I've heard, via a legitimate New Jersey press source and an NBA-insider that one of the New Jersey Nets is "bisexual" and has outed himself (perhaps unwittingly) to his teammate's wife. I cannot name either the player (now avouched) nor the wife. What I can say is that the tremulous rumors surrounding the squad have caused for poor play. The New Jersey Nets, on the cusp of a transfer to the Brooklyn side of things, have toiled of late. They've dropped six of their last ten. If this rumor is true, then it would be the first outing of an active athlete in male professional sports.

Certainly, David Stern will do his best to suppress any mention of players' private lives...especially not in the bedroom. The reality is, the NBA may represent a rare segment of society but it also must be composed of men with aspects/traits unforeseen. According to another source, this player is also leading a relationship with a fellow-NBA baller (pun intended) who shares his alma mater. What a lid this would blow off if they found that two men who fraternize on the court, actually do the same off the court!

 The nature of sports is slightly too-close-for-comfort-at-times for most casual players. Athletes have license to be more personal because their careers are physical. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that it's even fairly obvious. Sports is, basely, about the admiration of competition between worthy adversaries. The adversaries we watch the most are males. Some of these males will be homosexual, but personal details don't get in the way of 'polished' players.

If this player is outed, will their be a ripple effect or will he do as Mike Piazza did and deny?  

Let us not forget that Bill Walton and Charles Barkley may simultaneously qualify for the most undeserved MVP's in NBA history. The fact that the two hold this dubious distinction may inform the masses of how their television personas have been forged. Casting shadows of doubt on the select stars of the game while berating the less apt players (a la the infernal Charley Rosen) is a mark of insecurity and fits the bill for two men well past their prime -- a prime in question even at the time when they played. May the basketball gods strike me down if I'm wrong about this. Charles Barkley should not have won the MVP award in 1993 and I can't help but be reminded of another Suns players with no defensive skills winning it this year. MVP-race-baiting aside, Walton and Barkley have made my basketball experience richer if even just to argue their inane points and to acknowledge the slivers of truth that sneak in between those. 

I once denounced Walton so vehemently for his commentary that I had to do research on just how a man could say the most improbable statements and still receive a handsome paystub. Bill Walton's stats indicate that his MVP was acquired in a slow year, despite prominent numbers in the rebounding and blocks category. His award came just after the ABA-NBA merger and the league may have grown tired of giving it to Kareem (much like the league grew tired of giving the MVP to MJ in his prime). For the record, Kareem averaged more points, blocks and rebounds. To be grouped with Kareem must have had a deleterious effect on Walton who never played the same thereafter. Injuries kept him limited to the bench in most of his late career, which he almost proudly reminds us of during in-game analysis. Thanks Bill.

CB34 was a bit more of the truth when he played. I caught a game on classic where he dropped 46 on a young CWebb in his Rookie Year. Chris Webber had all the makings of the next true forward and then Charles came to Golden State to delete all that. He dropped a smooth 46...in the first half. Chuck could wet the three, grab boards and post like no other small forward, which makes him bear comparison in my mind to Paul Pierce after him and Bird before him. The guy got on the boards like a beast no matter what his health or weight dictated. However, Charles' career was plagued by weight issues and effort issues. Think Antoine Walker after his skills depleted, relegated to outside shots and seemingly afraid of the backboard and inside play. 

This is all to say that both men have never truly been on the level of their great peers. Walton embraces the redheaded stepchild theory in other aspects of life by being an admitted Deadhead (read: pothead), absentee father and happy outcast. Barkley has found his lofty perch not in the political forum (where he once deigned to enter as a Republican) but by giving both anecdotes and invective a new name at TNT studios. I can't even count the number of players who have personally contacted Chuck to complain or have used an on-air slot to pick on him just the same. Doesn't it figure that these two men are the color commentators of our day, when government hypocrisy runs rampants and attention spans are as long as the time you take to read a blog or e-mail? They are soundbyte aficionados with enough savvy to understand how to reach a younger generation without compromising their own stubborn opinions. Holla if you feel me.

