When I wrote the other day about the NBA's new ball, B.G. wondered which ball was cheaper to produce, the old one or the new one. I don't think that's the issue. But I do think that, like a lot of incomprehensible situations, this one becomes clearer if you follow the money.

The leather basketball isn't patentable and its specs aren't proprietary. Although Spalding's the exclusive supplier to the NBA, other manufacturers make virtually identical leather balls. Wilson, for example, is offical manufacturer of the NCAA ball. But this new ball is proprietary and patented. It's a Spalding exclusive. If it gets established in the NBA, colleges will have to adopt it, so their players will be using the same equipment they'll be using if they make it to the NBA. And high schools will have to adopt it for the same reason. Little kids' leagues, too, if they're anywhere in the country where they feed into the high schools that feed into the colleges...

And suddenly Spalding owns, OWNS, the multi-million dollar basketball market.

So what's in it for David Stern and the League?

Well, a serious cynic would say Stern probably owns Spalding stock. I doubt that; it may even be illegal. (Although it wouldn't be illegal for the players, and any savvy player's manager who saw this coming might have run out and bought a bunch.) A serious innocent would say Stern probably bought the idea that a proprietary ball could be controlled in production to the point where it's absolutely identical from game to game. I doubt that too.

But I wouldn't be surprised at a scenario where, say, Spalding is giving the NBA these balls for free, or at a massive discount, for some number of years into the future. This saves the owners -- who may well own Spalding stock themselves -- a nice chunk of change, making Stern their hero once again. Which gets reflected in his contract and his Xmas bonus.

I'd go on, but it's time for me to pack up the Wilson Sure-Shot and head for the gym. It's Sunday morning, and I have a game.