Steve Nash is one of 11 players with multiple MVP awards. John W. McDonough/SI Ian Thomsen's Mailbag Ian Thomsen will periodically answer questions from SI.com users in his mailbag. Name: Email: Hometown: Question: SEND

4 Questions/topics rescued from the spam

4. Predictably, much response was generated by a paragraph I wrote last week about Steve Nash. Here is a sampling ...

Your answer to a question about whether Steve Nash is overrated is one of the more inane things I've read on the Internet, which says a lot. Do you really think a large number of NBA fans question Nash's reputation because of his stance on the war in Iraq? That's plain stupid and another way to cover your butt for protecting Nash all the time. Most true/knowledgeable observers of the sport who question Nash and his undeservedly glowing rep point to the fact that he is completely and utterly useless during half of any basketball game.
-- Brent Walters, Ann Arbor, Mich.

Well, didn't that strike a nerve!

I talk every day to "true/knowledgeable observers'' who work in the league -- coaches, executives, scouts and players -- and I truly don't hear anyone complaining that Nash is overrated or undeserving of his reputation as one of the NBA's best players. Defense has obviously been his weakness, but it's not like he has played alongside excellent defenders either. His teams have always been built to win with offense, and in that context, the good provided by Nash has far outweighed the bad. That's how I feel about it, and that's also the gist I hear from true/knowledgeable observers.

And yet, I receive an inordinate amount of e-mail decrying Nash as overrated. So last week I wondered if some of the ill will toward Nash from a minority of his critics had something to do with his anti-war stance, based in part on my experiences of hearing a couple of fans complaining to me about it. There are all kinds of reasons to not like a player apart from talent -- maybe his personality, maybe his criminal behavior, etc. -- and so I wondered if Nash's feelings about the war could be grounds for some of the enmity.

Because let's be honest: It's a long list of NBA stars who could be criticized for their defense. But the likes of Dirk Nowitzki, Allen Iverson and even LeBron James in earlier years have received a free pass defensively compared to the mail I get on Nash. And I don't understand it.

I am amazed that you would attempt to connect Steve Nash's opinion on the Iraq war (which I wasn't even aware of, by the way) to perceptions that he is overrated. Nash is one of 11 players to get the MVP award more than once. Do you really believe he's one of the top 11 players of all time?
-- Luke, Huntington Beach, Calif.

I don't know anybody (except you) who ever has suggested he could be one of the top 11 players of all time, and I don't see how anyone could translate two exceptional seasons into that kind of ranking. The MVP awards recognized his work for two seasons; it's not a career award.

Steve Nash's public stance against the war has nothing to do with people arguing he shouldn't have been MVP once, let alone twice (and I'm in the military). I agreed with him then about the Iraq war and I do now. But the argument can be made that Chris Paul completed a season far more impressive than any of Nash's MVP seasons and he finished as low as fourth on some MVP ballots this year. I don't think Nash is overrated, but neither do I think he is some great player. He had three or four GREAT seasons but is not a GREAT PLAYER and is nowhere near on par with guys like John Stockton or Isiah Thomas or even Gary Payton historically, and will quickly be surpassed by Paul and Deron Williams.
-- Wayne, Chicago

Thank you for your well-framed argument. I don't agree with all of it, but it's fair.

3. Do you agree with the NBA advance scout's comment [from last week's Countdown column] that Gregg Popovich is not that much better a coach than Byron Scott? Given the difficulties today's coaches have of keeping players in line with their system and not losing their players' support after so many years of delivering the same message, it seems that winning consistently in pro sports goes far beyond having great players such as Tim Duncan or Chris Paul, or having the good fortune of "being a good coach in a great situation." Would the Spurs have won four championships in nine years if, say, George Karl or Rick Pitino were their coach? Probably not. In the case of San Antonio, or any successful team, it seems to be the ideal partnering of the right coach with the right players.
-- Eddie S., Washington, D.C.

I couldn't agree with you more. What Popovich has done year after year puts him -- along with Jerry Sloan -- in a different class. As well as Scott has coached the Hornets this year, Popovich's achievement with one franchise is transcendent.

2. While so much attention has been given to the strength of the Western Conference and the futility of the East, doesn't it seem a bit striking that for the most part the East gave us a better first round? Seriously, who would have thought that the Sixers and Hawks would have won more playoff games than the Mavs, Suns and Nuggets combined? Additionally, as you pointed out, the Hawks and Sixers seem full of promise (and cap space) heading into the offseason while the Western pretenders head into the offseason with little cap space and more self-doubt than ever before. Do you think in another a year or two we will still be talking about the disparity of the two conferences? Or will time strengthen the young teams in the East while weakening the old of the West?
-- Jonathan Kastar, Anchorage, Alaska

There are some people in the league who truly believe that the West's superiority is itself overrated, on the basis of having so many bad teams at the bottom of the conference. But I disagree: The East was lousy this year.

It will change eventually. Not so long ago eight of the 10 championships were won by the East, and then Michael Jordan retired from Chicago. The next five titles were won by the Spurs and Lakers, then L.A. unraveled. The last four have been split by the two conferences, and who's to say that the East won't win again this year? If the East were to win three titles in a row, the West wouldn't be viewed as being superior. All it takes is one or two dominant clubs to swing perceptions of one conference's dominance over the other.

1. Why hasn't Bruce Bowen won a Defensive Player of the Year award yet? Do the voters hate Bowen so much that they blindly and classlessly ignore his hard work?
-- Bob, Louisville, Ky.

I don't think hatred is involved. Bowen's work does not go unnoticed as he's made the All-Defensive teams the last seven years. But there are a lot of people who view Bowen as a dirty player. My opinion is that he should have won at least one Defensive Player of the Year award. But if it hasn't happened by now, it never will.