mock draft insanity?

[referendum]

According to the draft express website, next years draft, that of 2008, will only have about 4 or 5 whites in the first round, but an increidible 15 in the second round. Most of these players are Europeans of course, and their draft status goes up and down over time, but to have whites make up half of an entire draft round is unheard of, the last time that happened would have been when, the early 1970's?

 

[Don Wassall]

Actually, this is what happened in the '03 and '04 NBA Drafts, before the league retrenched racially the past two drafts (courtesy of CF'sBasketballarchives):


(6/25/04) The 2004 NBA Draft was not as white as the historic, majority-white '03 draft, but it was still much whiter than the NFL Draft. Ten whites were selected in the first round and eleven in the second, adding up to 21 whites selected out of 59 total draft picks, or 35.5%. The average for the past two drafts is nearly 44% whites chosen.

 

[PitBull]

The NBA draft is a reflection of the changing nature and marketing of the
NBA around the world. Sure, many whites from Europe are chosen, and so
are whites and blacks from Latin America, and now draftees from China.
That's because the NBA is expanding its marketing to these places and
wants foreign faces on the teams. If the NBA recruiting basketball players
from China isn't the most blatant example of racially gerrymandering teams
for marketing purposes, then I don't know what is. Anyone who thinks that
professional sports teams are simply merit-based and have nothing to do
with politics, affirmative action, and pandering to corporate interests to the
point of affecting who gets drafted and who plays has their head up their
rear end.

 

[Don Wassall]

Anyone who thinks that
professional sports teams are simply merit-based and have nothing to do
with politics, affirmative action, and pandering to corporate interests to the
point of affecting who gets drafted and who plays has their head up their
rear end.

Any opponent of Caste Football who can't or won't admit the truth of that sentence is beyond salvaging. For all those who do, a dialogue should be taking place.

 

[ToughJ.Riggins]

Corporate interests are certainly also a big one. The Boston Celtics were actually accused of racism in the 80's for having so many white players although I don't think because of their great success it affected them much financially. Many blacks would tune in or attend games even as to cheer for Magic over Bird. But speaking of racial accusations, you know what happens as soon as Al Sharpton toots his Speaker phone crying racism. If an American sports franchise gets accused of racism, even with no reasonable merit to do so, there would come a boycott from black America and advertisers.Edited by: ToughJ.Riggins

 

[ToughJ.Riggins]

It also reminds me of how ridiculous it was when it was mentioned if white referees were racist because they send white players to the charity stripe slightly more than black referees. The whole thing was preposterous. You could have just as easily asked the opposite question about black referees. Even so, I think the sentiment from that article may have affected the play calling in favour of San Antonio in that game 4 in Utah. SA's stars Duncan and Parker were at the FT line just about whenever they touched the ball. Kirilenko, Okur, Harping and Girecik although not as good at drawing fouls got no FT attempts at all and were given a couple ghost foul personals.

 

[GWTJ]

Anyone who thinks that professional sports teams are simply merit-based and have nothing to do with politics, affirmative action, and pandering to corporate interests to the point of affecting who gets drafted and who plays has their head up their rear end.

Any opponent of Caste Football who can't or won't admit the truth of that sentence is beyond salvaging.  For all those who do, a dialogue should be taking place.

The problem is an old one. For centuries, the white man has been using blacks for cheap entertainment. Be it singing or dancing or sports, it has been our history. In the old days it was Bojangles. Then it was the Harlem Globetrotters who dazzled the white world with their athleticism while working for very little money.

With the Civil Rights movement, the white power structure told blacks that the big money entertainment door is now open. And they poured in.

For example, in the 70's, the skill set that Dr. J brought to the NBA was the most preferred among fans. I hate to say it, but I believe most of white America would rather see a black athlete perform than a white athlete perform.

Truth be told, whites don't see blacks as intellectual equals and want to give them an opportunity to succeed, so any physical endeavor is open to blacks. Which is probably why white parents tell their daughters to marry a man who uses his brain to make a living.

Amazingly, blacks agree with this assessment and few blacks try to compete with whites intellectually. That's why black leaders fight so hard to keep affirmative action in place. They have no confidence that their race as a whole could succeed with a level playing field.

So you have white owned corporations who believe that they are giving their white customers what they want. At the same time they are appeasing blacks to some degree and avoiding potential violence and mega-lawsuits.

We see it as a travesty and the owners see it as a win-win situation.

