NBA MVP

Congrats to Steve Nash for winning the NBA MVP award. I'm a big fan of this. I love Nash's game all the way around. I love his game so much that I can ignore his Canadianess. Which is saying a lot. Steve is one of the best ball handlers, passers, shooters, and decision makers in the league. His ability to see the floor is possibly matched by Jason Kidd, but Kidd isn't half the shooter that Nash is. I keep hearing this whole defensive liability nonsense about Nash. Is it because he's slow and white? Yes, yes it is. I won't even try to pretend he's a good defender, though I don't think he's as bad as his reputation claims. My point is that it doesn't matter. I'd rather have a great floor leader who hits big shots and makes great plays than an "athlete" who can D someone up. I'm totally against the whole "athlete" (aka Cincinatti Bearkat basketball) concept, but that's a topic for a different article. I also think that winning this award over Shaq is meaningful. Shaq is a dominant player who would be the first pick by any GM in the league, and an article by Skip Bayless (for the record, I think Bayless is a loudmouth idiot) at ESPN.com says all that needs to be said in favor of Shaq as MVP. My argument against Shaq and for Steve Nash is that the MVP of the league should be able to dribble, pass, AND shoot. There is no way that someone as disgraceful from the free throw line as Shaq should win. Fifth grade girls can hit 70% of their free throws, what's Shaq's damn problem? Good job Canadian Steve, way to win one for the guys who have actually mastered basketball skills instead of relying on their natural, undeveloped ability.