Reply With Quote
He writes better than he talks.
http://sports.espn.go.com/espnmag/st...t&lid=tab1pos2
How important is someone like Dirk to the NBA's image overall?
If it's white, it's all right! Contrary to what the NBA wants you to think, there's still a rising perception that the league is interested in growing its population of international players who are of a lighter hue. The perception is that this is happening to appease white patrons exhausted by the behavior of 20-year-old millionaires gone bad—whose culture, and pigmentation, is different from their own.
I've heard such noise emanating from African-American communities in the aftermath of the Brawl in Auburn Hills, nearly four years ago. The argument goes like this: The NBA hasn't had an American-born white superstar since Larry Bird, and teams will travel to any and all corners of the earth to find a Dirk Nowitzki, a Peja Stojakovic or someone else without a remote connection to Ron Artest. The noise has been echoing again this spring, as 13 of the 16 playoff teams have at least one white international player in at least a supporting role.
If the argument made sense, the NBA would be the definition of hypocrisy, considering all the hip-hop booming in arenas around the league. Except the argument doesn't make any sense at all.
I have no problem with the changing demographics on the court, for the simple reason that they're strictly about the worldwide chase for dollars and cents. David Stern is running a multibillion-dollar business, and he's willing to eviscerate anything or anyone who threatens to lower his bottom line. But is Stern, or the league, behaving in a racist manner? Come on. Although several African-American players I know disagree with me, none of them wants to admit as much on the record—wisely, I might add. Because the facts speak for themselves. NBA executives point out that while there were 76 international players, from 31 countries, in the league at the end of the season (more than 20% of the players on the 30 team rosters), only 46 were European. These international players included not just Nowitzki and Stojakovic but Yao Ming and Yi Jianlian of China, as well as Congo's most famous senior citizen, Dikembe Mutombo.
Those same NBA executives will tell you that owners would embrace green goblins, giant frogs or players who "wore diapers instead of regular underwear," as one team official told me, if it meant another $10 million in revenue. "I don't think race has anything to do with who's playing in our league," says Wizards president of basketball operations Ernie Grunfeld, who makes numerous international scouting trips each year. "I don't think people really care about who the players are. It's about what they bring to the table."
Like entry to global markets. "At some point, everybody is looking for a pool of money to swim into, and the international market is clearly where it's at," says Bill Duffy, an African-American agent who reps Yao and many other NBA players.
"How many sneakers or T-shirts can someone buy? You avoid reaching a saturation point by delving into that international pool. The NBA can't be blamed for that."
Makes sense to me. Other than soccer, basketball is arguably the world's most popular pro sport. Beginning with the original Dream Team in Barcelona 16 years ago, the NBA has gone global, creating shared revenue that has helped bridge the gap between large-market and small-market teams.
Yes, the league has an image issue. But there's a dress code now, for what that's worth. And stiffer and swifter conduct penalties are in vogue, with guys getting ejected for staring at or laughing at an official, for crying out loud.
Once upon a time, I was inclined to believe that the NBA, in an effort to ingratiate itself with its viewing public, wanted more white players to serve that purpose—until, that is, common sense taught me otherwise. Enough with the race issue. The NBA would never compromise the composition of its product for the sake of a few racist holdouts. The league is all about improving its product—the better to sell it!
In a society where some still criticize Babe Ruth because he didn't play against Negro Leaguers, how can we complain that international participation in basketball has opened the floodgates for more intense and well-rounded compe ion?
We can't. So let's cut the noise.
He writes better than he talks.
A very good article, and he makes perfect sense.
If he gave this as a speech we would be wondering what the was he talking about this time.
Soccer has players all over the world playing on teams. Its the most popular sport in the world. You don't need to have that local on your team to be successful (Tickets sales) If so Houston would have picked Vince Young in the NFL.
To many players and teams now a days. The players change teams every season. You can live in San Antonio and hate the Spurs. You can live in San Antonio and follow your favorite team through so many media outlets. You can see all the games now as if you live right down the street from the arena.
Still pretty poor article I think, compared to the other writers.
The man has to take some writing or Logic class, because he needs to clarify his arguments much better.
It is still a little weird that he bring Dirk back in this conversation, that he is hinting at the possibility that somehow Dirk is a star only because of his color even he himself agrees that it's not true, but I'll let it go this time around.
His last newspaper he got canned from didn't think so.
yah that whole argument doesn't sound racist at all
It's actually a very good article.
I enjoyed reading it, and this is coming from someone that thinks Stephen A. Smith is annoying as .
Is this really news?
This is a little off subject, but have you ever watched the Euro League playoffs?
Holy cAn those guys play!!!
Actually this argument made little sense to me.
Basically it seems Smith is saying:
"Some (in the African-American community) say that the NBA favors white players because they're white, and they want to appeal to white audiences. "
(Note from me: this is exactly how Isiah Thomas feels. He famously once said "Larry Bird would just be another good NBA player if he was black." It's obvious that he has carried this American-player bias onto the Knicks.)
"However, this argument is wrong. The NBA doesn't just favor white European players, they favor international players of all races and languages. They want them not because of racism but because of money. They want to appeal to fans outside the USA."
I think Smith is full of crap, and racist himself to boot. Why? Because here's the unspoken assumption:
"All of the good NBA players, in reality, are African-American. If the NBA weren't tilting the scales in some way, every team would be all African-American."
This is a racist assumption, that African-American players are naturally superior. In fact, this is a cultural phenomenon, not a racial or genetic one. African-Americans do not have a monopoly on great basketball talent and skill.
I think that teams are simply finding that they are more successful with recruiting players from outside the USA than simply staying with USA-born-and-bred players. I don't think you have to invoke racism or money to explain it.
But Smith just doesn't get this. It's obvious when you see his commentary how biased he is. African-American players always get several extra rating points with him.
^very true, I didn't have the time to write it, but it seems like you and I read the same hdden assumption behind all of this.
And yes, Euroleague is great. I was expecting a better final game, but it was still pretty good this year.
there's some Manu hate on this article not naming him.. instead he put Peja Stojakovic with Dirk...
The only thing is, only SAS would be stupid enough to actually give thought to this issue.
I think the deal here is that Smith believes he represents the African-American point of view on basketball. So he feels that he needs to give voice to these arguments, stupid as they are. I think maybe he believes them too.
I'm in the minority here, but I actually like Stephen A.
I appreciate his ability to not see racism in every little thing. He and Whitlock both rightly say that the black community needs to clean their house before they can go around pointing fingers at everyone else.
A pretty decent article, too.
Oh, but he does. This article is a backhanded way to show that. Why would you defend Dirk and Nash on the basis of race when you were one of the people to question them to begin with?
And it still seems like he is saying, the NBA wants to market these guys because of the money they bring in through their global image. Nowhere in there does he say that those two, and others, are some of the elite players in the league. That's what pisses me off, you have to go and read someone like Hollinger (the most unbiased writer on the net) to get a full evaluation of what Dirk's done the last 3 years.
I agree. Case in point:
What? This is nonsense.In a society where some still criticize Babe Ruth because he didn't play against Negro Leaguers...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