On Kobe

I might have relished in seeing Kobe Bryant humbled yet again but, in all honesty, I wanted him to win. I wanted him to demolish Steve Nash and for Nash to have the most illegitimate Podoloff trophy since b-ball curmudgeon Gnarls Barkley. But by the time the Mayorga-De La Hoya undercard began, the L.A. faithful must have been straining not to change channels. I haven't seen Kobe in this state, degenerated and disgusted by team basketball, hoping for a swell conclusion without imposing it himself. The guy is great and he should not have to feel depressed because there is a vicious media (Drew included) waiting for him to crack. It's not right.

I was flummoxed by his lack of shots and seeming surrender on Saturday night until I realized what kind of thoughts must be enveloping him as his team went down 14...then 25...then 30. Here is my interpretive inner Kobe-logue; it may provide some perspective for the reader.

As Suns go up 15: "Damn. If I take more shots, these guys will be colder than they are now...scored 50 on 'em with no cigar. Maybe Smush and Sasha need some buckets?"

As Suns dominate by 20: "What's an MVP anyway? One hundred twenty six guys in America think this guy is better than me. Are they right? They're gonna be creaming their pants when we lose. At least I made them sweat for that silly choice. Silly."

Down 30: "Long as Wade don't win one, I'm good. When do they start playin' again...I'ma have Vanessa program the TiVo. To-do list: Send Shaq congratulations card for the baby before he sends to me."

Now, for those who might errantly suggest that Kobe is a quitter, I'll ask you this: do we know the same No. 8? Didn't everyone get a least a bit excited in overtime of Game 6 when he hit that first three ball over Marion? (Interesting sidebar: My buddies and I had the penultimate game behind by about 3 minutes when one of us gets a text saying "Kobe is the most vicious player in basketball" which prompts us to a debate over whether or not to fast-forward and one shouting "there's no way they came back! there's no way!") He plays to win the game but he was plastered by a better group of players.

This all leads to the age-old aphorism. Walk a mile in his shoes. It's not like the placid Peyton Manning commercial that mocks the zeal of fans by turning the QB into an intrusive fan. It's more like being Jack Johnson and knowing that the scale of your accomplishments will be made relative to the amount of criticism you face for...well...greatness.

The great black athlete with any smack of arrogance will soon be destroyed my the media. It happens every time. The "race card" term amuses me in the sense that there is a faction of people who wholeheartedly believe that we only apply race when there is a troublesome situation, that blacks are only interested in bemoaning injustice. How laughable that these athletes, who predicate their career and spirits on triumph, would so easily bask in the implication of social defeat. Please.

On Bonds

I want Barry to crush Babe Ruth's homerun record even more than I want Kobe to reach for the Finals and not because I'm an avid baseball guy. The rise of the Steroid Era was marked by Canseco, Maguire, Giambi and Caminiti more than it was by Barry Bonds. Barry Bonds was a 40-40, Gold Glover before he began to allegedly juice. His indulgence in performance enhancing drugs could be likened to Jordan taking them during his Wizard days. The greatness had already been established and the legacy was undoubtedly there.

I would never excuse cheating but for a man who has been cheated by the MLB and fans, had his life threatened and lived to swing another day, I could dang sure understand it. I could understand his impulse to disprove the people who thought that Maguire was a better power-hitter or that Barry Bonds was not the Player of His Time. Like Kobe, he must face a media that has been more focused on his prickly responses to constant inquiry than to his ability to dominate year after year. Give him his 715, let him keep his 73. You don't know his plight (just like I don't) and you never will. Bud Selig drew my disdain for his callous comment about refusing to commemorate Bonds' achievement. Selig made a glib remark about "not reading into it" before then offering a token to fans with specialized balls for the record-breaking at-bats.

So yes, it is about race and it is about overcoming difficulty. Sports is the struggle for fairness more than it is about the dollar signs. Kobe and Barry will never be afforded the former and for that I respect their persistence.

