Like any respectable NBA enthusiast I pay attention to the All-Star conversation. Without question, the top stories this year have been Allen Iverson and Tracy McGrady. Up until the final hours of fan voting both players looked like starters despite their un-All-Star like play. Steve Nash ultimately “overtook” the inactive McGrady (thus avoiding real embarrassment), but Iverson maintained his lead over Vince Carter (who is also having a subpar season) and was awarded his 11th trip to the game. The chatter should’ve stopped there. It didn’t. Iverson’s controversial selection catapulted into a larger conversation about fan involvement and the current All-Star selection structure. As it stands, fans decide the starters for both sides and coaches decide the reserves. That means a mere 10 out of the 24 selections are in the fans’ hands. But even that’s a deceivingly high figure because out of the 10 players selected by fans this year at least 7 would have been selected by the coaches as well. (Bosh probably would’ve gotten the nod over Garnett, Duncan should be listed as a center on the ballot at this point in his career, and Nowitski is a hands down starter at forward.) So, in essence, we’re talking about the fans actually “selecting” 2 to 3 starting spots at most (keeping in mind Stoudamire and Garnett still could have been reserves). Percentage wise this means the millions of NBA fans around the world who voted collectively account for 8 or 12% of the total All-Star vote. That’s it. So, yeah, it might seem like an ‘inmates are running the asylum’ situation but it’s far from that. The league’s 30 coaches have tremendous power. Think of it this way: Lebron James and Kobe Bryant were the leading vote getters this year. Both received roughly 2,500,000 votes. We can safely assume that all 30 coaches would have selected both players as well. Ultimately that means each coach’s vote for Lebron or Kobe would have been worth 83,333 fan votes a piece ( that’s a 1: 83,333 ratio). In other words, the All-Star game controversy is another fake debate spearheaded by hypocritical NBA insiders who depend on fan support but disdain fan input.
Why the disdain, though? It’s not as if fans vote for All-NBA teams or MVPs or Hall of Fame inductions—the stuff that really matters. It’s not even as if Iverson voted for himself or lobbied for anyone to vote for him. The answer is simple: NBA insiders think the average fan is stupid. Not stupid as in dense but stupid as in uninformed and ill-equipped to make decisions that impact their game in any way. And you know what, they’re right. But here’s the thing: it’s not our fault. The NBA chose to market itself as a league of stars. It chose to capitalize on the entertainment angle. The NBA chooses to make ballots available online and to allow repeat voting. The NBA chooses to avoid voting guidelines or “best practices” for fans and coaches to abide by. The NBA chooses to focus our attention on flashy players and plays. The NBA chooses to allow bad officiating to ruin games on a nightly basis (This actually has nothing to do with All-Star voting per se, but it does contribute to the general disinterest people have in understanding the game).
The flipside of the “fans are stupid” argument is that coaches and players are better equipped to make All-Star game decisions. I see the point. They live in that world. They know who’s doing what on a nightly basis. They’re out there in the thick of it seeing all of the little things that make one player more valuable than another. Here’s my question, though. If you’re playing and coaching every night, how are you able to really look around the league and know what’s going on? Isn’t your day to day knowledge dictated by your next opponent? Can you honestly say your assessments are bias free (I mean, will Stephen Jackson get in?)? Now that we’ve all got access to the internet and to as many games as we can handle, the “I see more than you” argument just doesn’t hold as much weight. I can watch every game if I want to. I can check the scores in the morning. I can analyze the charts and advanced statistics. I can read the sports writers. I can be a sports writer.
