Defending Wilbon and Defending Stan Van Gundy (Thought for Different Reasons)

Defending Michael Wilbon

There are many times when I disagree with Michael Wilbon. Nevertheless, Stan Van Gundy was out of line in his criticism of Michael Wilbon. Stan Van Gundy criticized Wilbon for stating that he heard rumbling that Van Gundy would be fired if the Magic lost to the Celtics. First, I think Wilbon probably had the sources to make this claim. He’s covered the NBA for quite some time. Second, if the Magic had been swept, ownership would and probably should at least consider a change in coaching staff. The Magic have one of the highest payrolls. Their starters are all top tier players: Lewis, Howard, Nelson, and Carter. This is a championship team and if they fail to reach the NBA Finals, every possible cause for that failure should be examined, including the head coach.
Stan Van Gundy responded by irresponsibly slamming Wilbon. First, he pointed out that Wilbon was not a player or coach, so he had no idea what he was talking about. Second, he said Wilbon was attacking him for Van Gundy’s refusal to be a guest on PTI. Both of these lines of argument are absurd, and Van Gundy should apologize to Wilbon.
First, just because a person is not a professional athlete does mean they are less apt at covering the sport. The percentage of people who play, coach, or manage professional sports is incredibly small. Unsurprisingly, most people and most reporters are not among them. The idea that this disqualifies them for accurately commenting on the actions of a coach, player, or general manager is absurd. A lot of former players make terrible commentators. There are some commentators who are sufficiently detached in their coverage that they would have benefited from being a player. However, the overwhelming number of top tier reporters and commentators have studied sports with just as much intensity as any player. Additionally, some players have biases based upon their previous role and their position. When you hear Charles Barkerly talk about the NBA, he focuses on the obligations of a star player and on post players in general. Magic Johnson tends to focus on point guards. I imagine if you discussed the success of the Phoenix Suns with Mike Brown and Don Nelson, their answers would be completely different. A lot of players and coaches develop biases about the value of certain aspects of their sport that reporters do not.
Second, the fact that Van Gundy has not been on Wilbon’s show is not the reason he got criticized. His team was on the verge of getting swept. His team looked bad. I have watched PTI. I know that Wilbon has some favorites, and I do not think Van Gundy is among them. Nevertheless, while I can not say for certain what Wilbon’s motive was in reporting that Stan Van Gundy could be fired, given his record as a journalist, I am likely to believe that the proper motives were at least part of the equation.


Defending Stan Van Gundy
Despite blasting Stan Van Gundy for criticizing Michael Wilbon, Orlando’s coach deserves praise for the Magic two game winning streak to stave off elimination. If the Magic win Game 6 and tie the series, the Celtics may very well collapse. It’s still a long shot, nevertheless, Stan Van Gundy’s Orlando Magic look like they could be the first NBA team to come back from 3-0.
If you want to see the difference between a team with mental toughness and a team without one, compare the way the Orlando Magic played when they went down 3-0 with the final game played by the Atlanta Hawks. While I do not blame Mike Woodson completely for the Hawk’s collapse, Joe Johnson displayed a complete lack of leadership, the Hawk’s coaching staff deserves a portion of the blame. Conversely, Stan Van Gundy does deserve a lot of the credit for the success.