Former Boston Celtic great, Larry Bird was asked by ESPN's Jim Gray if the NBA didn't have enough white superstar players (specifically excluding the foreign players from Europe, Canada and other nations) and Bird replied:

"Well, I think so," said Bird, the Indiana Pacers' president of basketball operations. "You know, when I played, you had me and Kevin [McHale] and some others throughout the league. I think it's good for a fan base because, as we all know, the majority of the fans are white America. And if you just had a couple of white guys in there, you might get them a little excited. But it is a black man's game, and it will be forever. I mean, the greatest athletes in the world are African-American."

"The one thing that always bothered me when I played in the NBA was I really got irritated when they put a white guy on me," Bird said. "I still don't understand why. A white guy would come out (and) I would always ask him: 'What, do you have a problem with your coach? Did your coach do this to you?' And he'd go, 'No,' and I'd say, 'Come on, you got a white guy coming out here to guard me; you got no chance.' ... For some reason, that always bothered me when I was playing against a white guy.

"As far as playing, I didn't care who guarded me -- red, yellow, black," Bird added. "I just didn't want a white guy guarding me. Because it's disrespect to my game."

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=1818396#

Rick Barry, a former NBA great, disliked Bird's remark about being defended by "a white guy" and took exception to his assertion that "the greatest athletes in the world are African-American."

Uh, Larry...ever hear of Lance Armstrong?

Magic Johnson, who joined Bird in the discussion along with contemporary NBA stars, LeBron James and Carmelo Anthony said of Bird, "We need some more LBs -- Larry Birds. ... Larry Bird, you see, can go into any neighborhood. When you say 'Larry Bird,' black people know who he is, Hispanics, whites, and they give him the respect."

But is Larry Bird right? Will the predominantly white audiences that the NBA plays to continue to pack the arenas if fewer and fewer white superstars emerge?

So here's a two prong question for debate:

1. Is Larry Bird right or wrong about the need for more white players in the NBA?

2. Who is the BEST (American born) white player in the NBA right NOW?

1.)I don't believe that he's right. I would offer up for discussion that the problem isn't white athletes, it's media exposure. Some hard to pronounce Croatian or some othe Balkan player isn't going to get the Nike deal over Kobe or Shaq.

2.)I'm not the biggest basketball fan, so I can't comment exclusively on this. Didn't the Kings have some bald white guy who made dazzling passes and was jus something else to watch?? Can't remember him right now......

Is Larry Bird right or wrong about the need for more white players in the NBA?
Wrong. When anyone makes comments like these what they're really advocating is discrimination. Bringing in underqualified white players at the expense of qualified black players, so the NBA can "look right", is discriminatory and unamerican. Lookism is becoming too popular among some, especially the governing elite. We see people screaming that fire departments, presidential administrations, school administrators, and even prisoners don't "look right."

Just one example: when I was in elementary school (a government one), California decided there were too many male Principals. So they dumped my current male Principal and replaced him with a female who was extremely inexperienced. I remember some of the parents and teachers feeling disgruntled over their new underqualified Principal. But hey, at least she looked right, and that's what really matters.

Just to hit one small point here. Are ther any black professional road racers?

(I know he said "African-Americans", but...) Could you imagine what would happen if cycling in Kenya were given the same focus as running currently is? IMO they could dominate the pro peleton just as easily as they currently do marathons.

This is probably one of those topics that its best not to dwell on too much.

I think a lot of people in this country would say something like Larry Bird said off the record. I 'll make a presumption that he was focusing on players and not general managers. owners, refs, team doctors etc.

But in short. No there is not a need for more white players in the NBA, but I do think a white Michael Jordan would create a huge boost in the ratings. (of course any Michael Jordan would) What happens, happens. The NBA teams should keep their focus on winning even though they are in the business of selling tickets.

I think that Bill Walton was the most talented white player I have ever seen (via tapes, sorry too young) but after he got hurt he was only a shadow of the player that made UCLA fans comfortable after Alcindor (sp?) left.

In the league today. Well I'll give half a vote to Jason Kidd

To be honest I don't watch much NBA anymore, but I think that is in part because I find the dominant player in the game is boring. Dr. J brought me in first, then Magic Johnson, then Michael Jordan, I think the game is back in a pre Magic/Bird funk.

I guess Steve Nash is Canadian, I thought Keith van Horn was a worthy candidate, but I haven't heard his name mentioned much. OK, I give up. I shouldn't have to work so much for this.

This may only be because he is stuck in my head right now, but I was impressed with Fred Hoiberg of the Wolves in the Western Finals.

He was a sweet football player in college as well.

First off I think that many sports are becoming predominantly black for a reason: african americans are very physically talented. They just are. Sports like football, basketball, and track and field suit them very well. This is not to say that other races are not able to play at the same level, but just that the percentage of other races being as physically gifted is lower. I personally would like to see a bigger diversity of races in sports, as long as the game doesn't suffer. There's no reason to bring the performance of a sport down because of principle.

And I think Mike Bibby might be the best white player in the game now, or maybe Wally Sczcerbiak. But I'd go with Bibby.

Sorry, the Kenyans would get hosed in professional ROAD cycling. They would do quite well in Triathlons, and in something like the Race Across America. They generally don't have the right balance of power and endurance. After all, you never see Kenyans in the track and field sprints, do you?

As for Bird, he's right from a marketing standpoint. Non-black American superstars will broaden the market. I think his statement about African-Americans being the greatest athletes in the world is fallacious though. They are SOME of the greatest, but there's so many different sports, with differing demands, that such a blanket statement is useless.

Is the NBA too black.

