When it comes to Nick Kyrgios, take him for who he is, or just leave

If there were only 30 tennis players competing on tour, like there are only 30 National Hockey League teams competing for the Stanley Cup, I might muster more than a wry smile at Nick Kyrgios’ latest round of antics. Earlier this week, the 21-year-old tanked a match, the 53rd he’s played during a season that’s seen him rise to a career-high No. 14 in the world and win his first, second and third ATP titles. By any measure, this has been the most prosperous stretch of the Australian’s career.

But the strides Kyrgios has made since his bizarre and obscene outburst last year in Montreal have been brushed aside for this latest wave of outrage. The prevailing thought is that every player—most specifically the gifted Kyrgios—must play to his or her potential and not squander their natural talents. Kyrgios thinks otherwise, going so far as to tell the Shanghai fans who showered him with boos this week, “I don’t owe you anything.”

And he doesn’t. You don’t have to like Kyrgios to still enjoy watching tennis, which features hundreds of other players to pull for—and maybe even one to root against. Is Kyrgios a saint? No, but nor is he a stain on the sport. I won’t go so far as to say that Kyrgios’ actions are good for the game, but from my experience as a sports fan, having a villain is rarely a bad thing. And what Kyrgios has done in 2016 isn’t even close to the villainy he exhibited in 2015.

“It’s my choice,” Kyrgios said plainly about his lack of effort against Mischa Zverev in Shanghai. “If you didn’t like it, I didn’t ask you to come watch. Just leave.”

At the end of the day, the person who should most be concerned about Kyrgios is himself. Not ESPN’s Mike Greenberg, who thinks Kyrgios is “the biggest jerk in sports,” or the youngster’s countless other critics. Sure, the Australian tennis federation has a stake in Kyrgios’ success, and if he was a true ambassador of tennis, I’d be more concerned. But Kyrgios—remember—is just 21, and at a certain point he’ll realize what’s at stake for him, personally, professionally and financially. Until then, he remains the most fascinating figure in a sport so often devoid of drama during the non-Slam weeks.

Speaking of Slams, I think the 2017 Australian Open will be very telling for Kyrgios. He will have had an off-season’s worth of time to think about the way he comports himself, and how seriously he wants to take a tournament in which he’ll be one of the main attractions. I can picture the “new Nick” narratives now—but I wouldn’t take it to the bank, considering Kyrgios’ self-assessment in his post-tank press conference: “I’m unpredictable.”

That may be the only thing was can say for certain about Kyrgios right now. Instead of trying to define what Kyrgios should be, appreciate or hate him for who he actually is.