 "Photo:")
In my short time at The Daily Gamecock, I've written a few things that have caused people to vehemently disagree with me. I've bashed Notre Dame, Alabama, Brett Favre and pretty much every other overcrowded bandwagon in American sports, but this column might be met by more opposition than any of the others.
That's right: I'm sticking up for Kobe Bryant.
Although the NBA season still has months left on the schedule, it's time to talk MVP. Who really deserves it?
My vote goes to Bryant.
The award is supposed to go to the Most Valuable Player. That has to be Bryant, right? Take him off the Lakers and they'd be struggling in campus intramurals.
This is where things get complicated. The Maurice Podoloff Trophy is rarely awarded to the most valuable player. Instead, it usually goes to the best player on the best team or a great player on a contender.
I think we all can agree that the four players who deserve MVP consideration are Bryant, LeBron James, Steve Nash and Dirk Nowitzki.
All four have their respective teams in the thick of the playoff race. All are instrumental parts of their team's success and all put up terrific stats. I could write volumes about why each should be the MVP, but let's look at why they shouldn't.
Bryant and James put up similar numbers on equally awful teams. However, James pales in comparison for two reasons: defense and free throw shooting. The Cavaliers have lost nine games this season (through Tuesday) by 5 points or less; James has missed 35 free throws in those nine games. Were all those losses his fault? No, but if he could shoot better than 68 percent from the charity stripe, Cleveland would have the best record in the Eastern Conference instead of looking up at Detroit.
I have to lump Nash and Nowitzki together because they both play for ridiculously good teams that are filled with quality players. The reason I can't choose either of the two is defense. In a recent Sports Illustrated poll of NBA players, Nash and Nowitzki tied for the lead as the NBA players least interested in playing defense. For a sports writer to say they couldn't defend a 6-year old is one thing, but for the 271 NBA players surveyed to say it is another.
As most of you know, Nash has won the last two MVP awards. If he wins it again this year, they should rename it the Dan Marino Trophy. Sure, Marino played in the NFL, but Nash's career is much like Marino's, as he's the leader of a run and gun offense that hasn't won a championship.
The only real reason I've ever heard to not give Bryant the MVP is his passing, which is ludicrous. Blame Phil Jackson for designing the triangle offense to have Bryant taking most of the shots. It sure didn't keep anyone from campaigning for Michael Jordan for MVP, and he won five of them, which once again proves that charisma reigns supreme.
If it weren't for an incident in Eagle, Colo., almost four years ago, Bryant would be the fan favorite. One woman's accusations have made him the object of undeserved hate from nearly every casual fan of the NBA. Absolutely there is bias against Bryant, and I know a lot of fans agree with me.
Simply put, he's the best in the game today. He's one of the best scorers of our generation, a perennial NBA All-Defensive team selection and arguably the most clutch shooter in the league. He can turn any arena into 18,000 real-life versions of Edvard Munch's "The Scream." When the game is on the line, everyone in the building knows he's getting the ball, and they know he's going to score.
Hey, lots can change over the last 20 games for all four stars. However, I truly doubt any one player is more valuable to their team than Bryant.
Isn't that what the MVP award is all about?
Be the first to comment on this article!