There's still a lot of All-Star chatter, which is great because while the game itself is just an exhibition, the process of reaching the game serves as a barometer of how fans (picking the starters) and coaches (picking the reserves) rate players. There is also some counter to the popularity of Steve Nash and the premise that his 2009-10 work compares favorably to the two MVP seasons.
On to the letters....
I read your article about Steve Nash, but I think you are falling into the stat trap. Stats don't make a player good. When Nash won MVP [in 2005-06], Kobe was putting up much better numbers -- 35 points in the modern NBA is ridiculous. Nash won MVP because he controlled every game, was the leader of the best team in the league, and made his team better (Boris Diaw) He is still doing some of those things, like making Channing Frye an incredible 3-point shooter. But the Suns aren't what they used to be, and Nash doesn't control the game like he used to. The Suns' up-tempo game is just a shell of its old self. His numbers are up now because he is being asked to do more. He is not the same player that won back-to-back MVPs.
--Ezra, Toronto
It's the comments that make the claim, not the stats. His coach, Alvin Gentry, without being asked to compare 2009-10 to the career seasons, says, "To me, he's playing as well if not a little better than he did when he was the MVP in the league for two years." An opposing coach, Paul Westphal of the Kings, made the similar connection with, "I don't know if I've ever seen him have a better year, and he's won MVP twice." Even Nash himself agreed with the premise.
Obviously, his own coach wouldn't rip Nash if the notion seemed foolish. Gentry is experienced with the media and knows how to give a non-answer answer if he wanted to dodge the topic, something along the lines of, "It's impossible to compare the different years because our roster has changed and the league has changed, but Steve is playing well for us now and that's what is important." But Gentry was the one who brought the MVP comparison into the discussion when I was asking about Nash's impressive play in general.
Also, while I agree with your statement that the Suns are not what they used to be, at or very close to No. 1 in the league in scoring, shooting and 3-point shooting hardly qualifies as a shell of its former self. And just because someone is being asked to do more does not guarantee they will shoot better, yet he's on pace for a career high in field-goal percentage.
So let me see. LeBron can travel and get favorable calls in matches, but what you are complaining about is why T-Mac may be an All-Star again. The All-Star game is about fans watching their favorite players, not players currently playing good. T-Mac is a true All-Star and the way that people vote for him even when he's out is a testimony to how great he is. There are bigger things to worry about, instead of getting all over T-Mac's case. You should rather be arguing over the idea that Nash should be voted in and not Deron [Williams] when it comes down to choosing the reserves. Deron is carrying his team right now. Nash is just too used to having a star-studded supporting cast. When it comes down to the reserves, you can justly argue that only the players having a great season should be voted.
--Rehman, Lahore, Pakistan
First of all: Who's complaining? I said voting should stay with the fans, as long as everyone agrees it's a silly popularity contest that should not have real impact. (Baseball using the All-Star winner to determine home-field advantage for the World Series? Yikes.) I can tell you a lot of fans have a problem with the process and it has become a common topic among coaches and players around the league, but if people want to see Tracy McGrady and Allen Iverson, great.
But as far as Williams carrying his team and Nash lucking into a good roster, no go. Both deserve to be selected, and I think both will be. Nash for sure and Williams finally. Utah is a good team, though, and Carlos Boozer is a potential 20-10 man.
Welcome to the drawback to the popularity contest. If a fan favorite crashes the starting lineup in an underwhelming season, it costs a deserving candidate.
First, I don't agree with T-Mac being included in All-Star voting. But, second, and most important, why is Erick Dampier NOT included in the voting? Looking at Damp's stats and the way he has played should put him in the voting. What happens to the "write-in" votes? I write-in Damp each day when I vote, but don't know what, if anything, they do with write-ins. It appears to me that the nominations are all based on maybe last year's play. Is this correct?
--Janet, Flower Mound, Texas
You are partially correct. Last season is not the entire factor -- Blake Griffin is on the ballot as a rookie, Marc Gasol is on the ballot after 11.9 points and 7.4 rebounds in 2008-09, Gilbert Arenas is on the ballot after being limited to two games because of injury -- but history is a guide as the selection committee guesstimates the best 120 candidates. The panel this time, by the way, was Mike Breen of ABC/ESPN, Eddie Sefko of the Dallas Morning News (from the host city), Doug Smith of the Toronto Star (president of the Pro Basketball Writers Assn.), Marc Spears of Yahoo! Sports, Marc Stein of ESPN.com and Ian Thomsen of Sports Illustrated.
The problem is that the names have to be chosen far enough in advance to allow ballots to be printed, distributed, in arenas long enough to maximize the number of fans casting votes, returned and tallied. The committee can't wait 20 games to determine who is having a good-enough season. So, injured players are included and deserving players are left off. Dampier has no chance of making the West roster, but 9.2 rebounds and 1.68 blocks in 26.6 minutes shows that he is among the deserving. The biggest example is that Chris Kaman has a chance to be named a reserve after being passed over.
A lot has been written on the Rookie of the Year race between Tyreke Evans and Brandon Jennings. But how do you consider the draft as a whole? Do you think this is one of the best in the decade or just a usual one? Dropping 55 points or averaging 20 points, five assists and five rebounds seems quite exceptional to me, but no article has been published on NBA.com about the overall level.
--Elie, Paris
I think it has been a very strange class. Nothing from the No. 1 pick (Blake Griffin) because of injury, very little from No. 2 (Hasheem Thabeet) because he's a project, a reserve role for No. 3 (James Harden) and nothing from No. 5 (Ricky Rubio) because he stayed overseas. The top of the lottery has been one of the worst drafts ever.
Meanwhile, there have been wonderful surprises. Evans was supposed to be this good, only not right away. Same with Jennings. Omri Casspi (No. 23) is the fourth- or fifth-best rookie. Ty Lawson (No. 18) had a big early impact. The leading rebounders among first-year players went 26th (Taj Gibson) and 37th (DeJuan Blair). Wesley Matthews has been a part-time starter for the Jazz after going undrafted. Strange, strange, strange.
These are the formative months, not the time to make a call on the how the season went for the newcomers. That will come in the spring. At the midpoint, though, I don't think it is one of the best or one of the usual. I think it's very different, and not for all the right reasons.
Posts