I wanted to make this about the NBA playoffs and the resultant excitement. I wanted to bemuse about the matchups between evenly matched foes like Kobe-Nash or Redd-Detroit Defense or Grizzlies-playoff history. Nevertheless it became about the anointment of a man some would call the Boy King. I shudder to think of what men are if our "boys" look like LeBron James. Last night the best player in the NBA took the court with another heap of detractors grumbling of his shaky play in Washington. But humility does not begrudge. The Man is biblical finesse and an eloquent gamesman. Kobe gets dragged into the muss of scuffles with subpar defenders like Raja Bell (reputation notwithstanding, he's a Bruce Bowen to me: a small forward who fouls and reaches so perniciously that even the best players get annoyed at how much he breaks the rules). LeBron would not dare make any aspect of the almighty game less than pure.

I'm addressing this article mainly to L.A. fans and people who have not yet followed the empirical trail that concludes LeBron as the superior force in the league today. Mr. SK, my friend the filmmaker, I hope you read this closely and with a good cinematic eye because the story has all but unraveled before you YET you still fail to believe. It is more improbable for me to believe that anyone can deny this kind of ascendancy and not coalesce to the consensus that this guy is the best ...period. Past or present. I'm standing by it. I'm going to list the criteria for what I consider greatness and allow others to judge my fairness and objectivity. Obviously, I entered this argument as LeBron admirer and while there is hardly new ground to tread in affirming his power, I find pleasure in putting forth the argument.

 1. Benign Until It Matters - Michael Jordan drew the ire of some opponents, usually the scrappy defenders who would be the Raja Bell characters of the time (Kendall Gill, Ron Harper) but strangely he endeared his most contentious counterparts. Coaches who faced Jordan would often remind their star players not to get into the "fun" of playing with a hardwood assassin. Despite these warnings, Magic, Barkley, Ewing, Malone and others would jaw with MJ but with no ill will toward him. His playful guise and trip to the golf course gave him the relationship he needed to have with every amicable ring-less player. Ring-less is the operative term here. LeBron inspires the same kind of admiration from Dwyane Wade, Carmelo Anthony, Gilbert Arenas and other players he will whittle away at for championship after championship. Like Jordan's before him, LeBron's foes are just as much a part of his spectacle and greatness as he is. That makes him transcend the moments with 3.5 on the clock to be in his own world. Kobe Bryant is in the fray, not because of talent level but because of mortal pride. His enemies will always do anything to arrest his progress and he will have to live knowing what it feels like to swim upstream while LBJ glides through air.

2. Game Allows Only What the Court Tells - "Tarot cards/you could see the pharaoh Nas..." We've seen him flustered in stretches of his rookie year and against defensive juggernauts like the Detroit Pistons. I can't help but think of how the Motor City bad boys once foiled Jordan...for a time. But LBJ has a faster PC  when it comes to upgrading from one version of his game to the next. Michael Jordan was in the position the Kobe finds himself in now: needing to score because of the dearth of talent on his roster, no margin of error. Because the Cavaliers have been built to help LeBron grow by surrounding him with complementary pieces, LeBron may experiment with more ways to dismantle a defense. The adjustments he has made to stay ahead of the Wizards are indicative of his need to win. He understands that the Cavs have a defensive deficiency just short of Fallujah in springtime and makes it his mission to outscore the Wizards. Whenever they go up, he replies with a basket. Remember the DEEP threes he made in D.C.? Don't for one second think that he was not dropping those in response to Arenas losing his mind at the home bucket. If you can't D him, join him. Dominique's matchups were much like that, involving an intense game of HORSE for the pro's who could make any shot.

3. The Three-Year Stipulation - In three years, and after another two matchups with Detroit, Lebron James will make the NBA Finals. Michael Jordan needed three years to best Isiah, Magic battled with Bird for a few years, Shaq had to wait for Jordan to be done with. All of these players, with the exception of Magic in his rookie year, needed some time to improve their playoff performance and muster impenetrable will. In three years, he will have undoubtedly nabbed an MVP or three and become the youngest to dribble left twice and dunk reverse on a layup in Charlotte.

