clif
ASFN Addict
Didn't see this posted. Very solid reponse to Mr Le batard in Miami.
Link
Bob Young
The Heat Index
May. 10, 2005 12:00 AM
[font=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]There are plenty of good reasons to debate whether Steve Nash deserves the NBA's Most Valuable Player award more than Shaquille O'Neal.
Race isn't one of them.
However, it has occurred to Dan Le Batard, a Miami Herald columnist, that race was a factor.
At least, the question occurred to him.
See, Le Batard didn't have the guts to just go ahead and take the position that Nash's selection is racist.
No, he used that old gossip's trick: I'm not SAYING Sally is a promiscuous little tart, I'm just ASKING.
Le Batard wrote that there is no good way to answer the question with "science or math."
Actually, a little bit of legwork probably would have done the trick.
The Arizona Republic's NBA/Suns beat writer, Paul Coro, did exhaustive research on the voting, polling 106 of 127 media members with a vote before the announcement.
As you know by now, Nash just edged O'Neal in the official balloting, which Coro's poll accurately predicted.
We looked through the list of minority media members we had polled: African-American, Hispanic and Asian. Their votes were nearly split right down the middle, with Nash having a slight edge - just as he did in the overall voting.
Then, just for fun, we looked at the "Old White Guy Vote." We identified 10 voters in our poll who have been covering the NBA for at least 15 years - most of them far longer - and who are White men.
Seven of them voted for Shaq. Only three picked Nash.
Well, there goes that theory.
Oh yeah ... question.
Truth is, the media covering the NBA, while still predominantly White, is the most diverse group of reporters covering any professional sport.
If race is an issue with them, where has it been the past 20 years?
Larry Bird was the last White guy to win the MVP award in 1985. He finished second in 1988, the last time a White player finished among the top three MVP vote getters.
Why wasn't it an issue when the NBA media was far less diverse?
How come John Stockton never won? He's a White point guard, isn't he?
"I'm Black, and I voted for Steve," said Marc J. Spears, who covers the NBA and Denver Nuggets for the Denver Post. He also is a member of the National Association of Black Journalists and represents the western United States on that organization's Sports Task Force.
"I used to cover college sports and pro baseball before I covered the NBA, and often times, I found myself as the only one, or one of only a handful of Black writers there," he said. "It wasn't until I started covering the NBA in 1999 that seeing somebody who looked like me or seeing another minority became common.
"I'll say this, too, and it might be offensive to some, but some people call the NBA the 'brother beat.' I've heard people say it doesn't look good to have two Black people covering the beat at the same paper because then it looks like a 'brother beat.' "
Bottom line?
"To me, race didn't matter in it," Spears said. "Shaq had a great year. I still consider him to be the most dominating player of all time. The reason I voted for Nash is because his team was in the best conference and dominated.
"And when he wasn't there, the Suns weren't the same team. Another reason I voted for Steve is because when you look at the Heat's record against the West, they were 18-12. That isn't outstanding.
"By the same token, I voted for Shaq second and that's nothing to be ashamed of there."
Le Batard wrote that no one who looks or plays like Nash has ever been basketball's MVP. He calls him a tiny, one-dimensional point guard who plays no defense and averages fewer than 16 points a game.
Well, he got the scoring average right.
Nash is not one-dimensional. He shot 50 percent from the field. He would score more if he took more shots. One reason he's so valuable is that he chooses to make his teammates better first, and his team wins because of it.
Evidently, if he took 30 shots a game and made 40 percent, he'd be MVP material to Le Batard.
Boston's Bob Cousy was every bit as tiny and "one-dimensional" as a point guard in 1956-57 when he won the MVP. Or course, Le Batard would point out that Cousy averaged 20.6 points a game that year.
He wouldn't point out that Cousy did so while shooting less than 38 percent.
Le Batard asks if we should "continue laughing and making noise at our playoff cocktail party while ignoring the pinkish elephant standing in the middle of the room."
Dan, the only thing people are laughing at is you.