No. Do they get paid too much? Yup. This goes for every other professional sport around. I don't pay much attention to professional sports. I am still trying to figure out what is so fascinating about watching people work. I used to get into professional sports as a kid, but these days there is too much showboating. Deion Sanders comes to mind here. He has singlehandedly flushed the professional game - it is currently circling the drain in my mind.

Waaa waaa I was fouled ref.



There is no right or wrong here, it is what the market dictates.




Who cares? I don't care who the best black player is for that matter either.

1. Is Larry Bird right or wrong about the need for more white players in the NBA?

Wrong. The NBA needs quality players regardless of race. I don't think fans care what race a player is, as long as he is fun to watch and someone they can look up to on and off the court.



Mike Bibby is black. His father is Henry Bibby, former NBA player and head coach at USC. Here's a snippet of an article talking about him:

- Journal Sentinel

Not that it matters, Bibby is still one heckuva player. I just thought it was funny that a black man was listed as the best white player in the game!

I think "LB" is wrong.

Larry Byrd is making the assertion that white people actually care what color people in the NBA are. The only people that care what color people in the NBA are are the people who care what color people are in general. White NBA fans (and sports fans in general) want to see talent, what package that talent comes in is pretty irrelevent. I don't think non black stars will bring new fans to the game. People like the game for the game. I personally stopped watching the NBA when Jordan retired, because everything else was just a step down IMO. The same thing for the NFL when Barry Sanders retired. I haven't seen a player that brings that level of excitement to the game since. White people, in my experience, are not looking for someone of their race to identify with when it comes to sports. They are looking for talent.

I also agree with Dave's post.

He's right about there not being a lot of white superstars in the NBA. The only thing is, it's nobody's fault. It just looks as if more black people seek an NBA career than whites.

He is wrong about the best athletes in the world being african-american. I don't know what the hell he was drinkin that night but he must of forgotten about....

Jim Thrope - Native American

Wayne Gretzky - Caucasian

Fernando Valenzuela - Hispanic

Ichiro Suzuki - Asian

You could probably rate Bird's remarks up there with those of Chicago Cubs manager Dusty Baker about skin color and game performance.

Sorry about that, I guess he's just very light skinned. I have no idea now...not that it really matters.

I believe it's more *nurture* than *nature* when it comes to people being "better" than others at a given sport-a large part of it has to do with exposure. Whites aren't any better than blacks when it comes to swimming events, hockey, or yachting. Boxing is a great example of how low socio-economic groups use idle time to become great fighters. Who can forget Rocky Marciano or Willie Pep?

Well this is a tough one to answer because there are so many ways to go with this topic.

First and foremost, it's a matter of upbringing and what is "expected" of kids. White kids are still, by in large, expected to go to college and be lawyers, doctors, scientists, etc. Black kids generally are given a lower set of expectations - from the media to parents to schools. Sports are often pushed on Black kids, not only by parents who sometimes view sports as the only way out of the ghetto (after all, when you go to poor schools, you tend to get a poor education), but by teachers and other adult mentors who might think they are just being realistic. Black kids see something like the NBA, a sea of successful Black men, as the most likely way to "make it" - the NBA is probably the most visible institution/career path in which Blacks are dominant, so kids start thinking that the NBA is a viable option. As a result of being constantly told that you are "made for sports", you begin to internalize these things. My mother used to tell me I was prettier than my sister (why, I don't know) - so I internalized it and even though I knew it was silly and my mom was wrong for saying something like that, I started to believe it and to this day, I still have these thoughts in the back of my mind. When you are told a thousands times over that your best chance for success is in pro sports, you begin to believe it and your goals begin to shift to fit that expectation.

Also, it's a matter of availability. In many poor Black areas, there aren't as many extra-curricular options (free ones or low-cost ones) as there are in white areas. Black kids play basketball in Boys and Girls clubs or at the Y or at the local park. Got a ball? You can hoop it up.

So what does that have to do with there being a lack of whites in the NBA? White kids just aren't pushed down that path nearly as often. The pro sports world isn't usually considered the number one way to "make it" in the world in a white household. White kids are told in school that they can be anything they want to, and they can visually see this to be true - the President, CEOs of major corporations, and other higher-ups in the corporate/business world = white. So they tend to think they have a wider variety of ways to "make it", thus the focus is likely less narrow.

When Black kids are told they can be anything, they likely take this info with a grain of salt - they don't see Black Presidents, Black CEOs, etc. They DO see Black athletes.

I think when Bird was talking about the best athletes being African American, he meant the majority of the most visible/well-known athletes. BUt, he is obviously not correct in that the best athletes, PERIOD, are African American. He is a basketball player, so he is likely visualizing basketball players more than anything else because that's what he knows. Yep, most of the NBAs best have been and are Black. But as others have pointed out, other sports' bests come from a variety of ethnic backgrounds. That said, I think if you asked the average American whether the best athletes are Black, they'd probably agree without really thinking about the question. In one of my favorite books Don't Believe the Hype (Chideya) , one of the Racial Issues IQ questions is "what percentage of pro-athletes are Black?". When this question is asked among a group of people, almost ALL overestimate the percentage (the percentage is right around 10% as of I think '92). Basketball and football still tend to be the most visible sports, while the majority of pro-sports have few Black athletes (golf, tennis, NASCAR, rowing, biking, etc.).

I don't really think the NBA "needs" more white players. It's obviously doing quite fine the way it is in terms of popularity. A "Great White Hope" might bring some new fans, but I wouldn't say the NBA is suffering because of a lack of white players. I think it's quite different from the Serena/Venus Williams and Tiger Woods' phenomenon. Sports that were so typically white with probably few non-white fans attracted much more diverse crowds with the success of the Williams sisters and Tiger Woods - because they sort of lifted a barrier that was seen in their respective sports. There isn't that same barrier for white athletes in the NBA - they are there and there's nothing really keeping them from being there as basketball is one of those sports played in white and black neighborhoods alike.

