I read the recent report in the paper on Karl Malone insisting David Locke and Tom Nissalke should be let go. I am a big Karl Malone fan. Honestly, I certainly want Karl Malone as the Jazz power forward, and I don't care if Nissalke and Locke continue in their functions as the afternoon KFAN team. I'm not quite sure what Locke's credentials are, and I don't always agree with him (sometimes he can be quite sophomoric). While Tom Nis-salke's credentials are impressive, I don't always agree with him either (he can tend to make sweeping generalizations).

However, agreeing with either of their opinions is not the point. I am interested in observations by credible people who observe the game. I want rational, well thought-out commentary on the Jazz. KFAN can certainly find analysts who can do as good a job as these two do. However, if Karl is upset with the criticism made by Locke and Nissalke, he may have an even bigger problem with new people than he has now. If the role of KFAN is to provide cheerleading for the Jazz organization, I'm not so sure I would be interested in listening.My concern is the effect Karl's observations will have on future reports. (Gordon Monson seems to have tamed his observations somewhat since last year's playoffs.) I think KFAN should provide programming that is intelligent, thought-provoking, logically thought-out and interesting regardless of what Karl, I or any other individuals think. If this is truly done, KFAN will be producing a product that the thinking fans appreciate, not making another commercial for the Jazz or Karl.

Scott Hilton

Salt Lake City