Ball 5

Author: Justin Golenbock

Do you like cocker spaniels? I do. They're very cute. They're little, and they've got these big, floppy ears, and they're very popular in Canada [editor's note: he has no idea if that's true].

So I wasn't really all that surprised when Steve Nash won his second consecutive MVP award. Most knowledgeable observers were a little surprised; after all, the award generally goes to a player on one of the best teams in the league, or a player with superior statistics, or at the very least someone who is not a one-dimensional doormat on the defensive end. But I knew better. I mean, he's adorable, and I 3 that little hair flick of his when he brushes those stringy locks behind his ears.

So what if he looked absolutely mortified when informed that the only other guards in NBA history to win back-to-back MVP's were Michael Jordan and Magic Johnson ("I guess part of me just tries to find the comedy in it," he responded with a look on his face that I can only describe as "pained"). How many players can honestly say they were one of the best three players on the fourth best team in the league? Only 11 others. That still gives him at least a .8 percent chance of winning back-to-back MVPs, right?

Now, my editors have forced me to reluctantly acknowledge that there is some argument against the Canadian Caucasian. He is, as aforementioned, maybe the worst defender in all the NBA, a shortcoming that the Lakers offensively-challenged point guards were incapable of taking advantage of. If you looked at the stat lines (points / assists / rebounds) of the type-five MVP finishers, though, who stands out most?



Player A - 18.5 / 8.6 / 3.1



Player B - 31.5 / 6.6 / 7.0



Player C - 18.8 / 10.5 / 4.2



Player D - 26.6 / 2.8 / 9.0



Player E - 35.4 / 4.5 / 5.3



Hmm. Well, Player A was on the best team in the league, and his all-around stats look pretty close to Player C. No? A distant fifth? Players B and E made the playoffs with lesser talent. Second and fourth? They must be missing that "makes everyone better around him" trumping intangible. Or maybe, as with the SAT, if all the choices look good, C is statistically your best bet at the right answer.

What they didn't acknowledge is that fast-paced games allow for both higher points scored AND higher points against…in other words, his stats are inflated by the style. But hey, whose side am I on?

So, come on. It's crass to suggest that race may have had something to do with the voting. No one actually likes Canadians. Even if we all love cocker spaniels.