And ultimately, the owners have the right to put out whatever product they want. It's their business.
Edited by: GWTJ

 

[OC football]

White men do not hit puberty as early as blacks. White players will come out of the wood work. 5 in the top 30 actually is not bad for such an early prediction.

 

[Guest]

White men do not hit puberty as early as blacks. White players will come out of the wood work. 5 in the top 30 actually is not bad for such an early prediction.

Pure rejectamenta. "Some" black players look older because of harsh conditions. Exibit a, Labron james. It's called "hard living". If you go to a poor european country like serbia, ukraine, etc. you will see the same thing. Hard faces and people who are 18 that look like they're 28'.


There are also a lot of whites who live in poverty in america and they are hard/almost ugly looking. Tough neighborhoods do that. Look at chris mullin. He's irish but he had hard living growing up. He also looked like he was 30 y/o when he was 20.


There are other factors involved as well.


I've read a lot about puberty and sportsand scientific studies about this.A small number ofthe moralistic scientists hold the same postion as you. It's like coon's books. He often wentby with what a marxist wrote.


Edited by: voltaire

 

[Guest]

I also have to laugh at my black neighbors. The girls are always complaining about how immature black guys are.

 

[OC football]

voltaire,

Everyone agrees that black girls begin their cycles (periods) at a younger age then white girls.

Blacks develope more quickly. It is a fact.

 

[white is right]

White men do not hit puberty as early as blacks. White players will come out of the wood work. 5 in the top 30 actually is not bad for such an early prediction.

Pure rejectamenta. "Some" black players look older because of harsh conditions. Exibit a, Labron james. It's called "hard living". If you go to a poor european country like serbia, ukraine, etc. you will see the same thing. Hard faces and people who are 18 that look like they're 28'.


There are also a lot of whites who live in poverty in america and they are hard/almost ugly looking. Tough neighborhoods do that. Look at chris mullin. He's irish but he had hard living growing up. He also looked like he was 30 y/o when he was 20.


There are other factors involved as well.


I've read a lot about puberty and sports and scientific studies about this. A small number of the moralistic scientists hold the same postion as you. It's like coon's books. He often went by with what a marxist wrote.

It can be hard living or an over active pituarity gland. You remember Oden is 7' and who knows what he should be if his pituarity gland was normal. He maybe rapidly aging before our eyes. Many giants don't live much beyond their 40's because of this.

 

[Guest]

voltaire,

Everyone agrees that black girls begin their cycles (periods) at a younger age then white girls.

Blacks develope more quickly. It is a fact.

I'm sorry but that's just pure pseudo science. What scientific institutions made such a silly claim? Please show yournon-leftreports/studies.


Thanks in advance.

 

[Guest]

[/QUOTE] It can be hard living or an over active pituarity gland. You remember Oden is 7' and who knows what he should be if his pituarity gland was normal. He maybe rapidly aging before our eyes. Many giants don't live much beyond their 40's because of this.[/QUOTE]


I would agree with that notion. There are many factors. It's never just one thing. Now do girls mature faster than boys, of all races? Yes, that has been proven.

 

[jared]

voltaire, Everyone agrees that black girls begin their cycles (periods) at a younger age then white girls. Blacks develope more quickly. It is a fact.

I'm sorry but that's just pure pseudo science. What scientific institutions made such a silly claim? Please show your non-left  reports/studies.


Thanks in advance.

Ah, but didn't you say "harsh living conditions" equals a more mature physical appearance? I'm sure that is in no way "pseudo science", is it?

 

[KG2422]

voltaire, Everyone agrees that black girls begin their cycles (periods) at a younger age then white girls. Blacks develope more quickly. It is a fact.

I'm sorry but that's just pure pseudo science. What scientific institutions made such a silly claim? Please show your non-left  reports/studies.


Thanks in advance.

This is a long eastablished fact Voltaire. Investigate before being so dismissive.

From an associated press medical writer:
http://www.fact.on.ca/news/news0109/ap010913.htm


Boys May Be Entering Puberty Sooner
By LINDSEY TANNER
AP Medical Writer
Associated Press
CHICAGO (AP) â€â€￾ A new study suggests that boys in the United States, like girls, are entering puberty slightly earlier than previously thought, with blacks the most likely to develop the first signs by age 10.

Skeptics challenged the findings but said they raise important questions worthy of more comprehensive study.