As far as the NBA, I think the best current white, American born baller is probably Steve Nash. Brad Miller ain't half bad and I happen to be a pretty big fan of Scott Pollard. Christian Laettner had such promise out of college, but fizzled and Jon Barry is still pretty decent though not as good as his dad was. Jason Williams (the aforementioned bald white guy with skills) has some great passing skills, but he's sloppy as heck. I would consider him a possible "star" because he draws a crow dwith his flashy style of play/passing. There are a few rookies who could be "stars" - Dunleavy, Dickau, and Hinrich all have the potential to become big names - Luke Walton, because of this father's fame, is probably on the list of potential success stories of white NBA players (went to college with him, he's pretty decent but I wouldn't say he's "star" material). I think Dirk is a huge star and though he's foreign born, he IS a white guy. Same goes for Stojakovic. I wouldn't include Szczerbiak in the "foreign" category because though he was born in Spain, he went to high school in the U.S. We've had a number of "great white hopes" in the past decade or so though: Hornacek, Majerle, Kerr, and of course John Stockton and Chris Mullin. I do think it wouldn't HURT the sport to have a "great white hope" today, but I don't think it's something we (as fans) desperately need.

Thank you for eloquently stating, what I stated ineptly in my pervious posting. To follow your well stated posting-if black kids grew up hearing and seeing on t.v. how blacks are successful accounting, I would wager you would see a self-fulfilling prophecy come to fruition. The cultural impact of t.v. is not really recognized in my opinion. It's similar in other ways too such as:

-Boys are better than girls at science & math

-Girls are better at boys in speech, debate, and other "verbal" skills

-If you are Irish, you have a temper; If you ar Italian, you have "the family" to help you.

The influx of eastern european players into the NBA is a great example of this. Many of those young men grew up in terribly imporverished cities, which allowed them to "escape" into basketball. That is why today you have someone from Sarajevo dunking over someone from inner city Detroit.

Well LB was accurate and honest. Two things that don't set well with Americans these days. Whether it is right or wrong would depend on one's own tolerance to the truth.

Remember Jimmy the Greek? Now when you mention slayery in defense of your opinions, then you cross the line. (Something about being breed to be better slaves.)

In my opinion, black or white dominance in any particular sport is the result of social influences. Blacks are predominantly from the south, and thus aren't big factors in Hockey, curling, or down-hill skiing. On the flip-sdie, I don't see many white youths hanging out down-town at the community "Y" pacticing lay-ups. Akin to R&B vs. Country musicians.

Added:
And to mention the best white american-born NBA player, Brad Miller.

FYI, for overall season stats, 3 of the top 5 NBA players are white skinned, although not american.

Peja Stojakovic
Andrei Kirilenko
Dirk Nowitzki

I believe that nature and nurture both play a big role in determining many things, among them this topic. After doing a little research I found two things of interest that support both our claims.

First:

La Griffe du Lion

This stat is as of January 2000, and there might have been a few whites to run the 100m in under 10 sec., but not enough to demonstrate physical equality. The article also tackles other sports with some complex math. The bottom line is that there is a gap between the physical abilities of whites vs. blacks.

Second:

Psychologists help debunk the myth of Michael Jordan

This article shows that nurture also has a profound effect. The media perpetuates the idea of the black athlete and shows many of them. This can create an idea in a persons head that becoming an athlete is their only option, especially if that person is black (or a minority) and in the lower socio-economic end of the spectrum.

So the bottom line for me at least is that nurture plays a large role, and nature also plays a significant role in determining this question of the NBA being too black.

I didn't know how to answer this question...."too black" for WHOM? Michael Jordan's success is due in large part to his differentiation from other "black" athletes and stereotypes. He was seen as a role model, family man, hardworker etc. That aside...

With basketball its more of an urban youth thing than a race thing...Basketball has always been dominated by the urban underculture (lower middle and poor). For instance in decades previous Jewish people dominated basketball...and at other times immigrant populations. Suburban youth develop a different style of play from their urban counterparts who are competing for limited court space, playing more one on one, developing showmanship etc. Suburban kids learn more about team play (zone defense etc). They practice shooting with no opposition (as often it is harder to find the playmates)...whereas the urban youth is getting his practice in on a court with definite opposition. They must compete for court space. This was a big topic in my Sport and the Sociological Imagination class this semester. That is overrepresentation of particular racial groups in assorted sports and why. Usually it boils down to a class/environment issue. That and young urban youths are brought up to believe that basketball is a form of social mobility although they (urban youths, often black) have a better chance of becoming a doctor or lawyer than they do of becoming a basketball star.

There is an article we read that is very good about this topic if you have time look it up:


In fact a larger percentage of the NBA is URBAN than BLACK. Race is largely a social construct based primarily on pheotypes (apparent differences) than actual genetic genotypical difference. If you look at most major sports leagues they are not representative of the general population with regards to % of different races. This isn't because whites are inherrently better at hockey or blacks inherrently better at basketball...its because those particular cultures (economic status, class, race, urban/suburban living space) have particular pushes toward different sports.

The Bird quote was part of a piece I saw on ESPN last night. (outside the Lines, I believe)

Keith Van Horn was the highest scorer on the white American list. I think he was 44th in the NBA this year.

1. Is Larry Bird right or wrong about the need for more white players in the NBA?

He's wrong, I doubt that many people care about the racial make-up of NBA players. NBA fans want to see the most talented players in the game out there making big plays, skin color doesn't have anything to do with that.