 4. Because I deserve it - I deserve to be a fan of someone this great because the Knicks precluded me from admiring Michael Jordan. I could not be a fan of him because children are more bound by loyalty than by admiration and greatness. I was loyal to a Knickerbocker team that played second-fiddle when it was at its peak. In my adult years, after watching the heartbreak of the 2001 Blazers-Lakers series, the Kobe-Shaq phenomenon, I want another GOOD thing to root for. The Detroit Pistons play team ball and all the great things I also like...but it's not the same. There's nothing that captures the feeling of knowing someone will do something to amaze you and then having it happen in the same moment. LeBron does this with every task.

What do you think? Add a comment.

The previous blog o' mine attempted to disabuse any NBA layperson of the notion that we're dealing with anything but a graceful, athletic, intelligent era of basketball which will soon be heralded as one of the greatest of all time. Fellow A-junkies know what I mean; the class of LeBron, D-Wade, Melo, Dwight Howard and Chris Paul will attempt to enter the highest ether of the sport with their dining company including both MJ's, the Big O, Russell, Wilt, Bird, Gervin, Nique (and sometimes Charles) to compare statistics and ring accessories.

Alas, because I mentioned Steve Nash was of "fairer" skin, one commenter alerted me that I was being racist to even mention it as a factor in MVP voting. I did not mean to imply that Nash endeared the voters with ethnocentric qualities (read: long silky hair and inoffensive game). I only meant to say that there is not a snowball's chance in Hell that he should have been in the running after the Suns floundered so mightily in the last third of the season. I would never want to detract from the brilliance of John Stockton's pure passing and "nifty" defensive tactics by suggesting that his race had anything to do with that. What I will say, with no caveats, is that the media tends to favor players who purport an image of All-American, even if the athlete in question in Canadian.  College sports suffer the same sad stigma when the shooting prowess of J.J. Redick and Adam Morrison dominate the headlines of the back page, while another crafty offensive player, Brandon Roy, goes barely noticed. This might be an unfair parallel in the sense that Dwyane, Bron and KobeNo.8 all receive attention as MVP might-be's but it still boggles the mind that neither of those three surpassed Nash with their late-season efforts. Will Nash ever receive harsh aspersion for failing to take game-winners in the closing moments as LeBron did? Will Nash be diminished for playing with another great leaguer in Shawn Marion a la Wade-Shaq?

We must raise these questions because ultimately sport is about fairness in competition. There are at least fifteen more subjective criteria I could list for LeBron or Kobe as the 2006 MVP over Steve Nash, one being my boy's text message when the word leaked reading "Nash is Mark Price ... and not even as good a passer." But, these opinions amount to little in the world of sports commentary and it is just as hard to name a deserving award-winner as it is to eliminate his worthy runners-up. In sum, race will always be a factor in determining the legacy of a player. It may not always be a negative factor but, writers -- like all people-- retain biases that affect how they cover a player. Tim Duncan has won MVP's in years when Shaq was a clear favorite because the writers and opinion-makers in sports simply like Duncan more. We are at a loss if we patly ignore the biases of human beings when examining our motives. Charley Rosen hates Larry Brown and Stephon Marbury. I would be at a loss if I read his columns without embracing this fact. Bill Simmons thinks Isiah Thomas is a blowhard and idiot. Again, I would be remiss if I failed to consider that when I read any of his pieces about the Knickerbockers. The same acknowledgement of bias informs the MVP discussion.

So Nash had "less players," a "better statistical year" and collected many wins. LeBron was without Larry Hughes for the better part of the season and Kobe had no players before Lamar Odom showed up for the first round. I love Steve Nash's game and find it entertaining to see any point guard demonstrate his vision and split-second decisiveness. Maybe that got him the award. Oh wait! Lebron and Kobe both have amazing court vision and where LBJ throws no-looks and zip passes incredibly, Kobe can demonstrate his creativity in mid-air! Nash, again, is a terrific player who has taken the hodgepodge talents of a less-than-immaculate team and meshed them to great effects. Oh wait! Kobe and Lebron did the exact same thing. Be real about your basketball info before you approach Drew about his 'biases.'