Early puberty may increase a boy's chances of developing testicular cancer later in life because it may mean longer exposure to sex hormones, said University of North Carolina researcher Marcia Herman-Giddens, the study's lead author. If boys are truly maturing earlier, then sex education classes should begin earlier, she said.

The study â€â€￾ an analysis of a 1988-94 federally funded national health survey â€â€￾ found the average age for developing pubic hair was 12 in white boys, 11.2 years in blacks and 12.3 years for Mexican-Americans. That's up to half a year earlier than in earlier studies, Herman-Giddens said.

But 21 percent of black youngsters studied had developed pubic hair between their 9th and 10th birthdays, compared with 4.3 percent of white boys and 3.3 percent of Mexican-Americans.

The study also suggests that a significant number of boys as young as 8 in all three races had signs of genital development â€â€￾ some three years earlier than previous estimates. But the authors and other experts say those signs likely are too subjective to draw conclusions from.

On average, ages for the start of genital growth were 10 for white boys, 9.5 for blacks and 10.4 for Mexican-Americans.

The study appears in September's Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine. Herman-Giddens' previous research, published four years ago, suggested that significant numbers of white and black girls begin to develop sexually by age 8.

Potential reasons for earlier development include rising obesity rates, better nutrition, exposure to environmental chemicals that can mimic sex hormones and use of infant formula and other products containing soy, which also can mimic sex hormones, Herman-Giddens said.

Genetics and environmental differences may explain racial disparities, she said.

Critics said the findings are flawed because assessments of physical changes were based on visual exams by researchers, not the boys' pediatricians.

While the start of pubic hair growth is generally the first sign of puberty, it may also occur in response to hormonal changes that don't necessarily mean sex hormone activity has begun, said Dr. Peter A. Lee, a pediatric endocrinologist at Pennsylvania State University's Hershey Medical Center.

Testicular growth is generally the second stage, but determining whether the testes have enlarged is extremely subjective and most reliable when done by a doctor who has followed a boy's growth for years, Lee said.

The study ``does not clearly, unequivocally indicate that puberty is occurring earlier'' but underscores ``the need for good, reproducible data,'' Lee said.

Dr. Edward Reiter of Tufts University medical school said even if boys are starting puberty slightly earlier, it's likely no cause for concern, especially since data suggest they're completing puberty about the same time as previous estimates â€â€￾ reaching sexual maturity around 15 1/2 on average.

â€â€￾â€â€￾â€â€￾

Edited by: KG2422

 

[Guest]

Lmfao!!!! That's it?
The left minded study clearly states that nothing has been proven and that they aren't even sure how accurate it is, if at all. I was hoping for a harvard study or something a bit more reputable than leftwing-liberal pseudo science from a jewish yenta. A study out of black-ridden Chicago no less.


quotes:


"Skeptics challenged the findings but said they raise important questions worthy of more comprehensive study."


"Critics said the findings are flawed because assessments of physical changes were based on visual exams by researchers, not the boys' pediatricians."



>Marcia Herman-Giddens,


[url]http://paprogram.mc.duke.edu/images/hof/Herman_giddens%20.jp g[/url]


As I figured, she's a swarthy marxist-jew and I did a little research on her. Shes also a feminist studies LOON.


It's important to get proper studies folks. We're talking harvard or the new england journal of medicine.



"environmental differences may explain racial disparities, she said."


Ahh there we have what I have been talking about. The human body adapting to it's enviroment.


"Potential reasons for earlier development include rising obesity rates, exposure to environmental chemicals that can mimic sex hormones and use of infant formula and other products containing soy, which also can mimic sex hormones, Herman-Giddens said."



These left-wing/marxist-like studies will have a long way to go before most scientists take them seriously i'm affraid.



Case closed.

This is a long eastablished fact Voltaire. Investigate before being so dismissive.

From an associated press medical writer:
http://www.fact.on.ca/news/news0109/ap010913.htm


Boys May Be Entering Puberty Sooner
By LINDSEY TANNER
AP Medical Writer
Associated Press
CHICAGO (AP) â€â€￾ A new study suggests that boys in the United States, like girls, are entering puberty slightly earlier than previously thought, with blacks the most likely to develop the first signs by age 10.

Skeptics challenged the findings but said they raise important questions worthy of more comprehensive study.

Early puberty may increase a boy's chances of developing testicular cancer later in life because it may mean longer exposure to sex hormones, said University of North Carolina researcher Marcia Herman-Giddens, the study's lead author. If boys are truly maturing earlier, then sex education classes should begin earlier, she said.

