Interesting Idea? To publish a study in the New York times which basically labels white NBA refs biased and racists? Perhaps if you were a white NBA ref you'd have a different type of interest still. The study is garabage. Somewhere within it, it must be stated that they've made the assumption that White and Black NBA players, in actuality, commit fouls at Identical rates. Just how does one go about proving that? Using the Foul Statistics, the same statistics that disprove the assumption? Reviewing Tape!? Fouls are subjective. It could be that whites commit 8% less fouls and the real bias is against white players by both White and Black refs! I caught Charles Barkley on ESPN this morning, he called the study assanine. "...assanine... There are way more blacks than whites in the NBA, of course they commit more fouls."
Mr Barkley is right, i would say. For no other reason, than if the NBA were 100% black, Pabst would likely use it as a stat for black-on black fouls/crime or similiar. That, and the fact it would prove conclusively, tall white men can't jump. Basketball is a stupid game anyway, why would any sane person encourage their kid to play it? When they KNOW unless they hit 6'8" minimum, they dont have a hope. No, they dont: soccer moms take heed, basketball isnt for your vertically challenged child.
The problem with the whole thing is they don't publish a definition, (as far as I know) about just exactly what constitutes mvp. Is it the best player/scorer or is it the guy that makes everyone else better? They seem to pick someone and then come up with the reasons why. It's not always the guy that makes everyone else better, witness Wilt's four mvp's, most of which were given in his big scoring years.
I happen to be pretty good friends with an NBA ref and I also know two college refs. It is crap like this that could cost a great guy a career. I am now completely sick of this race baiting bullshit by liberals assholes out to make society look bad. I just did a statistical analysis as well. Blacks got 83% of the playing time in the NBA and they account for arong 10% of our population. If my friend loses his job, I will tell you right now, I will organize, I will blog and I will get on TV. I will be the white Al Sharpton. We need one. I will say stuff like this. This disperate treatment of white people, must be the result of endemic reverse racism in show business. And that the statistics are racially biased. White people tend to play a different style of ball. It takes more time to set up the plays. We must reeducate the news shows and sportscenter to show the beauty of a slower developing play. this will help establish more white superstars. We must reeducate the public to appreicate the beauty of basketball as played by white people. Then we will have more white guys in the NBA and we will achieve social justice.
While you're at it, you might look into why white guys in this country apparently can't play but white guys in europe and south america can. At least they can if you look at how our teams do in international competition. A white kid in middle or high school has to be Larry friggin Bird to get playing time or even make the team, unless he lives in some area with no blacks.
you are right AAA - we need quotas on high school and college teams to reverse decades of institutional bias against whites in sports. We also need to see movement towards hiring more white coaches on inner city teams - It seems there are not enough white inner city coaches. I am sure I can find data which supports the conjecture that whites players are forced to move to the suburbs where top notch basketball opportunities are limited because of the lack of population density. ( I can just imagine saying this with a straight face. I just do not know how Sharpton and Jackson can do it without busting out laughing at times. I have seen sharpton get close to losing it. It must be difficult.
MVP is not the best scorer necessarily, there were years that Mike didn't win the MVP even though he lead the league in scoring. It is very subjective, obviously, and generally goes to that player that has a year that is above the norm of greatness, which leads the team to a winning record, and near the top of their respective divisions. I think it would be rare to find an MVP on a losing team, so most valuable has some meaning as it relates to victories, etc. Was Barkley a better player than MJ when he won his MVP? Mike showed Charles in the finals who was the better player. Same for the year that Karl Malone won his...Mike was the finals MVP. I am guessing that any MVP winner during the regular season would trade that for a NBA finals MVP. So a player may have had a great regular season, yet not be the best player on the court come Championship time. It is an honor, no doubt, but when Elgin Baylor never won an MVP, or Jerry West, or Rick Barry...well, that really says it all, doesn't it? This also comes down to who is the best player in the league. Is it Kobe? I don't think you are going to find many GM's who put Kobe at the top of the list to build a team around. Look to most NBA championship teams, and the most important player was smack dab in the center. Go through history, and apart from Mike, and one year for Barry, you are hard pressed not to find a team with a strong all star caliber center. That's why Duncan has been (he is getting older) generally on the top of the list for people to build a team around, or Shaq before him. Russell, Moses Malone, Wilt, Kareem, Hakim, Shaq, Willis Reed, etc. Centers are more important than guards for the most part, then point guards, then scoring guards and/or power forward. People don't want to hear it, but if MJ in his prime played in the current league with the current rules, he would average 40 points or more a night for the year. Remember, he played regularly against the brute teams like Detroit, New York with Riles as coach, etc. It was a tougher league back then.
