Sabrina Ionescu and Steph Curry went head-to-head in a three-point shooting exhibition during NBA All-Star Weekend. The concept for the event was ideal, but the implementation was terrible.
Curry emerged victorious over Ionescu with a score of 27 to 24. It was a closely contested competition, which added to the excitement. Personally, I have little interest in the NBA. I rarely watch regular season games and barely tune in for the playoffs. I prefer college basketball because of the energetic atmosphere and the players’ genuine effort.
I acknowledge that NBA basketball and the officiating are of higher quality. However, that doesn’t necessarily make it more entertaining, at least not for me. That being said, I do enjoy the three-point shooting contest during All-Star Weekend. I have no interest in watching the dunk contest or the actual All-Star game. In my opinion, the three-point competition is one of the best All-Star events across all sports, second only to the Home Run Derby.
When I learned that the NBA invited WNBA star Sabrina Ionescu to compete against Steph Curry, the greatest shooter in modern NBA history, I was intrigued. So much so that I decided to stay up late on Saturday night to watch their showdown, despite just returning from a trip.
I thought the event itself was fantastic. Ionescu held her own against Curry, scoring 24 points from the NBA three-point line. Curry emerged as the expected winner, but only by a three-point margin. If Ionescu had participated in the NBA’s official three-point contest, she would have performed admirably.
However, as is often the case, the NBA managed to mess things up. Following the competition, TNT broadcaster Kenny Smith made some genuinely thought-provoking comments and highlighted something I hadn’t realized before the event. Ionescu used a WNBA basketball during her turn, which is smaller than the one used in the WNBA.
Smith pointed this out and suggested that she should have also shot from the WNBA three-point line to level the playing field. This remark sparked immediate backlash from co-host Reggie Miller and many social media users.
Miller responded, “Why are you putting those boundaries on her?” to which Smith retorted, “It’s not a boundary – that’s what the game is.” Miller argued that Ionescu wanted to shoot from the men’s line. Smith reminded everyone that she used a WNBA basketball, not an NBA ball. Smith added, “There’s a women’s tee in golf and a men’s tee … for a reason.” Miller strangely commented, “Don’t let any man put boundaries on you like Kenny,” and even suggested that Smith believed Ionescu should be “playing with dolls” instead of basketballs.
I have several thoughts regarding this peculiar interaction between two NBA on TNT commentators. Firstly, Reggie Miller easily won the award for the “biggest virtue-signal” of NBA All-Star Weekend, which is no small feat during an NBA event.
The NBA often engages in virtue-signaling. They happily accept billions of dollars from China while remaining silent about human rights abuses, all while criticizing America’s treatment of marginalized individuals. Miller’s comments like “Don’t let any man put boundaries on you” and “you want her just playing with dolls” were classic examples of him trying to portray himself as a hero. He later added, “Women are just as good as men at basketball.” According to many on social media, he succeeded in his mission.
This is precisely why individuals like Reggie Miller resort to virtue-signaling – because it works. People immediately applaud without considering opposing viewpoints. Many labeled Smith as sexist, but his comments were completely valid.
I have no issue with Ionescu shooting from the NBA three-point line, and for a fair competition, she should have done just that. However, she should have used an NBA basketball. Either shoot NBA threes with an NBA ball or shoot WNBA threes with a WNBA ball. The compromise of giving her the women’s ball to shoot from the men’s line felt like a strange decision. But here’s the secret: the NBA wanted viewers to believe that Ionescu and Curry were competing on an equal playing field.
If they had allowed her to shoot from a different line, it would have been obvious. However, it’s challenging to notice that she’s using a smaller basketball from a television screen. I only realized this when Smith pointed it out.
In essence, the NBA engaged in its own virtue-signaling by presenting the competition in the way they did. They wanted to convey the message, “Look, WNBA players can compete with NBA players!” However, they quietly allowed Ionescu to use a different basketball. That’s why Miller immediately went into damage control mode when Smith pointed it out. He played the role of an NBA PR representative, and he did it well once again.
I do disagree with Smith’s golf analogy, though. Women’s tee boxes do exist, but women are not obligated to play from them. They can choose to play from the men’s tees, just as Ionescu chose to shoot from the NBA line. The difference is that female golfers don’t use a different ball.
Ultimately, the shootout between Steph and Sabrina unfolded as one would expect. The NBA had a clear agenda that they wanted to execute, and once again, they failed.
According to the Source outkick.com