No, but it is likely due to primarily to exposure. Cycling has been primarily a European sport, with some Americans and Australians coming into prominence in recent years.

Even now with Armstrong on the verge of making history in the world series of races, the Tour de France, no one in America really knows anything about the sport. It isn't even broadcast on ESPN (that I'm aware of) except for maybe some quick highlights. CBS airs something every Sunday. The only channel you can watch complete coverage on is the Outdoor Life Network (a cable channel not available everywhere).

Larry Bird is wrong. Nobody cares about race. As with any sport, popularity amoung different races fluctuates and that will show up on the teams rosters. In the twenties bastketball was dominated by the Cleveland Rosenblums and that improved the state of basketball. There was no need to go out and find non-Jewish players because improving the sport led to popularity which led to diversity. Not the other way around.


Steve Nash is canadian but as anglo-players go he's the best. But the best white American basketball player is definetly Brad Miller. 14 points, 10 rebounds and 4 assists per game is statistically better than any other white American player. Statistically at least, Brad Miller is the 24th best player in the NBA according to ESPN.

Looking into the future I think quality, white American players are on the rise. Kirk Hinrich, Mike Dunleavy, Jason Kapono, Luke Jackson, and Luke Ridnour all have bright futures in the NBA. Plus there's that guy, Robert Swift, who was drafted in the lottery. But as a big fan of the NBA I only really care about the quality of the games I watch, not what race the players are. Sports are just more exciting and fun then thinking about race, period.

1. Is Larry Bird right or wrong about the need for more white players in the NBA?



I agree. Just spent the weekend watching my kids play basketball. I feel blessed that they see those that they play with not by the color of their skin, but as teammates & friends. The NBA has played a role in improving race relations. I'm sure there's just as many white kids as black kids who want to be Like Mike.

Bird may have been referring to NBA cities where they are having trouble drawing from the redneck demograpic.

As to the best (wishful thinking) American born white guy...I'm going with Mike Dunleavy only because I'm holding out hope for my Warriors.

Bird is partially right, partially wrong.

While it would be good to see more well-qualified white players, it would also be good to see well-qualified black hockey players. Each sport has been favored by more of one race than another. It doesn't mean it is bad, just that it is tradition.

The goal of any sport is not to have checkerboard representation, but for each team to have the most qualified players. Racial balance is nice, but is the performance of the players that should determine who is hired and retained on a team.

I recently read an article about the diminishing numbers of black Americans in major league baseball. It discussed actions Major League baseball, and it's teams, were taking to reverse this trend. I don't recall ever reading about the NBA taking actions to reverse the trend of less white players. I am wondering what the reaction would be if such an action was undertaken?

Well first of why does no one but me complain about the lack of asian people in sports? (except Vijay Singh whose from Fiji and Yao from China) It has a lot to do with how family brings the child up, with asian families more likely to keep there kids inside studing then outside building muscle. Another factor is in impoverished parts of the country you see more people playing basketball because all you need is a ball and some shorts. With football and hockey you need pads and other equipment, that usual the school provides. With golf and tennis you need to pay for the country club fees.

That's amusing, because the decline of Blacks in MLB is directly traceable to two social trends, neither of which MLB can do squat about. But hey, it gets them good press. First, the increasing urbanization of Blacks. Baseball draws far more of its players from rural and suburban backgrounds than urban, and the black demographic among these groups has shifted away from the rural. Second, most of the spots are being taken by other minority groups, who, not surprisingly, are primarily of suburban and rural backgrounds. (Climate plays a role as well, as baseball is a far more attractive game to play in warmer climates than basketball)

Larry Bird is a racist. He wants to have it both ways. He thinks the NBA should favor white players over the black players that are more athletically inclined, yet I bet my life savings he is against Affirmative Action laws that give preferential treatment to blacks. I think both ideas are ludicrous.

1. Is Larry Bird right or wrong about the need for more white players in the NBA?

2. Who is the BEST (American born) white player in the NBA right NOW?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. I agree with Larry Bird, for the most part. I believe that there are many people whom believe that the NBA has turned away a large amount of viewership and popularity among middle-class white America. However, I believe it's because of allowing men into clubs whom have basketball skills but no social ability. They allow their men to walk around looking like thugs and street criminals, to speak on interviews sounding like they just emerged from a Master P (rap) video. They have gold teeth and absurd hair cuts. How could we possibly relate? The fact is that when the NBA recruited exclusively from the College ranks, there was a different crowd of men. I wonder how David Robinson feels...

This being said, I believe that affirmative action is a farce, but so is the current NBA. Look at what happened in the Olympics. How many people declined the invitation to play? Why did we lose to a nearly completely caucasian appearing Argentina? There's no doubt that our team had the ability, that the NBA had the talent. But my question is... do young African American men recruited into millionaire status have the loyalty to this great nation that they should? MOST IMPORTANTLY, do they have the class that the NBA should require? Do they represent the professionalism they should? Don't we call them "professional athletes"?

To answer the question directly, I believe that there is a void of non-black athletes in the NBA because of the style of game and recruiting requirements used today. This is the reason we lost during the olympics. We have a large number of men that shoot well, jump high, and dunk hard... but that's about it.

2. American Born white players? There are NO superstar caucasian players from the US. Canadian born Steve Nash and German Dirk Novitski are the only white men in the NBA that carry any franchise noteworthiness.

