Regular readers will know that I have an almost unhealthy dislike of the Suns, and vehemently disagree with Steve Nash as MVP the last few seasons.
Currently, I’m watching the Suns-Spurs game four. Phoenix is playing their asses off, but hey, when you’re down 3-0, maybe you should do that.
Assuming this series ends as it should (with the Spurs getting it done), that would mean the Suns have been punted from the playoffs AGAIN before the NBA Finals (much less an actual championship). When you have a two-time NBA MVP on your team who is in the prime of his career, usually that would mean you’re getting ripped apart in the press for not being able to win when it counts. But for some reason, nobody gives Steve Nash shit for that. Why?
I have a couple of simple explanations. I’m interested to hear what other people think it is.
1) “Oh, Nash isn’t really like Lebron or Kobe or somebody like that. He needs the others around him to step up to win at that level.” Well, in that case, why the HELL was he the MVP before?
2) “Nash is white, so we don’t get on him.” I’m sorry, to me this seems like the only other logical explanation.
The bottom line is that nobody (the media, fans, etc.) seems to hold Steve Nash to the same standards we hold other NBA MVP’s. When he loses, nobody’s surprised, and nobody calls him a choke.
Ask yourself, honestly, why is that?
comments (5) write a comment »
write a new comment
2 months ago
Dirk Nowitzki is white, and I recall him being crucified, especially in Dallas, for his playoff performance. In reality, before Steve Nash, you have to go back to 1986 to even find a white MVP (Larry Bird). It's not that the white MVP winners get (see Dirk), it's just that there aren't any of them to criticize.
I agree that Nash deserves criticism, but it would be narrow-minded and foolish to blame race.
from 2 months ago
*It's not that white MVP winners get a pass (see Dirk)...*
2 months ago
I don't think anyone is giving him a free pass. Most people talk about how his window is running out to win.
He won his first MVP because he came to a losing team and made them one of the best in the conference. He won his second MVP because the only doubt out there for his first was Amare Stoudemire. He took his team to the Western Conf Finals without Stoudemire. He didn't win his third because they couldn't let him do something that would upset people like you... (his numbers were better in the third year than in his two MVP years)
Why did they lose? First playoffs with nash: Joe Johnston broke his eye face bone. Second playoffs : made it to the western conf finals without stoudemire and then lost raja bell. thrid playoffs played amaising against the spurs and due to stupidity by his own team lost stoudemire and boris for a game. The two years they lost to the spurs the spurs won the champ, and the year they lost to dallas they didn't even have amare the entire time!
Take tim duncun away from the spurs for a year and see where they get. take manu out with a leg injury and see how they do in a playoff series.
You try playing basketball with a incurable back injury and a rib that slips out of place and do what he does.
Does any of this make it okay for him to loose? No but it does explain why he doesn't have to take all the blame when they don't win.
2 months ago
DIRK & NASH both deserve credit and the criticism that is born from failure to advance.
Is it fair to be handed the blame?
Of course not.
They play with inadequate team-mates.
They play for questionable coaches.
At the same time, they need to step-up and do whatever it takes to WIN.
Otherwise, they're both just over-paid MVP caliber guys
who lack the finishing touch.
Race has nothing to do with it.
They both have talent ... just need to be more fierce ...
have that killer-mentality ... fight to the end...
Because if they don't, they'll retire with any CHAMPIONSHIP RINGS.
Right Barkely???
Right Malone???
Right Stockton???
2 months ago
I couldn't disagree with you more. Steve Nash wouldn't have gotten MVP two years in a row if he didn't deserve it. He makes everyone around him better, and he is by far the best point guard in the NBA. Sure he didn't play as well in the final playoff game, but honestly no one on the Suns team played well except for Boris Diaw.
Steve Nash should not be blamed for the reason the Suns lost to the Spurs. They missed 17 free throws, and most of those missed free throws belong to Shaq. Just think...if they made half of those free throws, the Suns would still be in the playoffs. I personally think that the Shaq trade was the downfall of the Suns. They were having an amazing season until he showed up and slowed them down. The Suns were known by their speed and fast pace, and Shaq is a decent player, but he can't keep up. The Suns had to adjust to his speed, and they aren't used to that style of play.
The Suns will have their year...just wait. I don't understand why anyone could dislike them. Their style of play is so much fun to watch, and Steve Nash continues to amaze people with his passing. If you disagree then you must be blind. The only reason the Suns are a good team is because of him. When Mike D'Antoni takes Nash out of the game, the tempo changes and they suffer without him. He carries this team and holds them together. If that isn't a true MVP then I don't know what it.
write a new comment