Question: Why don't the Jazz bring Andrei Kirilenko off the bench? It seems like this would improve their second unit, give Kirilenko the chance to be more of a go-to guy on offense and give Manu Ginobili a run for his money as the Sixth Man of the Year.

-- Paul, Salt Lake City

Answer: My initial reaction to your suggestion was comical, at least to someone whose sense of humor has been impacted by covering NBA players for a long time.

I laughed out loud when I thought of coach Jerry Sloan going to Kirilenko during training camp, looking him in the eye and saying, "Andrei, we've decided that bringing you off the bench will be best for the team." Remember, Kirilenko was so miserable by not having a greater role in a Jazz offense centered around Carlos Boozer, Memo Okur and Deron Williams that he had a public meltdown during the 2007 playoffs. Later that summer, he demanded to be traded after starring with the Russian national team, criticizing Sloan's style and techniques in the process.

I can just picture Kirilenko's reaction to Sloan telling him that he will come off the bench this season, which he certainly would perceive as a demotion. Andrei just might turn around, walk out of Taco Bell Arena and and catch the first Boise-to-Moscow flight he could find.

OK, OK.

Obviously, Kirilenko would not walk away from the $49 million he has left on his contract with the Jazz. But I'm guessing he would not embrace the idea of coming off the bench with much enthusiasm, and that could ruin the sometimes painfully obvious effort Sloan and his teammates made last year to keep him content with his role and productive on the court.

The bottom line: Kirilenko will continue to start, as long as he's playing in Utah.

That said, the idea of bringing Andrei off the bench and bolstering the Jazz's second unit has probably crossed Sloan's mind.

As you suggested, he would likely get more opportunities on offense if he was on the floor without Boozer, Okur and/or Williams and -- as everyone has learned in the last couple of years -- that is important to Andrei and can impact other aspects of his game.

Kirilenko does have a history of coming off the bench and being productive. He did it during his first two seasons, which happened to be the final two years of the John Stockton-Karl Malone Era.

As a rookie in 2001-02, Kirilenko played on a team that also had small forward Bryon Russell and swing forward Donyell Marshall. He started 40 times, came off the bench 42 times and averaged 10.7 points and 4.9 rebounds. Not bad during a find-your-way season.

In 2002-03, Kirilenko started only 11 times after the Jazz signed Matt Harpring, who averaged 17.6 points and got most of the minutes at small forward. Still, Andrei averaged 12 points and 5.3 rebounds backing up Harpring and effectively playing some power forward, either behind Malone or when the Mailman shifted to center.

Since those two seasons, however, Kirilenko has started 320 of his 330 regular-season games. In my opinion, a switch back to the bench would be a dramatic change for him that could dampen his enthusiasm and bring issues that the Jazz mostly buried last season back to the surface.

I believe the Jazz remain better served with a second unit featuring Paul Millsap, Kyle Korver, C.J. Miles, Ronnie Price and Harpring. That group continues to lack size, which puts a heavy burden on Boozer and Okur. But what are the options? Start Korver over Kirilenko? Start Harpring or Miles? In my opinion, the Jazz need to continue starting Kirilenko because, at this point in his career, it is extremely important to him. The probable negatives of bringing him off the bench outweigh the possible benefits.

-- Steve Luhm