Over this past weekend, it was leaked through the NBA rumor pipeline - the one thats as wide as Texas - that Steve Nash was the winner of the NBA MVP award. Sports pondits pontificated profusely about the qualifications of Mr. Nash versues other top candidates. That's what they are supposed to do, review news items of interest in sports.
Most of them do a great job of it. They delve deeper into the stories, ellaborate on certain subjects, warm our hearts with good stories of athletes, and make us think harder about their subject.
Then there are those that try to become the news. Take Dan Le Batard, of the Miami Herald, for instance. On Monday, Le batard wrote an opinion peace saying that Shaquile O'Neal should have won the MVP. Dandy idea if you want to use stats and facts. Horrific idea if you want to say Nash won the MVP because...... he's white. This was a non-existent issue, until Le Batard made it one.
Le Batard invalidates Nash's great year - only the 4th point guard in history to win MVP - by saying the MVP voting was racist. I'm not going to ignore that racism does exist in sports, or anywhere else in society. I do believe, however, that anyone who covers the NBA is probably not racist. Shaq was still dominating this year as he normally is. But he also played fewer minutes in a weaker conference, and posted about the same numbers as he did last year in L.A.
I'll allow Le Batard to be a homer for the Heat. Afterall, that's what he gets paid to do. But don't diminish the voting and call your press peers racist just because they voted a white guy as the NBA MVP.
2 comments:
At the risk of being shot, I will agree and disagree with Dan here. In his defense, I believe he was trying (however poorly) to say Nash was selected because he was different. He was unique. And the reason he was different was he is white -- did voters vote Nash in for his merits or for the kitch-factor? That said, bringing race into the picture is always just dumb.
As for who should have been MVP, I can certainly see Nash's merit. But consider this: when Shaq retires in three years or so, he will probably go down as one of, if not, THE greatest center to play the game. He has dominated his position (free throws aside) as much as any player has in the history of the NBA. Every year, a shoe-in for the All-Stars, first or second team All-NBA and three rings and three Post-season MVP awards. BUT, only ONE regular season MVP. Compare that to 3 for Magic, 4 for Wilt, 3 for Larry Bird. Shaq was and is just as good as them, but every year the voters find some reason to not pick him for the MVP crown.
Good points all. If Shaq would have won, I would have defended him just the same if someone were to say he was selected because he was black.
Post a Comment