To reply to ELMOE's "REDNECK DEMOGRAPHIC" statement:
I believe that you've completely missed the mark. Many middle to upper middle class white men feel disenfranchised from the NBA. We can't relate to "bling-bling" and gutteral urban English. How come the NBA can't recruit men to not only dunk the ball but uphold their professional image? How would you feel if your local police force only employed big men that can run fast and wrestle criminals to the ground??? hmmm...

Wow, a question of race and professional atheletics. Say answer me this? If affirmative action is good enough for the rest of America, why not pro sports? If it applied anywhere it should apply here. Yes, I know, booo, we don't want to see that NBA. So now we have established that blacks are better basketball players, on average. We have also established that putting less qualified whites in to appease some idea of equality is stupid, and takes away from the game. So why isn't this common sense applied to everything else? It's because there is a double standard about recognizing differences in the races. Anytime blacks are found to have an advantage it's ok to say so, but this does not apply to areas where whites have an advatage. We are taught that it's not nice to point out the deficiencies in others, and assume that the deficient doesn't have an advatage elsewhere. The sheer brilliance of God's plan of a diverse world full of individuals is apparent to me. I celebrate the fact that we don't live in a great big international ant hill where everyone is the same. Do blacks deserve to dominate the NBA, hell yes, blacks are good at basketball. Do we need more whites in the NBA? If they are good enough, sure. This shouldn't be about which race plays better, it should be about which individual is better.

My favorite player played for the Kansas City Kings, ole 44, Sam Lacy.

1. I think he's wrong. The best players should get the contracts. I don't support affirmative action in the workplace and I won't support it here. The NBA has been predominately black for awhile now and as far as I can tell, it's as popular as it ever has been. Fans want to see the best basketball for their money, they don't care about skin color.

2. Best American born white player........

ummm... Go Lakers!

Social skills dont win ball games and they dont make the NBA money. The ability to get to ball to the rim whether it is by attempting a dunk or taking a 30 foot jump shoot wins game and makes money which is the main goal of any business, which is what the NBA is. If there were two basketball leagues, one of them being a bunch of "thugs" who can play ball and another group who are ok but dress very well, the thugs would be making all the money because they are more entertaining to watch. I'm not saying social skills are not important but these guys are not running for office. Most basketball players dont look or act like thugs. The problem is that there are/were enough of them Rodman/R.Wallace./A.Iverson that people use them as an excuse to label everyone else.



We call them professional athletes because they are paid to play sports where as most people are not payed to play. The reason why we lost in the Olympics is not due to lack of patriatism. It is because we had to many guys with similar playing styles and no one wanted to be a role player. When you have a team you have to have balance. The Chicago Bulls won not because they had MJ(not the sole reason anyway) and they as a group did not have the best players, but every team had the same design. Mike and Scottie were there to score. Most of their centers, while not that good could hit outside jump shots which prevented the other team's center from trying to stop drives to the basket, and whenever someone tried to double Micheal who could also post up he would either pass to the center or their 3 point shooter depending on where the doulbe team came from. The US team did not have any shooters other than Richard Jefferson, or any big man other than Tim who could hit an outside shot


Actually they could not shoot well and that is why they lost



If you like the game then you will watch the game. I dont agree with what a lot of people do in their personal lives, but I'm not thinking about that while the game is on. I'm pretty sure if these people got on camera using their "gutteral english" to embarrass the NBA there would be fines the next day becuase of the interview.

I disagree on the affirmative action analogy. Affirmative action isnt charity its a system set up to try and alleviate existing racial hurdles in education and jobs. Statistics have proven that its harder for blacks to get jobs or loans with ethnic sounding names. Statistics prove that predominately black schools are underfunded. Statistics prove that a disproportinate amount of blacks live below the poverty line.

I ask you why is this that so many blacks live below the poverty line? To me it seems that people against affirmative action think that blacks are inpoverished because they think blacks are genetically dumber then whites. People who are for affirmative action think its because the system is stacked against them. I choose the pro-affirmative action stance.

Personally I hate affirmative action and I would love for it not to be necessary but I absolutely think it is.

Basketball does not equate because whites are not discriminated against because whites do not have the hurdles to become pro-basketball players. Nothing impedes whites when it comes to basketball. This is why affirmative action doesnt make sense for whites and basketball.

Now

1) Is Larry Bird right or wrong?

He is right. I see nothing wrong with people liking to see their own excel on the court. Young white Americans do not have many people they can look at in the NBA and relate to.

2) The best American born white player is probably Brad Miller who was an all-star last year. Jason Williams would be a close second.

1. No and Yes. No from the perspective of having the best basketball players in the league...if theres more blacks in the league thats because more blacks might be playing basketball. Just as there are more whites in baseball. Naturally the amount of professional quality players from a race is proportional to the amount that sport is being played by that race. I know a lot of good black players and a lot of bad black players. I know a lot of good white players and a lot of bad white players. The NBA should have the best - and if more of the best are black than so be it.

However...if you want to make more money and appeal to a wider audience than yes the NBA needs white players. I'm white and I love the NBA. However, from what I can tell and from my experience I'm an exception. Most of my white friends like college basketball more. There are more white guys in college basketball. Is this a coincedence that young middle class white men seem to prefer the basketball with more young middle class white men? Maybe partially as the college and pro games are indeed different, but I think race plays a lot of the role here. They'll say they like college basketball because these guys really care unlike the thugs in the NBA. Theres a racially charged word right there - thug. Here we've got our clean cut college white boys and our thug black athletes. Who do they identify with? Its that simple. I know plenty of white guys who will readily tell you that they think the best player was either Pete Maravich or Larry Bird. Two very good players, certainly. However, the best players ever? Magic Johnson, Michael Jordan, Wilt, Oscar seem missing from this list. If you badger them enough why they prefer these guys they'll tell you that they were great and WHITE. Ridiculous. So yes, race does matter in the NBA from a buisness perspective. White kids will be less inclined to watch something they cannot identify with - regardless of the fact that what they should be watching is the game, not the colors of the players playing it.

