This is why they hate our Western ways. Too much wasted time and money... So much illogic that I'd flunk these kids. A poor mans Moneyball. Here's some guys with better ideas. http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2006/05/29/060529crbo_books1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- First off, the study doesn't publish if white players ALSO were called for more fouls. Without that data the whole study is meaningless. In other words we don't know if the study should conclude white ref's call more fouls on blacks or if they just call more fouls period. I'd guess white ref's are a bit more "old school." Not to mention what color were the player's they fouled? A bump of 2-4% isn't statistically significant. We're talking about 1 foul a game.
Justin Wolfers, an assistant professor of business and public policy at the Wharton School, and Joseph Price, a Cornell graduate student in economics Oh yeah, gotta love the academic excellence of way past his prime... Have you even read the study yet? LOL!
I found it to be an interesting idea, something worthy of posting...that's why I posted it... I often find things interesting, and also I find that people who then outright dismiss them interesting as well...a different type of interesting, of course.
Come on, you know this "study" is BS. Liberal university professors with a desperate need to publish something write up this kind of crap because they know the mainstream media will jump all over it. They will be on talk shows, become minor celebs, maybe the NBA hires them as consultants. If they had done a study that showed more black players commit crimes, have illegitimate babies and get involved in drugs, do you think the media would touch it?
No Z, I meant is the study itself on line-NOT the NYT's summary. And yes I found it an interesting read although flawed. But then again the study itself is perhaps pristine but the Time's effort flawed. Can't tell without the raw data, eh? I'm also the guy who said Nash's MVP last year was a bit racist. By default he may make it THREE in a row. P.S. I wonder how much Will Perdue and Steve Kerr influenced the white guys on winning teams stat. Logging playing time on a 72 win team couldn't have hurt the average......
You could say Nash's selection was racist, but that is more evidence you don't know hoops... Oh, and a few Hall of Fame white guys who never won an MVP: 1. Jerry West 2. John Stockton 3. Rick Barry Next you will say that Bird's MVP's were racist...
Phoenix won 9 fewer games last year from the previous season due to Stoudemire's injury. To reward Nash after a such a drop was absurd. Your pal Kobe should have been the 2006 MVP. Clearly. Strip the Sun's of Nash and they're still a playoff team. Take Kobe away and L.A. is in the lottery.....
Again, the level of ignorance is nearly the size of your ego. Those who watch Phoenix play without Nash know that he is the MVP. When Amare went down, Phoenix was immediately relagated to a bottom dweller (think Shaq going down, or Duncan going down, etc.) What Nash did with what he had upon losing Amare demonstrated why he was the MVP, and his numbers this year are even better. No one makes bit role players as good as Nash, and he makes the good players even better. Oh, and in the playoffs last year, Nash's team beat Kobe and company, and did so as well this year, handily. Kobe may be the best scorer in the game, but he is so far from MVP it is a joke. Pick one player to build a team around, it ain't Kobe. Lots of people make the same mistake you make. They think Kobe is the best player in the game, but he is not the MVP. MVP's don't allow their team to tank the way the Lakers did down the stretch this year. They make players better....Kobe doesn't make anyone better.