On Thursday morning, I wrote a piece for GQ.com about the role of race in the New York Knicks' decision to part ways with Jeremy Lin, and in the few hours since we posted the column I have received a number of fascinating responses to it, including this e-mail from one of our favorite NBA writers out there, Myles Brown, who has contributed to GQ.com in the past. What Myles wrote isn't exactly a counter-argument; it's more of an elegant, nuanced expression of context for Carmelo Anthony's inflammatory remarks about Lin's "ridiculous" contract. Since I liked it so much, I thought it was worth sharing. Before I turn the floor over to Myles, I just want to reiterate that I tried to be careful in my original piece to make clear the degree to which I think race played a role here, and that is: a very minor one. Mostly what the Knicks (and Melo) did and said was plain old stupid. OK, here's Myles:

"It goes without saying that this is a black league and we both know some of the stereotypes and misconceptions associated with that. Despite their dominance and popularity, there is still resentment bubbling underneath the surface toward black players: they're overpaid, they're unintelligent, they're lazy, they're thugs, etc. When they get paid millions, it's money that teachers and policemen deserve to play a kids game. Yet, when it's time to pay Lin, those same contracts are suddenly a justifiable precedent. There's been several references to the money to be made from Asian-American fans, yet not as much is done to draw an African-American audience.

Point being, I do agree with the notion that there may be an undercurrent of resentment toward Lin from black players, specifically Melo. However, I'm not as sure about the extent of it. More importantly, I'm not sure if it isn't somewhat understandable. Considering the backlash he received upon his exit from Denver and the barbs tossed his way during [former Knicks coach Mike] D'Antoni's exit, Melo surely was jealous of Lin's popularity. Linsanity was one of the feel-good stories of the past decade, but a great story doesn't necessarily make a great player. Lin was cut multiple times. He was about to be cut by the Knicks. He caught fire during a down cycle of the schedule in a lockout season of unconditioned and injured players playing without the benefit of training camps, practices or even proper scouting reports. As time went on, Lin showed that he favors one hand a bit too much, his assists to turnover ratio was below average for his position and he shot an underwhelming percentage. While I think he can last in the league as a backup, it's also reasonable to consider whether he won't just be another regrettable contract that caused the lockout in the first place, in addition to becoming another miscalculation by New York's Finest. Couldn't this have just been a fluke?

All of this is what I think Melo was alluding to when he called that contract 'ridiculous', which, in fact, it was. That's why it's called a poison pill, no? It shouldn't be swallowed? Of course there's the issue of whether he should've said anything at all, which is true. But I don't think he was trying to stop Lin from getting paid--which would be awful--just acknowledging the reality of the situation. So again, while I do agree with many of your assertions, I do wonder if they've been presented in their full context. Melo could be bitter and still have made these statements without bitterness."