2. Brad Miller or Jason Williams. I think Memphis kind of holds all of its guys back in order to better fit them into the team structure - which works for them and is a good idea in order to have a better overall team but doesnt quite let the guys break out their individual skills as much.

I am against affirmitave action. I do not think blacks are gentically dumber than whites. I think that rewards should be based on merit, not the color of ones skin. Explain to me how giving someone a leg up based on their race is anything but discriminatory? Putting someone down based on their race is wrong, so how in the heck is giving them more benefits based on that same criteria right?

I have never in my life looked at someone and based my opinion of them on their race. I know lot's of poor, stupid people that are white, plenty that are black, plenty that are hispanic, etc. I also know plenty of rich, intelligent people along the same lines. I also know rich, stupid people and poor, intelligent people. None of it has to do with race. It has to do with character and personal responsibility.

I don't think the NBA should draft according to race any more than I think the NHL should. If you are gifted in an area, more power to you.



Horse Pucky. If you think that affirmitave action is right, then it is right everywhere. If you truly believe in affirmitave action, then any race under-represented in any given field should have it available to them. I don't believe in the system, and therefore I don't think anyone should be given special treatment based on anything other than ability, performance, and talent.

If you think "whites do not have the hurdles to become pro-basketball players.", while arguing at the same time that blacks have more hurdles to overcome to land non-athletic jobs, you are fooling yourself. I have seen a smash hit film called "White Men Can't Jump", have you ever seen a film (at any level) called "Black Men Can't Do Math"? I'm not trying to be offensive (as I don't believe in either sentiment), but there is an obvious stereotyping going on in both worlds. If you can't see that, I think you might be blind...

You may be a fair person but a lot of businesses will hire a white person first, even if they are less qualified. I am not saying it is the majority but it does happen enough so that it has been noticed. I think that is one of the main reason why we have it to make up for the jobs that should have been lost that were not.




I feel like you do but my above statement is the reason for affirmative action. I will admit I have not looked at it from a white man's point of view but it is the we can do at this time until predjudice stops minorities from losing jobs that they might have had otherwise


Whites are not discriminated against when it comes to pro-basketball. The "White Men Cant Jump" movie was titled that way based on the observation that black men are generally more athletic than white men. Examples: the faster sprinters are usually black, the speed positions in nfl(running back, wide receiver, cornerback) are usually filled by black men. Most of the slam dunk contest are won by black men in the NBA and also at any other level.

I wouldnt say that the NBA is racisit because it is not. Lots of other races play on the NBA too. However i can conclude that the NBA has a majority of African American People. Such as Kobe and LeBron. However at times i do think that Rap Videos are racists. A Majority or almost all videos played on MTV (rap one) is an African Jamacian or Puerto Rican Singer. I only know of one White person (M&M) that is a rap singer and is wwhite. But thats for another post ;P

i do not think the NBA needs more white players, it needs more good team players, regardless of race. as said above, companies are too obsessed with being politically correct and image and should just go by best candidate for the job.

as for players, nash is canadian. i think jason kidd and kirk hinrich are up there too. brad miller is good but not a huge star.

i do not think that the majority of poor black kids out there realistically see the nba as a future. how many get into the nba? 32 teams with 12 players plus minor league is maybe in the thousands at most. theres much more than a few thousand blacks in the country.

1. No. The NBA and all sports in general are based on performance, not irrelevancies like "racial characteristics". Results oriented organizations are inherently anti-racist. Only misguided attempts to "level a playing field" that isn't flat in the first place introduce racism.

2. Who knows? What is "white"? What is "black"? The entire system of racial characterization is wrong these days. Is Jason Kidd "white" or "black"? Does one have to have the same hair as Ben Wallace to be considered 'black"? Race means nothing in sports. That's why it's the best thing in America these days.

Actually I think Larry Bird is wrong. I think white fans like black athletes. You can get a person who has nothing good to say about African Americans and the guy will kiss Jordan's behind.

I don't think white fans have a dying need to see white players, IMHO. I think people are more pro-American than pro-white. We'd rather see a Carl Lewis win than some white guy from Germany or a guy on our city's NBA team win, regardless of race.

I grew up a DETROIT BASKETBALLL fan, and we beat the Celtics with Bird and McHale. I'd take Joey D and Ishaih over those guys any day.

But then again, Larry comes from a different neck of the woods than I. Down in Indiana thinks are a little different. So he may be right for the Pacers or even Boston.

If fans really didn't like black players, they wouldn't be millionares.

My opinions
1) No. The NBA should be comprised of the most capable players to be found in America. Introducing racial preference into the selection process means that more capable players of one race will be passed over in favor of less capable players from another race. Personally I would rather watch one race play a great game than multiple races play an ok game.

2) Dunno. I guess it would depend on a combination of each player's contribution to his team and that team's record in the league. I sadly admit that I haven't really kept track of that. Mike Bibby is definitely good, though.

One could turn this around and ask does the sport of professional tennis need more Blacks?

After all, judging from how Venus and Serena Williams have been treated by some of their fellow competitors (Martina Hingis and Linday Davenport) and by not-so-friendly crowds (Wimbledon, the French Open), one could ask the same.

I’d would like to see more diversity in the NBA. But it’s not as if the owners of NBA franchises aren’t trying to find White, Latino or Asian players. They are.

They have scouts scouring Europe for White players and there is not a sports agent worth his after shave whom dosen’t dream of meeting another Yao Ming at LAX after a flight from Hong Kong.

