convergence in the 1990s, powered by stars such as Jordan, Charles Barkley, Isiah Thomas and the not-yet-comical Dennis Rodman who were famous for things such as sneaker TV ads and being in a league pushed into a spotlight by Magic Johnson and Larry Bird.

Maybe that NBA era will prove to be like tennis' two decades ago, when John McEnroe, Jimmy Connors, Bjorn Borg, Chris Evert and Martina Navratilova combined to regularly produce big-event TV ratings the sport hasn't seen since and might never see again.