The study â€â€￾ an analysis of a 1988-94 federally funded national health survey â€â€￾ found the average age for developing pubic hair was 12 in white boys, 11.2 years in blacks and 12.3 years for Mexican-Americans. That's up to half a year earlier than in earlier studies, Herman-Giddens said.

But 21 percent of black youngsters studied had developed pubic hair between their 9th and 10th birthdays, compared with 4.3 percent of white boys and 3.3 percent of Mexican-Americans.

The study also suggests that a significant number of boys as young as 8 in all three races had signs of genital development â€â€￾ some three years earlier than previous estimates. But the authors and other experts say those signs likely are too subjective to draw conclusions from.

On average, ages for the start of genital growth were 10 for white boys, 9.5 for blacks and 10.4 for Mexican-Americans.

The study appears in September's Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine. Herman-Giddens' previous research, published four years ago, suggested that significant numbers of white and black girls begin to develop sexually by age 8.

Potential reasons for earlier development include rising obesity rates, better nutrition, exposure to environmental chemicals that can mimic sex hormones and use of infant formula and other products containing soy, which also can mimic sex hormones, Herman-Giddens said.

Genetics and environmental differences may explain racial disparities, she said.

Critics said the findings are flawed because assessments of physical changes were based on visual exams by researchers, not the boys' pediatricians.

While the start of pubic hair growth is generally the first sign of puberty, it may also occur in response to hormonal changes that don't necessarily mean sex hormone activity has begun, said Dr. Peter A. Lee, a pediatric endocrinologist at Pennsylvania State University's Hershey Medical Center.

Testicular growth is generally the second stage, but determining whether the testes have enlarged is extremely subjective and most reliable when done by a doctor who has followed a boy's growth for years, Lee said.

The study ``does not clearly, unequivocally indicate that puberty is occurring earlier'' but underscores ``the need for good, reproducible data,'' Lee said.

Dr. Edward Reiter of Tufts University medical school said even if boys are starting puberty slightly earlier, it's likely no cause for concern, especially since data suggest they're completing puberty about the same time as previous estimates â€â€￾ reaching sexual maturity around 15 1/2 on average.

â€â€￾â€â€￾â€â€￾

 

[Guest]

Ah, but didn't you say "harsh living conditions" equals a more mature physical appearance? I'm sure that is in no way "pseudo science", is it?

Chicago, (especially its south side)isfull of blacks and conditions are often harsh. The whites that do live in chicago mostly live in saferareas and are typically more coddled as compared to blacks. As I said before people must adapt and mature quicker in harsh enviroments. I made the claim that hard living does in fact harden people and makes them mature faster, if there enviroment is tough and dictates this. This has happened throughout history. It's nothing new. It is a scientific mechanism in the human body that does this.So I wouldn't change my opinion on this fact at all. Again, simply look at labron james and compare him with different players. Labron had a much harsher upbringing and it shows in his maturity, look and growth. It all depends on the areaor enviromentof said black and said white.
I.e. he is stronger, has more wrinkles, etc. He is an example of living in a tough enviroment and adapting to it at a younger age then someone who lives in a relatively safer, more coddled enviroment. The human body simply adapts to its' surroundings.


What acerebral chimp would claim otherwise? I have to question their intellect.





Edited by: voltaire

 

[Guest]

Furthermore and this is another subject entirely but I find it interesting that Dr. Kinsey's world famous Kinsey institute out of Chicago showed that whites had larger penises than blacks. These studies were done over many years.


These studies have been around for eons and theonly people that dispute them tend to be leftwing minded kooks and loons. I've read people calling Dr. KInsey gay and other names like Racist etc. Clearly the truth hurts for negro supporters.

 

[jared]

Sigh...are you still here?

 

[KG2422]

This is not the only study that's been done that claims that blacks mature faster than whites. I'm just not going to waste my time proving something that is common knowledge. The "left wing kooks" are usually the ones who try to claim that there are no differences between races. J. Philippe Ruston seems to be the leading researcher in this area today. I will provide a link for the abridged version of his book Race, Evolution, and Behavior. Scroll down to the second chapter titled "Maturation, Crime, and Parenting". It will tell you what you need to know better than I can.

[url]http://www.charlesdarwinresearch.org/Race_Evolution_Behavior .pdf[/url]