Alas, it does seem that the best basketball players continue to hark from the colleges and universities of the good ole U.S. of A.

But wouldn’t it be great to have a tall Mexican stuffing one in the NBA? Or point guards from Yemen or Israel?

That would rejuvenate the sport, to say nothing of advertising and fan excitement.

Well, i'm a student at a high school and i don't pay too much to basketball but i think that larry bird is wrong. I mean... even though the game is predominantly black. I think that every race has a chance to get there as long as they make the right choices and are actually talented. Don't hate the player because they got skills.

Bird is wrong in that the NBA should place Caucasians in the game just to have Caucasians. If the best athlete at the tryout is white, that athlete should play. The better athletes tend to be black, for some reason. Don't get me wrong - I'm certainly not saying that all black people are jocks, or all athletes are black, or even that it's safe to make assumptions about any given individual. Just a disproportionate number, probably representative of a period in the culture.

Bird is also wrong about the game being purely a black man's game. I don't understand how Bird can be so dismissive of "white guys" defending him. He himself is white, isn't he? And he's one of the all-timers, right up there with Jordan. Again, though, I don't doubt that a majority of them will always be black.

1. Is Larry Bird right or wrong about the need for more white players in the NBA?

2. Who is the BEST (American born) white player in the NBA right NOW?




I think people are reading too much into what Larry Bird said. He simply said that he thinks there need to be more white players in the NBA. He never said that the NBA should set up any affirmative-action-esque preferences to accomplish that goal. There's a very big difference between the two. His remarks could have very well been directed to white athletes, encouraging them to reach for the NBA.

I personally think that most people, whether they care to admit it or not, tend to root for people they identify with more, and there's nothing wrong with that. In terms of race, if all other things are held equal, then I think white people would tend to root more for a white athlete. That is not to say that they don't or won't root for someone that isn't white. So, for marketing concerns, I think the NBA would definitely benefit from having more white athletes. It would also benefit from having more asian athletes and latino athletes. I say this because I think a more racially diverse assortment of athletes would only serve to boost the fan base. Notice I never said that the NBA should set up any hiring preferences for these other races.



The reality that the vast majority of them won't make it makes it that much more tragic. One definitely can't make the claim that most poor black kids see the nba as a future, but there are a lot that do. There are enough that it is a problem.



You used "white men can't jump" as an example of whites' hurdles to pro-basketball. Were you saying that the movie in and of itself constituted a barrier to whites? I would have to disagree because the only white guy in the movie was one of the best ball players in the movie.

Now if you were saying that the movie depicted attitudes (primarily from urban blacks) that were contrary to whites playing basketball, then I would agree. However, I would say that the attitudes of urban blacks don't figure in all that heavily on a white athletes chances of making it to the NBA. College and nba basketball administration is still run by white males (i don't have any numbers to support this but I don't think it's too much of an assumption to makea) and I don't see them being under the influence of urban blacks.

As for question 2, I'd have to say Brad Miller.

I'm a french guy and i think that we can have 2 types of opinions:

my first reaction is that it's logic (or normal) to say that Bird is right because when you're a white guy , you like to see white players, especially white US players ( 'cos if you're better interested in NBA that in Euroleague) make great games or become their team's franchise player. Why ? Because, in a way, you can identify yourself to them ; i think that's not a stupid reaction.

But , on the other hand, when you're passionned by basketball in a global way, you may think "talent has no color".
That's what i think too.
When i see a guy like Duncan or Shane Battier , i'm impressed with their smart game and no matter what their skin color is.


I hope you all understand me

1. Is Larry Bird right or wrong about the need for more white players in the NBA?

Not currently. People still watch, so clearly its not keeping them from doing so. What there is a need for is more people in the NBA who can actually hit a mid range jumper, or make a free throw. I don't care what color you are...those are basic basketball skills that are demanded at the junior high level. Why NBA players who can't do that are tolerated is beyond me. This is what makes the defensive minded game so successful...if you force most teams into a jump shot offense...they'll be unable to score, you'll get the rebound, and an opportunity to go down the court and miss your own jump shot. For free throws...if you're at that level, and can't make at least 75% of your free throws, you don't belong on the court. (I'll exclude Shaq from this, both because he's so dominant, and also because he is so big that it does probably affect his free throw shot--every try shooting baskets with a softball? Give it a try, and you'll see what I mean). At the rate many NBA'rs shoot free throws, you could pull your average 6th grader off the street and beat him in a free throw contest. What's the lure of watching highly paid athletes fail in simple tasks? That's the issue that will cause the downfall of the NBA. Why is it? Because far too many players at that level don't respect the coach. The solution to these problems used to be pretty simple...make your free throws, or coach would have you run lines till you puked. Ditto for the jump shot. Coaches don't have the power to do that anymore, and the game has suffered because of it. Players also frequently don't listen to the coach on other basics. There are those who say the Pistons winning the title was the worst thing to happen to the NBA in a long time...I disagree. It was the BEST thing to happen. The Pistons play basketball the way it should be played...as a team. It puts the emphasis back where it should be. If you doubt this...how many people you think are avidly following the Lakers right now? Kobe may be the best player, but his team isn't. They're not winning, so people aren't watching. A good team will beat a great bunch of individuals most of the time (Olympics proved this)...and winning is what people want to watch. Play the game the right way, you'll be successful, and people will watch.

2. Who is the BEST (American born) white player in the NBA right NOW?

Hmmmm...this does make a good case for Larry's point...who ARE the American born white players in the NBA? Have to think a while on that.... consulted ESPN's stats, and the answer is....Brad Miller?????? Brad Miller ??????????????? (he and Kurt Hinrich were in fact the ONLY two American-born white players in the top 75 statistically). This would indicate that Shawn Bradley might even come up in the conversation. There's something very, very wrong with that. Very, Very wrong.