If the All-Star Game is such an important event, why not ask the coaches to come up with some guiding criteria that the NBA can approve and share with fans? Instead of criticizing fans for being ignorant and taking away the one “voice” we have, educate us. Invite us into the thinking around All-Star selections, then hold us accountable. Right now arenas award prizes to fans for voting. For instance, fans who voted a certain number of times at New Jersey’s Izod Center (for who I don’t know) were awarded a copy of NBA Live. Talk about enabling stupidity! Why not require fans to pass a basic knowledge and competency test before voting? Why not build an insider fan community that supports the development of our understanding and appreciation for players flying under the radar. Sure some people wouldn’t want to be bothered. They’d ignore the voting altogether. But guess what, the fans who actually care would step up their game.
A bigger question facing the NBA may be why fans aren’t voting for exciting young players like Derrick Rose, Rajon Rondo and Kevin Durant? What are the young stars lacking that their predecessors had? Why are fans clinging to Iverson (and Garnett and even Duncan)? After last spring’s amazing playoff duel between Chicago and Boston it would seem both players would be primed for serious All-Star looks from fans. I haven’t studied this in depth but I’d say the reason they haven’t overtaken Iverson is twofold. On one hand, as good as some of these young players are, they lack charisma. There’s nothing charismatic or transcendent about them as human beings that fans connect with. They’ve got vanilla personalities, which is what David Stern seems to like. The second reason is related but slightly separate: young players like Rondo and Rose end up canceling each other out in voters’ minds because neither has a national following. Iverson was singular in that he became a global icon during the NBA’s Gilded Age. You couldn’t compare him to anyone else. You couldn’t mistake his game for anyone else’s. That’s what made him so unique. That’s why fans still want to see him.
As I was writing this post I came across a poem by Sherman Alexie posted on the Truehoop blog. The poem’s unambiguous suggestion is that A.I. should gracefully bow out of the All-Star game. Two weeks ago I would’ve agreed with Alexie. I would’ve preferred if Iverson opted to take the weekend off so Joe Johnson or Rajon Rondo could be assured a spot. For a while it looked like he would. Now we know he’s going to play and I agree with him. If the fans want to see him play then he should play. I didn’t vote myself, but if I did vote for him and he chose to sit it out to please the critics, I’d feel betrayed. The moment a player whose defined his career by quieting the naysayers accepts what others are saying about him, he’s finished. Iverson’s numbers may not look what we’ve always known, but he’s not the same player nor is he trying to be. He’s actively limiting his role in order to play within a structure, something he’s never really done before, something that requires a period of adjustment. He doesn’t get as many looks at the basket, he’s not the primary decision maker with the ball, his minutes are distributed differently. It’s a different game than he’s used to. He can’t go out and shoot his way into the game. Even when he’s hot, his teammates aren’t going out of their way to look for him. On any given night he has to find his own way.
At this point I’ve watched Philadelphia enough to know Iverson is still a quality basketball player. He can still score and he’s still a batter passer than he’s given credit for. What I find myself particularly interested in, though, is the former superstar’s attempt to remake himself into a role player on a team without a defined and bonafide star. Surprisingly, Iverson has been one of the few Philly players who has accepted a role. He plays off the ball. He doesn’t try to take every big shot. He keeps Sam Dalembert involved by setting him up for easy finishes. He runs pick and rolls to get Brand easier buckets. He defers to Lou Williams and Andre Igoudala. He’s supportive and positive of the team as a whole. What’s frustrating is if he could be doing some of the same things on a playoff contender (Memphis, anyone?). Since the post-season is probably out of the question for Philly, why not at least let the future Hall of Famer and soon to be 25,0000 point scorer (only 15 players have ever done that) get an All-Star nod? Really, what’s the harm?
Co-sign all this. I don’t see the harm at all. People love AI and there wasn’t another solid fan option. At least the man can now retire in peace knowing that people loved him and appreciated what he brought to the game. The McGrady pick would have been very suspect esp. with exciting and very deserving candidates like Steve Nash and CP3 behind him. As pointed out – most of these picks were going to be default starters any way so I don’t see any damage done. If the NBA is so concerned about the fan’s influence and they want to limit repeat voting they should just require an email address for every ballot. It’s not that difficult.