Hey, you do know a little bit about hoops. I only have a few minor points to quibble about. I still have to point to Wilt, who was an mvp four times, and couldn't in even one of those years be considered to be a player who made others better on the caliber of Russell. Not even close. You say that a person would be hard pressed to find a gm that would build a team around Kobe. That's exactly what the Lakers gm did. And, was willing to give up Shaq, to boot. You say teams without dominant centers don't win titles, except MJ's? Pistons. I don't think Wallace qualified as a dominant center. MJ scoring more now than then? Don't think so. Athleticism in the league gets better every year, and that translates into more d, much more so than more o. Scoring has gone down in general, not up. It was not a tougher league back then in general, just a few tough teams.
Wallace was defensive player of the year how many times? Every heard something about defense winning championships? Lakers blew it, because of Kobe. If Kobe had simply gone to managment and said, "If you don't make Shaq happy, I am not resigning with the Lakers" it would have gotten done. Kobe wanted to be the man, well, now he is...and look where he is. Whining and crying about everyone else on the team. I really believe that if Nash replaced Kobe on that team, they would at least make a better showing than with Kobe. The Lakers are a completely screwed up organization. They are betting the farm on Bynum by not trading him and trying to win right now. They made a horrible trade when they traded Shaq. They brought back a tired old Phil and overpaid him (10 million a year) because his girlfriend (Jeanne Buss) wanted it that way. Jim Buss who has input is a dope. Mitch Kuptcheck is a loser. Lakers let go of Jerry West, biggest mistake since Sox traded away Babe ruth. MJ would score more in his prime than Kobe, because of the rules changes: "One reason is the changes in the NBA rules designed to increase scoring. The changes, which went into effect last season, eliminated hand checking and opened the lane by making it illegal for any defender to be in the lane for longer than three seconds. The changes shifted the advantage to the slick ballhandlers, players who can get their own shots off the dribble and are athletic enough to make three-pointers and drive all the way to the basket. These players also are tough enough to get fouled a lot, then make their free throws." http://www.usatoday.com/sports/basketball/nba/2006-01-23-100-points_x.htm and because very few teams play solid defense. At the time of MJ, the tough teams were in the East, where he played, and dominated on both ends of the court. If anyone gets the NBA channel, sometimes they play classic games of the past. People ought to watch MJ's performance in Boston in the playoffs when he went for 63. His play on both offense and defense was mind boggling. And that was playing against one of the great teams of all time (though in decline) with Bird, Parrish, and McHale in the middle. Oh, and Wilt was so dominant as an individual, that they had to change the rules of the game because of his play. Apart from the "Jordan" rules, which were unofficial, the rule change because of Wilt's prowess are unmatched by the efforts of any other single player as relates to the game (not rules of fighting, leaving the bench, etc.) NBA: 1964-65 ⢠Lane widened from 12 to 16 feet Change primarily attributed to the dominance of Wilt Chamberlain. When Wilt Chamberlain was in high school, he had a unique way of shooting free-throws. He would stand at the top of the key, throw the ball up toward the basket, take two steps, jump toward the rim and jam the ball through the net. Doing this resulted in basketball rules to state that a player cannot cross the plane of the free-throw line when shooting a free-throw. I am not discounting Russell at all, or his greatness. Russell was asked if he could have defended Shaq. He responded, "Under today's rules, no. Under the rules I played under, yes."
Sir Charles is Literally correct of course. Hopefully, nobody tries to explain the math to him, he might ride the issue into the Arizona governorship. It is ironic that 2 of the top 3 foulers in the NBA happen to be white. I think the NBA should institute a white bias enhancer for foul calls, on the 20th foul call white-dudes are automatically assessed another one. (Imagine that, "bias for whites" in the NBA ... you can't make this shit up) Basketball rocks to play, boring to watch, IMHO. they should either start the game with 2 minutes remaining, or maybe make it the a best of 5 games, each to 21 points.