I'm a bit amazed that this thread still tends to gather views and posts but I have to agree with you totally, Hobbes. The poor fundamentals of the NBA make for some really vile basketball.

One needs to look no further than last year in the Summer Olympics when you had a USA team that couldn't knock down an open jumper to save its life. Meanwhile the other teams passed the ball, hit the open man, got back on defense, knocked down their free throws and rang up the three-point shots. I like Larry Brown but he locked down young guns LeBron James and Carmelo Anthony on the bench in favor of the veterans. But it was a poorly put together collection of talented ballers. It was never a team and it showed.

Last night I watched in horrid fascination the first quarter of a "game" between the Minnesota Timberwolves and the Utah Jazz. At the end of the first quarter the score was Wolves 31- Jazz 8. Eight points? By the "best basketball players in the world?" The Jazz were missing three of their top scorers and because of injuries only suited up 10 players. Here's their starting lineup for the game:

(g) Howard Eisley
(g) Gordan Giricek
(f) Matt Harpering
(f) Mehmet Okur
© Ben Handlogten

Not exactly an All-Star group, and it was the 29th different starting lineup for the Jazz this year who are lottery bound with a 23-51 record and were down in the game by as much as 39 points before losing by a not-as-close-as-it-score of 111-to-86.

But the Jazz's starting five did include four white guys. But a stiff is a stiff whatever color they are and there are a LOT of stiffs in the NBA.

Viva Brad Miller!

I wouldn't say too black but too urban.

I do not think its a race thing. In the 80's and early 90's basketball was at its pinnacle. These are the days of suit and tie wearing players though. Good looking people like Michael Jordan, Isiah Thomas, Magic Johnson etc ruled the day. They had a wholesome look to them. These times and players were generally more acceptable to whites (who compose the vast majority of basketball viewers). These are people who despite their skin color, whites could connect too I think. Today in this tattoo wearing, rap album dropping, jersey popping league white rural people just cannot connect. How is uncle Tom from Central Illinois going to relate with the thuggish appearance of Stephon Marbury, Allen Iverson, Ron Artest? Or even Brad Miller and Jason Williams who exude urban looks and are heavily tattooed?

This is no longer a GQ, suit and tie league its a massive chain wearing, hat cocked to the side, FUBU wearing league. It isnt infused with the sounds of Marvin Gaye, Teddy Pendergrass and Al Green. Its infused with hardcore street rap.

I think that is where the NBA gets hurt with viewers.

I also do not think that the insertion of European white players is a way to reinvigorate white audiences. I think your typical American is more xenophobic then racially/culturally biased. I think that it would be easier for Americans to get behind an American regardless of his skin color or amount of tattoos he had then it would to get behind a player who can barely speak english and who only cares about the US in the sense that its the place he gets paid the most in.

The best white American basketball player? John Stockton if he came out of retirement. Im not even sure that's a joke. Anyway probably Brad Miller.

I think we should be able to use Steve Nash. I know he is Canadian but basketball speaking that realy means nothing. Canadians play the same brand of basketball as Americans do. Nothing exists in the Canadian system that would produce Nash. Nash just emerged. Canada isnt like Europe. It doesnt play European ball. They play American ball and Nash went to Santa Clara anyway. Nash is the product of white American basketball. The same variety that Bird had in Indiana.

Just to add it by the way. Did anyone watch the Mcdonald's all-american game or does anyone follow high school recruiting? This year it seems their has been a great many highly skilled and recruited white players. The best high school player in the country right now (Josh McRoberts) is white. I would say about 40% of the McDonald's players were white. On recruitment lists I notice a lot of highly ranked whites Hansborough, Zeller, Paulus, Bobbi Frasor, John Sheyer, Brockman etc etc etc. I do not know if this year is an anomaly or what but a huge influx of white talent is entering college this year in America. In addition in case anyone suspects these are not centers. These are all guards and forwards.

The problem with the NBA is not that it is too black but that it is too ignorant. Jordan, Bird, Magic, Barkley, Isaiah, and Ewing all had at least the slightest bit of education and a respect for structure. Today's NBA athletes are high school millionaires or used college as a pretext for the NBA. Latrell Spreewell is a piece of garbage, but he scores 20 points per game so he has a job. Iverson, the troubled superstar PRETENDS like it is him against the world when really he is just a big baby who only wants to play games and not practice, screw the team, it is all about Allan. Rasheed Wallace, well, nobody knows what his problem is but for some reason he leads the league in technical fouls every year. Again, screw the team, his personal battles with the referees are more important. Carmelo Anthony had problems with his team over he said she said. What is that all about? Oh wait, it's all about Carmelo. Kobe Bryant comes out in public accusing Karl Malone of hitting on his wife. What kind of nonsense are we dealing with here? Miami plays LA and the story is all about Shaq and Kobe's fued, forget about Dwayne Wade being the next big thing. The NBA has no personality. Forget the whiteness. I liked Bird and Chambers because they could score, but I liked Jordan, Magic, and Isaiah just as much because they were great players. The key ingredient was character, the NBA has no character. I remember looking forward to the Saturday afternoon double headers when the Suns with Barkley, Johnson, and Majerle would play the Bulls with Jordan, Pippen, and Grant, but now, who cares who is playing. I may watch the playoffs and finals, but I would not be caught dead watching a regular season game. Oh yeah, I almost forgot Ron Artest, Jermaine O'Neal, and Stephen Jackson. Need I say more?