Next question?
[/font]
Link
Bob Young
The Heat Index
May. 10, 2005 12:00 AM
[font=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]There are plenty of good reasons to debate whether Steve Nash deserves the NBA's Most Valuable Player award more than Shaquille O'Neal.
Race isn't one of them.
However, it has occurred to Dan Le Batard, a Miami Herald columnist, that race was a factor.
At least, the question occurred to him.
See, Le Batard didn't have the guts to just go ahead and take the position that Nash's selection is racist.
No, he used that old gossip's trick: I'm not SAYING Sally is a promiscuous little tart, I'm just ASKING.
Le Batard wrote that there is no good way to answer the question with "science or math."
Actually, a little bit of legwork probably would have done the trick.
The Arizona Republic's NBA/Suns beat writer, Paul Coro, did exhaustive research on the voting, polling 106 of 127 media members with a vote before the announcement.
As you know by now, Nash just edged O'Neal in the official balloting, which Coro's poll accurately predicted.
We looked through the list of minority media members we had polled: African-American, Hispanic and Asian. Their votes were nearly split right down the middle, with Nash having a slight edge - just as he did in the overall voting.
Then, just for fun, we looked at the "Old White Guy Vote." We identified 10 voters in our poll who have been covering the NBA for at least 15 years - most of them far longer - and who are White men.
Seven of them voted for Shaq. Only three picked Nash.
Well, there goes that theory.
Oh yeah ... question.
Truth is, the media covering the NBA, while still predominantly White, is the most diverse group of reporters covering any professional sport.
If race is an issue with them, where has it been the past 20 years?
Larry Bird was the last White guy to win the MVP award in 1985. He finished second in 1988, the last time a White player finished among the top three MVP vote getters.
Why wasn't it an issue when the NBA media was far less diverse?
How come John Stockton never won? He's a White point guard, isn't he?
"I'm Black, and I voted for Steve," said Marc J. Spears, who covers the NBA and Denver Nuggets for the Denver Post. He also is a member of the National Association of Black Journalists and represents the western United States on that organization's Sports Task Force.
"I used to cover college sports and pro baseball before I covered the NBA, and often times, I found myself as the only one, or one of only a handful of Black writers there," he said. "It wasn't until I started covering the NBA in 1999 that seeing somebody who looked like me or seeing another minority became common.
"I'll say this, too, and it might be offensive to some, but some people call the NBA the 'brother beat.' I've heard people say it doesn't look good to have two Black people covering the beat at the same paper because then it looks like a 'brother beat.' "
Bottom line?
"To me, race didn't matter in it," Spears said. "Shaq had a great year. I still consider him to be the most dominating player of all time. The reason I voted for Nash is because his team was in the best conference and dominated.
"And when he wasn't there, the Suns weren't the same team. Another reason I voted for Steve is because when you look at the Heat's record against the West, they were 18-12. That isn't outstanding.
"By the same token, I voted for Shaq second and that's nothing to be ashamed of there."
Le Batard wrote that no one who looks or plays like Nash has ever been basketball's MVP. He calls him a tiny, one-dimensional point guard who plays no defense and averages fewer than 16 points a game.
Well, he got the scoring average right.
Nash is not one-dimensional. He shot 50 percent from the field. He would score more if he took more shots. One reason he's so valuable is that he chooses to make his teammates better first, and his team wins because of it.
Evidently, if he took 30 shots a game and made 40 percent, he'd be MVP material to Le Batard.
Boston's Bob Cousy was every bit as tiny and "one-dimensional" as a point guard in 1956-57 when he won the MVP. Or course, Le Batard would point out that Cousy averaged 20.6 points a game that year.
He wouldn't point out that Cousy did so while shooting less than 38 percent.
Le Batard asks if we should "continue laughing and making noise at our playoff cocktail party while ignoring the pinkish elephant standing in the middle of the room."
Dan, the only thing people are laughing at is you.
Next question?
[/font]
Last edited:
